World's First Digital Dog News
To The Editor
DoodleDog's eyes are squinty and his
nose is permanently bent out of shape so keep your letter succinct or like all Bullies, he will edit, eat, or
bury it! A Letter to the Editor is automatic
permission to publish unless the writer specifically states otherwise.
to the Editor
In my opinion, I
believe this (nonspecifically accused) person is 'wrestling'
with the decision, because there have been NO specific charges filed
against the person - only the suggestion in the now non-specific and
anonymous 'mention' in their October Minutes that the AKC BOD is
dealing with the (possibility) of charges against this person...so
nothing's been 'wrested' from this person other than AKC's
implication to 'wrest' the constitutional rights to free speech.
Furthermore, the original October Minutes as published on line
mentioned the person by name - yet these original minutes have been
replaced/amended with the name removed. I wonder which set of
minutes will appear in the AKC Gazette.
Also in my opinion, I believe this particular AKC
suspension issue against this person is at the very least Orwellian
in nature and smacks of McCarthyism from its roots. Anyone who
remembers the 1950's might also remember how many people were
singled out in the public media by 'the Jr. Senator from Wisconsin"
who, with his committee at the time, was able to falsely accuse via
innuendo (and incomplete information represented as 'factual')
innocent public and private sector American Citizens who dared to
voice their opinions if those opinions at any time in their lives
had been in conflict with the US Government.
We here in America are guaranteed the right to freedom
of speech under the First Amendment - without fear of retribution.
No public or private organization is above the Constitution of the
United States, and under that Constitutional Guarantee, I am writing
my opinions on the above quoted issue to your internet publication.
Judith S. Gates
have read several of your articles about AKC intimidation of the
judges and delegates. It happens in any corporate structure. It is
a fact of life. One either complies or moves on. Few judges are in
a secure enough position to disregard AKC policies or AKC’s
preferences. Of course we comply even though we may be resentful or
uncomfortable about submitting. I am not sure the publicity you
give about such situations is healthy for the judges or for the AKC.
I enjoy your magazine but there are some things I would as soon not
know. I am going for a group so please withhold my name but you can
print my opinion. Don’t laugh. I am not a fool. Thank you. (name
Registration Service: I do NOT agree with the Registration
Service to register the dogs I breed that are marked as limited, in
doing so, AKC negates my ability to keep what I think are dogs not
worthy of becoming breeding stock to be registered in the AKC.
This is not
right to do, as breeders who place or sell dogs without papers or on
limited registration, have educated REASONING for not providing full
registrations with these dogs.
One of the main reasons for doing this is that the dogs
in question are not of a standard high enough to be considered for
showing or breeding! If future owners are allowed to just apply and
get full registration papers for dogs that do not meet the
standards, not to mention having possible GENETIC defects, then the
future of healthy structurally correct dogs will be in jeopardy, as
well as the integrity of the AKC itself.
forum, any subject,
just keep it short! Send
to the Editor
am still in shock that you would publish an article promoting
de-barking surgery for dogs. This is exactly what Animal Rights
activists are yelling about! Here is another example of breeders
altering dogs further and further away from their natural state.
I’m not an AR activist, but honestly, de-barking a dog? Cut out
their vocal chords to keep the neighbors happy, or so you won’t have
holler knock it off? Are you serious? That’s sickening. If you
can’t handle dogs barking, don’t have dogs! Linn Vandiver, wait
till the AR people get hold of your article – you just gave them
more ammo. This article also says a lot about the Dog Press.
Obviously, it's not for me. Pamela Rody
Viewpoint: While my opinion is not going to be very popular, it
is my opinion. The author expresses frustration because there
were three bitches and the one dog. It seems she expected that she
could go BOW, thereby gaining the same # of points that the WB would
have earned just by showing up. For some reason, in our society, we
now feel a sense of entitlement towards things. The judge was
judging dogs on that day and obviously felt the bitches were
without merit. I would agree that if they were not showing in the
classes, he should have withheld the first place ribbons, but
perhaps they were showing well enough until they entered the ring
for Winners. I commend this judge for withholding WB if he truly
felt none were worthy of receiving the award. We all complain about
“cheap champions” and many times this is due to a judge going
through the motions, awarding WD, WB, etc. At least he had the
fortitude to stick with his convictions. After all, a judge does
sign the judging book when completing an assignment that he feels
the winners that day are worthy of a champion.
Many years ago, I had the same thing happen. In the
breed I show, majors are difficult to find many times. I was
excited to see that a show I’d entered had a major in dogs, while I
was showing a bitch. The dog judging finished with the judge
placing his dogs starting with a 2nd place ribbon, which
meant there was not going to be a WD. I knew at this time, there
was not going to be a major for my bitch this day, and she only
needed one major to finish. After judging, the judge came up to me
and actually apologized that he could not give BOW to my bitch,
saying she was the only one out there worthy of the major, but he
could not, in good conscience, give a major to the dogs. Was I
upset? You bet! But I gave him a lot of credit for sticking with
his convictions that the dogs were not worthy of a major, thereby
withholding. She did go on to finish the next day.
I understand the frustration of spending hard-earned
money to attend shows and come home empty handed, but lets try to
give a judge credit for doing what he felt was the right thing.
Re your Points Puzzle
article - I was at a show in Knoxville Tennessee watching Cardigan
Corgis in the ring when the Judge said loud enough for all the people
watching to hear “I find no dog in the ring worthy of winners you are
all dismissed”. This was the winners bitch class so the dog only got
the points for the dogs that were present there was no best of winners.
don't think the legislators want the public to know the difference
between hobby breeders (reputable breeders) and puppy mills or other
questionable sources. They want to force controls on everybody, then
expand them and probably drive most reputable breeders out of the
sport. I think in order to educate the general public we must
get support from not only newspapers, but also from the major local
TV news programs. In addition, legislators must be bombarded with
emails, letters and phone calls from fanciers, making them aware of
the fact that we are voters, and also educating them of the things a
responsible breeder does to insure a healthy, happy puppy and a
Dess - Cooper on Liaison: In
addition, there's a person on the AKC Legislative Liaison discussion
list who is very good at helping folks make decisions regarding
participation in legislation and education. Here's a quite from a
recent post (which she gave me permission to sent to you). Her name is
Jan Cooper and she's the LL for the Rottweiler parent club, BTW. If you
want her email address, let me know.
"Our adversaries are currently, and have, been taking the
time to develop little town-hall type meetings with local citizens and
pet owners and those of influence in communities. There is no reason
that some of us cannot be doing the same. What you need to do is find
out if you local library or school will permit public meetings or even a
local bank may have a conference room they will permit you to use, next
set a date and place flyers in grocery stores, malls, bulletin boards in
grooming and pet shops, Next gather educational tools and informational
aids, xerox copies and hold a small meeting to let those that have pets
in the communities to become armed and active to protect their ownership
of their dogs. This is what our enemies are doing and they are
succeeding.. ..most pet owners have no clue and the ones that will
attend your meetings are the very ones that will be out spoken because
they care enough to get involved."
Dess June, Dejeune
Your letter goes here!
Send your praise or pickles to
Letters To Editor.
Copyright ? 2002-2009 TheDogPress.com - All rights reserved. Under penalty of law, no portions thereof may be stored, reproduced or reprinted in any form without
first obtaining written consent of the publisher.