No Margins. No Limits. No Kidding.
Protecting the AKC Stud Book?
Does anyone see the irony in the recently
published AKC Code of Sportsmanship?
The AKC proclaims, “Sportsmen
refuse to embarrass the sport, the AKC, or themselves while taking
part in the sport.” Better yet, how about this, “Sportsmen respect
the history, traditions and integrity of the sport of purebred
dogs”? How can the AKC release this Code of Sportsmanship with a
straight face? Based on the facts surrounding the AKC Studbook fraud
cases, it is apparently okay for the AKC to “embarrass” and
I got involved in dogs in 1973. The idea of owning a show dog was
very exciting. I read everything I could to learn about the sport. I
studied my breed standard and learned about breeding and showing.
From the beginning, I took showing and in particular breeding as a
very serious matter. Actually having fun was a bonus! How naive we
all were when we first got into the sport. Who would have thought
that the AKC, and at least one parent club, would end up betraying
us as well as the breeds we love so much?
The multiple cases of documented stud book fraud surely strips us of
our initial feelings of awe and respect for the organization that is
supposed to be “dedicated to maintaining the integrity of our
Registry.” See (#1 AKC Mission Statement) at the end of the
How can any of us be truly certain that our pedigrees are worth the
paper they are written on? The statement that your dog is, “as good
as the breeder,” does not hold water. It is a cop-out. AKC can’t
shift the blame onto US! Even an honest breeder could be an
unwitting victim of fraud and unfortunately, an unwitting
perpetrator by selling puppies from subsequent breedings.
The AKC’s apparent softening in their “dedication” of adhering to
their Mission Statement has consequences. It is obvious that the
fact that the stud book is becoming a mockery. Secondly, the AKC’s
pattern of behavior and attitude will become contagious among the
fancy. Those breeders who might not have crossed the line for fear
of suspension/fines, etc., have now been given the green light.
Obviously, the long-time Breeder who rarely goes out of their own
line may not be affected by AKC’s handling of fraud cases but it can
be a problem for the most honest breeder when they need to breed out
of their line. Where do you go and how do you know that the pedigree
you are considering is accurate? You don’t.
Perpetrators charged with studbook fraud must not believe for
one moment that they are in any way exonerated just because the AKC
chose not to protect the integrity of the studbook. Particularly
when those charges were supported by DNA evidence. Science does not
lie. The AKC, sadly, becomes the accomplice.
Unfortunately, the AKC is not just becoming the enabler of fraud.
Worse, the AKC is becoming the abettor of fraud by allowing it to
stand when confronted by solid evidence, and to the unsuspecting
public who purchases a puppy out of these litters. These victims, if
they ever find out they were defrauded, could file a civil suit,
however, like the victim of fraud in the (#2 Samoyed Case) at
the end of the article, knew he would win his case
civilly, but he was fearful he would have to return the dog as part
of the judgment. That was not an option for him.
The name that continues to pop up in these matters is Thomas Sharp.
Who is this man who works for the AKC? If we accept the premise that
all AKC employees subscribe and agree to uphold the contents of the
AKC Mission Statement, it is safe to say that Thomas Sharp’s job
description, in part, states that he should:
• “Love dogs”
• Be dedicated to maintaining the integrity of the Registry
• Be committed to the interests of dogs owners
• Uphold high standards for the administration and operation of the
We have already learned by reading TheDogPress that Thomas Sharp has
had more than one case where DNA tests proved beyond a reasonable
doubt that the information on record is false. Thomas Sharp chose to
reject the evidence and let the fraud stand. How does Thomas Sharp’s
actions reconcile with his job description? Who IS Thomas Sharp? Is
Thomas Sharp doing his job?
Is Chairman and CEO Ron Menaker aware that people are so frustrated
with the AKC’s Compliance Dept. that they are providing DNA testing
at their own expense proving stud book fraud, only to have Thomas
Sharp reject it? If the AKC and Thomas Sharp are truly dedicated to
the integrity of the registry, any and all DNA testing submitted by
involved parties should be taken seriously. Anyone who goes to the
trouble of DNA testing at their own expense is deadly serious and
knows that a simple retest could negate their findings if not done
exactly right the first time. There is no doubt in my mind that
Thomas Sharp has had incontrovertible evidence proving stud book
fraud and he has allowed the fraud to stand. I have no doubts
because I personally submitted incontrovertible evidence. Once
again, I ask the question, how does Thomas Sharp reconcile his
decisions with his job description? How or why does Ron Menaker
allow this pattern of behavior to continue? Does the AKC seriously
want to maintain the integrity of the studbook? What is with the AKC
policy that the year 2000 is the break off point in accepting DNA
evidence? This policy is a disservice to purebred dogs and is
contrary to the AKC Mission Statement. The AKC needs to revisit this
policy as well as the motivation behind it. Whom does it benefit?
Purebred dogs? Hardly. How could it possibly benefit purebred dogs
when the policy, by its own limitation, allows fraud to exist? Where
does the Mission Statement say that the AKC wants to maintain the
integrity of the studbook, but with strings attached? Do they want
integrity in the studbook, or not? The AKC claims to be a registry,
when are they going act like one?
AKC Stud Book is under attack and therefore the very breeds we have
come to love are also under attack. It is sad to say, but it seems
like the fox is guarding the hen house. The AKC needs to go back to
its roots and stand by the Mission Statement where it states,” We
love Dogs.” I’m one of those people who believe that “love” is a
behavior. The pattern of behavior going on at the AKC is not loving.
You do not deliberately destroy what you love. I believe it is time
for a change at the AKC. The AKC has put forth a
Sportsman’s Code of
Ethics, which contains behaviors that they would like the dog fancy
to embrace. Similarly, I believe it is only fair for the dog fancy
to have the same expectations of the AKC. We should demand
sportsmen, honest dog loving sportsmen, go back to work at the AKC.
Nothing is going to change unless and until the dog fancy gets fed
up and demands better for our precious dogs.
AKC Mission Statement
non-rhetorical questions you want to ask.
You may reply directly to Gini
MORE FROM ADDAMO:___________________________________
If it's too hot to handle, send it to
Copyright © TheDogPress.com/Press Publications, LLC Under penalty of law, no portions thereof may be stored, reproduced or reprinted without written consent of the publisher.
Link to this page or obtain
Reprint Permission -