Unaligned News For The Dog Fancy ~ Since 2002


Like all Bullies, DoodleDog's nose is permanently bent out of shape so keep your letter succinct or he'll bury it!  He selects only the best and most original letters, and he likes them signed but if he knows you, and you ask real nice, he's trained to withhold your name. 

send your:  Letter to the Editor

Handler to Handler: Just reading your article about THE michael scott ..reminds me of THE SPECIAL PEOPLE WHO CONDUCT THEMSELVES IN DISGUSTING WAYS and are always tolerated because they have the wealthy power clients. I do not perceive Mike as a good handler or a kind individual, just a punk. I must be getting old... or I was brought up the wrong way.  There just aren’t any T. Hall Keyes any more.  Frances Shatner Keyes, ICMG  Nanhall Pet Spa

Not Aired: When Pedigree Dogs Exposed aired in the UK it had in it two very offensive clips which I gather were not seen in versions sold and viewed around the world. One was black and white film about racism and compared dog breeders to racists, the other bit showed more black and white film of Nazis clearing the Ghettos in World War II it compared dog breeders at that point to the Nazis saying they practiced the same eugenics policies as Hitler and his henchmen.  It upset a lot of people here but as it was on the BBC nothing was done about it. I saw that on You Tube the offending bits were removed too. Regards, P. King THEKINGSTHREE@aol.com

Honest Judges, Honest Comment:  I was at the Tar Heel circuit this year and unfortunately I do have to agree with both articles (New Age Dog Shows).  I have only participated the last 6 years or so but this sport is killing itself. New blood is not coming into the sport and I believe most problems are related to “this used to be about the dogs.”  When novice/provisional judges have to worry more about their next assignment than learning to Judge the breed it just continues the face judging for entries.

There are a lot of honest judges trying to do a good job but the face judges leads to the perception/reality that it’s really all about the ego and money.  I have a Special out there so I am talking from an owner’s perspective. I see this becoming an elite sport/group and we are going to wonder what happened when money runs out and no new clients entering the sport.  I don’t know what it’s going to take to fix it but the entries are not going to improve without new blood and getting back to Dogs.  Bruce Cook ccontrol1@tampabay.rr.com

Reveal Bad Breeders?  I receive e-mail updates from the Dog Press and I was curious, since you must have extensive legal backing based on some of the controversial topics you have posted on your website, if the Dog Press would consider working with the rescue communities and post the names of breeders who refuse to take back their dogs when they end up in rescue or shelters?  Debra Fletcher, Colorado debrafletcher@att.net

We would not publically shame a breeder without evidence and that is not our function.  In addition, most abandoned and rescued dogs are not from hobby/show breeders; they are from puppy mills/commercial breeders who would not be in the least affected by the bad publicity

Mastiff Breeder: More than shocked to say the least about the article on missing mastiff breeder, Gloria Davis. I just had an email from her 1 month ago about upcoming puppies available. OMG! Why is it so hard to find a good breeder-just never know who you are talking to - so scary. Thanks for printing it as I would never have known. PAEGGHEAD@aol.com

Dog Food Woes: I completely agree with the articles you've published recently, especially the ones regarding pre & probiotics and fiber sources... Just one thing though, do you have ANY dog food recommendations for foods WITHOUT these things? I cannot seem to find a food that does not contain all three of them (just TRY and find a dog food minus chicory root these days). I cannot keep my dogs from having occasional bouts of diarrhea/loose stools/mucousy stools and I am certain these are the culprit(s). Help! Lynn Zagarella bisbubby@aol.com  www.ragtymebeardies.com

I hesitate to recommend any food as I feed raw and natural cooked. I feed my Toy Fox Terriers a small second meal of dry Kirkland (Costco’s house brand) in the green bag.  It has no discernable pre or probiotics. “Lamb” is the first ingredient - my theory being that a lamb hasn’t lived long enough to be as contaminated as beef. It also has veggies, apples, etc.  For you cat owners, it gets much more difficult to find "real" meat foods.  Do read Liquorman's series on Pet Foods - contaminated, recalled, terrorists, etc.  Real eye-openers!

Measuring Inequities: I just read your article on measuring and weighing.  In the AKC show ring we've seen very little usage of wickets.  I think in the AKC rules if someone requests a wicket, one needs to be provided.  (I don't know all the rules by hand, I'm just a "dog person husband").  The first professional handler we worked with took the time to teach my wife the "politics" of showing dogs as well as showing our collie.  He would call for a wicket while in the ring.  Sadly, each time … the dogs were measured (many) would be disqualified, including champions and top-10 dogs.  Also, a few years ago my wife's friend was showing her Belgian tervuren.  We could tell that another dog was over disqualifying height (24.5 inches for a female).  Our friend requested a wicket.  Both dogs were measured and the other dog was measured over 24.5 inches yet was still allowed to show and win breed.

It's hard to take AKC's standards seriously when dogs compete even with disqualifying characteristics and (judges) are selective in enforcing the standards.  I'm not sure why Cliff's requests were always taken seriously, maybe he was well known enough that he would complain if they ignored this rule whereas the judge thought of our friend as a "small player" (despite being the president of a club) and not much of a threat.  Ed Blood draggar@gmail.com

Editor: the following was sent to The Dog Press by mistake.  It was meant for Dog News but because he makes some valid points, and due to subsequent correspondence with Mr. Kimes, I made the decision to publish it as a Letter to this editor.  See my comments at the end…

HSUS Defense:  For many years I operated under the misconception that my values, ethics and morals were fairly representative of most people.  I’ve learned how extraordinarily wrong I was when I began listening to the views of people in the media and became more socially and politically aware.  Unfortunately, I do believe you are operating under a similar assumption.  While not exclusive to this magazine, I do feel you have taken a very polarized view of our current world, of everyone who has views on animals and the human privileges and responsibilities associated with them.  Your unrelenting attack on the HSUS is a perfect example.  Over time I developed a strong sense that what you consider “information” was feeling a heck of a lot more like propaganda.  As a critical thinker, it is always very important for me to understand the difference between facts and opinions.  To do so, I took the step of subscribing to Wayne Pacelle’s blog to get a little better insight for myself of this organization.

I have publicly criticized the American Kennel Club for courting puppy mills because to me money does not trump morality.  John Mandeville’s argument for seeking the registration fees for commercially bred puppies based on the logic that the AKC bears the burden of purebred dog welfare might be slightly more compelling if it were based on fact.  Dog rescue is funded through kennel clubs and breed clubs and they do not benefit from AKC registration fees.  I mean isn’t it true that most of the dog fancy could care less about enslaving dogs in small cages, living their lives with no love and minimal care and who receive their retirement “gold watch” by being shot in the head and dumped into a trench?  Mr. Mandeville is right, whoever in the AKC who let this monetary opportunity slip by ought to be fired. 

But the proverbial last straw came in your latest edition where you made the off the cuff remark that thank goodness the HSUS supported legislation to outlaw videos depicting animal cruelty didn’t pass because, gosh, next they will be outlawing debarking.  Then I read the letter by David Mastio who clearly thinks the HSUS’s criticism of the egg industry is little more than a personal bias by that pansy, Wayne Pacelle, who after all is vegan for god’s sake.  I mean are we going to kowtow to people who don't realize the Internet broadcast of crush videos where women in stiletto heels stamp to death helpless kittens and birds for the sexual titillation of seriously disturbed people is just part of the free speech we super duper Americans are so proud to support?   I mean, only a vegan would care that hundreds of thousands of chickens are incarcerated in cages so small they can’t turn around or live their horrific lives with their feet or wings impaled in wire, or have rats crawling over them, or live amongst dead and dying birds.  Certainly, wouldn’t you agree all of us in the dog fancy are completely callous to the thought that these birds single wish can only be to die?  Oh please, do you want eggs or don't you?  Let's talk about something meaningful.

You make flippant statements about animal welfare as though this is all a philosophical debate.  Your comment that outlawing animal cruelty videos is the next step to outlawing debarking are not the words of strength.  They are the words of cowardice.  To forgo humanity because you are afraid you will give up too much is not leadership.  I can defend debarking, I’ve had debarked dogs for over twenty years, but it certainly doesn’t give me a second’s pause to wanting strong legal ramifications for cruel people.  It’s not a slippery slope at all.  You are on the slippery slope and, at least for me, it’s not a becoming posture.

It's unfortunate but true that animals depend completely on the goodness and grace of humanity.  I am glad animals do not depend upon the journalists in the dog fancy to dictate their future.  What I have learned in the last 10 years that knowing right from wrong instinctively is no longer generally shared across the population of Americans.  So let me be crystal clear: you do not represent my values, my ethics or my morals.  Jon Kimes jonkimes@gmail.com  Pluperfect Kennel, Reg. Kansas City, MO  http://jonkimes.com

Sorry, I actually sent that to Dog News, not your office, as a letter to the editor.  I forwarded it to part of my email listing which is how you got it.  But as a publisher, I think there has to be responsibility not to wallow as the least common denominator.  You are right, people won't get it.  I had a very "active" response from someone who considers herself some kind of activist.  She couldn't care less what the HSUS does - her world revolves around her only interest which I assume is (that she) wants to be able to keep her dogs without interference.  She doesn't care about seals or chickens or puppy milled dogs.  I find these people who are so offended by such groups as HSUS are the same people who can't be bothered to pick up dog stools at the hotels they stay at for dogs shows...god only knows what they do to their motel rooms.  They are the ones who are offended that someone would limit their right to have dogs and yet show absolutely no social responsibility.

The whole point of my letter was that denigrating everything the HSUS does because you decided you disagree with one aspect doesn't negate the good they do.  I certainly don't see anyone standing up and dealing with all the animal cruelty in the world.  And without an alternative, no I'm not going to gun for their demise.  The AKC wants to appeal to puppy millers and the dog fancy both.  I don't know yet what the HSUS attitude is toward the hobby breeder ... that I'm still trying to discern.  But any controls (over) puppy mills and commercial breeders is going to be contested by AKC because those are its constituents as well.  So we the dog lovers and animal lovers are caught in this confusing cross-fire.

I can say one of the red-flags for me is seeing these anti-animal welfare folks quoting a statement made by Wayne Pacelle many years ago, before he worked for HSUS, which had to do with a specific variety of livestock, it had nothing to do with dogs or anything else.  But they take this comment out of context and quote it as supporting their argument the HSUS is anti-dog breeder.  To my mind, if you can't stick to facts and misrepresent things you obviously either don't do any research or you don't have a valid position.  It makes me wonder....

I think the very sad state of affairs is that most of us dog fanciers are not going to involve ourselves in this fray.  And thanks to the ferocious attitude by the so called "activists" against the HSUS we won't take any opportunity to work with them to help them gain a better understanding of the difference of dog fanciers and commercial breeders.  And the HSUS, with a budget of $100M and growing, is probably going to eventually define rights.

The Dog Press shapes people's perspectives because most people can't be bothered to research anything for themselves. And the dog press is doing a piss-poor job of intelligently leading the way.  Thanks, Jon Kimes jonkimes@gmail.com

Editor: I have exchanged a couple of emails with Jon and asked him to expand on the valid points he made re HSUS, Animal Rights, and Breeders.  We understand each other better and I hope he will agree to do a guest column.  We may not always agree with other viewpoints but unless we consider them, we're doomed by animal "rights."

 Open forum, any subject, just keep it short!  Send your:  Letter To Editor.



Copyright TheDogPress.com/Press Publications, LLC All Rights Reserved.
Link to this page or obtain coded Reprint Permission from the publisher
 Privacy Policy  -  Disclaimer