World's First Digital Dog News



Adhering To The Highest Journalistic Standards




March 2017


Our coverage of (click to read) problems within the Mastiff Club Of America set a new record for public vileness which was barely offset by constructive comments. We provided an open forum to exchange opinions respectfully. That did not happen. While such articles are unlikely to be read by children, we expected decency in debate and have regretfully deleted some comments including those by the person posing as Heather Pearce.


Nicole Cutmore said:  So the adults who object to this article have stooped to falsifying others names on comments. Congrats! Thanks for reminding the rest of us of your unwavering maturity level.


Vicki said:  Good article. There are major problems in the club - some of which are why I resigned after being a member for over 20 years. Allowing members to lie about dogs and their owners/breeders is a real problem as far as I am concerned. And yes, I have the documentation to prove it. I commend those that have stayed and tried to make things better. I just could no longer be one of them. Not afraid to say who I am!


Teresa said:  I see continued response from cowards who aren't proud enough about their stance to say their name. Love the message or hate it, many of us will risk the insults and ugliness to stand for what we believe in. Those without the guts to take a stand with their name must not be too proud of their position.


Nick said:  There will always be those who defend the indefensible. (sigh) However, the market has spoken. There has been and will continue to be a mass exodus. People are not stupid. They will only out up with lack of ethics and nonsense for so long before they get eventually get fed up. All the talent is leaving. All the best!


Anonymous said:  People have been running from the floor for years. It is not a difficult process. You've made your complaints for a long time now. The membership at large doesn't seem to agree with you. And, if you are not smart enough to follow the simple process to run from the floor, you are probably not smart enough to be on the board.


Anonymous said:  You have had a very contentious relationship with the club and are very bitter about it. That is clear. AKC has made it clear that members guide their own clubs. They had no reason to intervene before and nothing has changed. Announcement of the slate, call for nominations and the elections happen at the same time each year. Anyone who is not happy with the slate or the direction of the club would go ahead and run.


Anonymous said:  This article is (edited) not verified information. Our club is running just fine and I personally wish all of this nonsense would stop.


Anonymous said:  (edited) The overwhelming majority of club members are good, decent, level-headed people, any one of who can and should lead this club.


Nick said:  It is true. MCOA is failing. One problem we discovered is that AKC likes to have its cake and eat it too when it comes to being a governing body. It is happy to hand down rules and rulings, but when a member parent club behaves like a house of ill repute, for whatever reason the AKC turns the dodging of "jurisdiction" into an art form. It holds its clubs about as accountable as it holds its judges! Lol

     The unfortunate result is that invalidates the legitimacy of member clubs while reflecting poor on the AKC's management and leadership. In my opinion, MCOA really should lose its national and status as an approved AKC parent club until it cleans up its act. Until the time comes where accountability becomes a very real issue, MCOA has no hope whatsoever of behaving like a valid parent club organization. It is just a platform for a clique of people to do whatever they want, whenever they want, and to whomever they want. So while I sympathize with the pains of those who keep trying to clean house, the Mastiff Club of America really does deserve to dwindle into irrelevance. Ex-members are proving just how much better it is on the outside WITHOUT the MCOA.


Anonymous said:  Show me where in the Dog Press bylaws it says identity must be shared. Oh, it doesn't. You're just making up rules and bullying people to follow them.


Anonymous said:  @Teresa, LOL Troll? I didn't post it but...Wow funny.


Teresa said:  "anonymous", when you care to post your name, I will gladly address your questions. Otherwise, you are just a gutless troll who is not willing to come into the light to state your thoughts, opinions and questions.


Anonymous said:  Now the ballots have been fixed? Is that what you are saying? You have had a very contentious relationship with the club and are very bitter about it. That is clear. AKC has made it clear that members guide their own clubs. They had no reason to intervene before and nothing has changed. Announcement of the slate, call for nominations and the elections happen at the same time each year. Anyone who is not happy with the slate or the direction of the club would go ahead and run.


Teresa said:  And, for any of you that are proud of your opinion, why are you staying anonymous? It takes courage to stand up for what you believe in. It takes zero courage to post anonymous, trollesque comments. The positive comments Identify the poster. Says volumes about those anonymous posters, now doesn't it.


Teresa said:  So, you are aware that communist/repressive/dictator countries have elections too, right? They fix the ballots to only reflect who is wanted to win. They work HARD to silence any and all opposition. They make sure no one else CAN win by any and all means necessary. Yup, very much like MCOA.


Anonymous said:  Comparing the club to a communist country does not apply because we have elections. People who feel things should be run differently can run from the floor and see if the membership supports their view.


Teresa said:  No, the lawyer you speak of was NOT hired once I realized her methods were alarming. She very well may get a great deal accomplished that way, but we agreed that our directions were different. The lawyer referenced by Bonnie is a highly respected lawyer from New York and is considered the top of the field in parliamentarian issues. I believe I have said several times the first lawyer was a mistake. Her solution was to get big money members involved and let them run the club. I saw that as trading one set of problems for another set of problems. A third firm was consulted and the $100,000 to force reform was quoted after spending $10,000 for research by the law firm. Yes, there was a suit there, but no, none of us had another $90,000 to spend to reform our club. Truly, I do not think this club will reform on its own. Membership, as a whole, had thrown up their hands and given up in anything but business as usual.


Nick Van Duren said:  Thank you Bonnie for having the courage to expose the parent club for what it is...a menace to the legitimacy, credibility, and relevance of the Dog Fancy.


Erika M. said:  Yah conflate. "most could care less whose in charge" is the exact problem. Perhaps you need to conflate a bit MORE - if you wouldn't give someone an entry why would you be sanguine with them running the parent club? Agreed the majority of the club are excellent level headed people any of whom could do an excellent job running the club. But if like yourself they don't care who is, we continue to get stuck with a few who are NOT representative of the many. Please start conflating!


Anonymous said:  Very well written. Thank you Bonnie Blink for your time and dedication for writing it. It is never easy to try and correct the "wrongs" of the past, but it must be done. It's such a shame that membership is continuing to slide. At this point it would seem that an audit of the books would be for the good of all and a starting point. As a relatively new member to the club even I can see the huge disconnect between the membership and the board. It's such a shame. This is an awesome and magnificent breed. Very noble in every way. It deserves better.


Anonymous said:  People have been running from the floor for years. It is not a difficult process. You've made your complaints for a long time now. The membership at large doesn't seem to agree with you. That's not shooting the messenger.


Bonnie Blink said:  The attorney referenced in this article is not the attorney to which you refer. You should try doing some actual research and not rely on the people who tell you things to protect themselves and their friends. Nominations and rules? Please. This is exactly what started this whole thing for me. Trying to follow election rules. Before I started researching those rules, I only had a vague idea of the problems in this club. It was researching via professional parliamentarians, not asking club officers/members who try to dictate what works for them. That revealed to me exactly how much this club did/does that is against our charter, our bylaws, and laws of the state in which we are incorporated.

     Exactly as mentioned in my article, so many members of this club don't really want to know what is wrong and when it is pointed out, they shoot the messenger. Exactly why people in this club just walk away and stop caring. It all seems so hopeless.

     (Bonnie Blink said "knowing that identifying myself as the author of the article and comments will invite attack. Why can't those of you shooting the messenger identify yourselves?")


Anonymous said:  Very nicely put. It is disheartening that the MCOA has come to this. And then to recycle the same old, same old.


Anonymous said:  Whether or not there are future articles doesn't change the fact that this article is full of innuendo. It speaks of hiring an attorney. Let's remember that attorney chose to try to publicly (and I would say inappropriately) make a case on Facebook. She tried to poll members regarding misrepresented facts, was flat out arguing with people and threatening to throw people off the list. A disgruntled membership always has a recourse in elections. Nominations can be made from the floor. The rules for submitting the nominations are simple and clear.


Teresa said:  To the poster saying this is only an opinion piece, please note, this is an introductory article. There was far too much information for one article. And, these problems don't only affect one club. Apparently, other clubs have some of similar issues. The hope is that AKC will finally take notice and realize how important it is for THEM to take a lead role in cleaning up the sport or there won't be much of a sport to save. It's within AKC's ability to help, but right now, they are choosing to turn their backs and simply say it is not their jurisdiction.


Teresa said:  Who is speaking? Or are you too afraid of being one that is getting the rug pulled out from under you? This publication verified their facts as an independent party. Please, feel free to dispute using actual information instead of hurling insults. That is how we choose to proceed. Your grand president had an opportunity to respond and give an other view, but typically, buried her head in the sand.


Teresa said:  The club shouldn't in my opinion, but has in the case of several people as "perks" for driving trophies or being on the board.


Anonymous said:  Since I'm not terribly well versed in dog clubs, can someone explain to me if it's normal for a club to pay for trips or for rooms for members? I was under the impression that members paid the clubs for membership, is this incorrect?


Anonymous said:  OMG, hahaha. What complete hogwash. The same tired, recycled crapola as last year about this time; i.e. preceding elections. Nice try, bit it stinks even more this time around. Ripe.


Anonymous said:  This is not a nonpartisan or some kind of investigative article. It's the opinion of a disgruntled club member. There are a lot of claims thrown around in this column including using a decline in membership to bolster a claim of wrongdoings. But during the same timeframe AKC has seen a 63% drop in registration. Dog show entries have seen similar drops. It stands to reason that membership in clubs would see similar declines. I see someone says that Dog Press has sifted through tons of documentation. They make no such notation here. This reads completely as an opinion piece.


Anonymous said: Well said Bonnie.


Jamie said:  Very well said, Bonnie! There are many of us that just hope that we outlive the cancerous tumors!


COURTNEY D said: great article bonnie..... just maybe...


Bev Molloy said:  There have been a number of years of complaints and terrible arguments and uproars in the Club. I would think by now that there should have been a complete voluntary investigation. By-laws are made to protect both the Club and the members who volunteer to be on the Executive. They should be adhered to. But, having been on both sides of the coin, we have to remember that there are very few people who will step forward to volunteer their time. And it can be a thankless job, with constant complaints, creating an atmosphere of hostility and indifference. Ultimately, a complete audit should have been, and should be, done. Let's try to resolve this once and for all. And remember, gratitude, to those who serve, and all who move this club forward, is a great obligation and gift.


Eerika said:  I have been stunned by what has been going on in this club. it is frankly amazing. I honestly have never seen anything like it. NO ONE wants to join.


Nancy Serdich said:  Bonnie, You have spoken truthfully and eloquently about the cancer that is destroying our breed club membership. Hopefully enough of them will hear and speak up.


Diane said:  This is a great article and so true! Sad what is happening to the mastiff club.


Anonymous said:  For the anonymous person, you are a coward, but that's another topic for another article. The fact is that the Dog Press sifted through tons of documentation. They requested input from the board (no responses). If there had been nothing to what Bonnie said, they would NOT have published this.


Rick Cisneros said:  Wow well said but you can already see what is being said why say it anonous if you have something to say fore ar against grow a pair and put your name to it!


Kay said:  Great article Bonnie, unfortunately you will only continue to receive abuse by those who are part of the problem. Anyone who has a difference of opinion is singled out for abuse, verbal and other. As with many breed clubs there are those with a different agenda than the charter and there are those with the money to finance the group. Anonymous is wrong as this is the truth and really not all of the problems. Come on Anonymous step forward. EST 2002 © 1703






Click for FREE privacy-protected HEADlines, no-strings, no-forms


Brought to you by the NetPlaces Network


The world’s 1st public website ( from Animal Health to Vaccines.

The world's 1st online dog news, ( from AKC records to zoological news.

The world's 1st site by/for dog show judges ( educates on purebred dogs.


Mission Statement   ~   Privacy Policy   ~   ii NetPlaces Network   ~    Disclaimer   ~   Advertising