Ankc - What Changes Would You Like To See?

[Keshwar]

In the New national body thread people have said they would like to see changes to the ANKC.

What changes would you like to see made?

Here's some I would like to see.

I would like to see consistent rules/regs nationally.

I would like to see one national body with offices in each state and territory. So no dogsnsw, dogact, dogsvic etc just the ANKC.

Elected representatives on the governing body board from each state/territory. Reps elected by all members in each state/territory.

[poodlefan]

All of the above AND:

* rigorous investigation and enforcement of rules where complaints are made by puppy buyers.

* Enforced health testing before registration of litters from breeds with conditions that can be tested for

* the appointment of an effective advocate for purebred dogs and their breeders.

[Jumabaar]

All of the above again and....

Better advertising- media and events team that have experience (so their open days have a big turn up and they are run well)

A system to have new dog sports introduced on a trial then permanent basis (ie put on trial with only a small interest group to allow it to develop quickly- although that is just off the top of my head)

Encouraging breed clubs to do more than just put on a show- have fenced grounds and encourage them to hold a breed meet each year- either in conjunction with a show or as an additional gathering. This will increase the benefits for non show people so there may be an increase in membership

Offer education classes in basic puppy health things such as nail clipping for puppy owners of ANKC breeders

[conztruct]

Agree with the above. I think consistency in rules and the application of them is the key issue. But there are many other benefits, including a reduction in the bureaucracy and associated cost of maintaining this as well as maybe some more sophisticated software and record-keeping methods. I'm not sure about the other states but I know here that things are very very manual (and therefore quite onerous and cumbersome) and it would not be difficult to automate things a little more. EG online forms, etc.

[experiencedfun]

all of the above

[Jumabaar]

All of the above AND:

* rigorous investigation and enforcement of rules where complaints are made by puppy buyers.

* Enforced health testing before registration of litters from breeds with conditions that can be tested for

* the appointment of an effective advocate for purebred dogs and their breeders.

Perhaps also health testing that is linked with pedigrees in their system? So you can track diseases through their progeny

Also why not a veterinary geneticist on staff? Purely to educate breeders on genetics of diseases so that they can eliminate them- ie using carrier to clear matings etc. So people are not relying on their vets who may/may not be up to date in this area. People could email questions/ book in consults at a discounted members price.

Edited June 23, 2011 by ~Woofen~

[poodlefan]

One more point:

* I think its traditional that breeders and judges of long standing occupy most council roles. Sadly, neither of those pursuits on their own equips people for the challenges of adminsistering our organisations. I'd like to see a little more "professionalisation" of our office holders and elections conducted based not on who people are but what they aim to achieve. I'd also like to see reelections based on what people have achieved.

I don't see those roles as a reward for a long contibution to the dog fancy. The contribution has to be ongoing. We have too many issues to have dead wood at the top. I'm not saying its there now (because I don't know) but we can't afford it at any rate.

[RallyValley]

To try and bridge the division between showing and other sports. If more sports people showed and more show people did sports revenue would increase and show breeders may steer more puppy buyers towards sports, and sports buyers shows ect.

[poodlefan]

To try and bridge the division between showing and other sports. If more sports people showed and more show people did sports revenue would increase and show breeders may steer more puppy buyers towards sports, and sports buyers shows ect.

People don't even have to cross over to participate. Holding events in the same location would suffice. Quite a few National breed shows have both conformation and performance events.

[RallyValley]

To try and bridge the division between showing and other sports. If more sports people showed and more show people did sports revenue would increase and show breeders may steer more puppy buyers towards sports, and sports buyers shows ect.

People don't even have to cross over to participate. Holding events in the same location would suffice. Quite a few National breed shows have both conformation and performance events.

In WA almost all shows are held at the same venue, we have a lower sports oval and an upper showing oval. Very rarely will you find some one going to the other oval to watch the event thats on.

[conztruct]

One more point:

* I think its traditional that breeders and judges of long standing occupy most council roles. Sadly, neither of those pursuits on their own equips people for the challenges of adminsistering our organisations. I'd like to see a little more "professionalisation" of our office holders and elections conducted based not on who people are but what they aim to achieve. I'd also like to see reelections based on what people have achieved.

I don't see those roles as a reward for a long contibution to the dog fancy. The contribution has to be ongoing. We have too many issues to have dead wood at the top. I'm not saying its there now (because I don't know) but we can't afford it at any rate.

This - a long time in the breed,judging or whatever doesn't necessarily equate to aptitude for a council role. In fact, it can sometimes cloud judgement. I'm not sure if these exist but it would probably be helpful if official positions had descriptions outlining the requirements - being fair, if people don't know what their role is, they either make it up or are hesitant and do nothing.

It's one of the puzzling things I find in the judging program requirements - having to breed litters. There are many breeders I have observed who could breed 1000 litters and yet know less about their breed than someone who has bred none (sorry OT).

[Rebanne]

DNA all dogs

[SparkyTansy]

I'd like to see a proper program in each state/territory in place for aspiring breeders with lectures/education and a written (not open book) test before applying for a prefix. The lectures would have sections on health testing, structure of the canine, education on the breeding aspects and raising a litter.

I would also like to see a more in depth program for aspiring judges to learn about structure/movement of the canine in it's basic form which then stems out to various breeds.

[Leema]

Many of these things I agree with. Some I don't are necessary, but I don't think they're bad.

I really think that the ANKC needs to make themselves bigger and louder. They need to be in the media, they need to have a voice. At the moment they're a special club for dog people that pretty much keeps to themselves. We particularly need an advocate for purebred dogs as a whole.

[RallyValley]

Maybe something easy to do would be brouchers to hand out at vets and obedience clubs for cross bred and BYB dogs (assuming pure bred pups owners will have the info) explaining about Canine association, the events that are offered with an explanation of clubs in the state you can contact to give it a try. Also with info about why not to make the next family member a BYB or cross bred with info about rescue dogs and registered breeders.

Then hope that the person will be interested enough to try some sports, register thier dog to compete and the next dog they get they will hopefully get a purebred dog or ethical rescue.

Canine associations need to promote purebreds and dog sports more, there is actually not much out there and some of the websites are not general public friendly e.g http://www.dogswest.com/

Edited June 23, 2011 by RallyValley

[~*Shell*~]

I really think that the ANKC needs to make themselves bigger and louder. They need to be in the media, they need to have a voice. At the moment they're a special club for dog people that pretty much keeps to themselves. We particularly need an advocate for purebred dogs as a whole.

This. I work in the media and really, it's not that difficult to make some noise. I never hear about anything to do with the ANKC or dogsNSW and was only told about their open day because of the different organisations I'm involved with. I didn't even see a press release about it - really, it'd take someone who was media trained 10 minutes to write one and even less time to email it to a bunch of local newspapers. If they had someone who was media trained on staff, they could even write the article to go in the local papers.

If that role was ever available at dogsNSW, I'd apply for it in a heartbeat.

[GRD]

I will jump in here with a couple of responses.

I would like to see consistent rules/regs nationally.

A National set of Conformation Rules (as per all other ANKC disciplines) WILL be an agenda item for the ANKC Board Meeting in October, PLEASE let your State/Territory body know you support it so they will support it. The motion being put forward will include member input and consultation.

I really think that the ANKC needs to make themselves bigger and louder. They need to be in the media, they need to have a voice.

A national media campaign is being investigated.

I would like to see one national body with offices in each state and territory. So no dogsnsw, dogact, dogsvic etc just the ANKC.

I don't see this happening in my lifetime, there is to much of a disparity in members and funds for the larger states give up what they have worked for.

Also why not a veterinary geneticist on staff?

The ANKC only has 1 full time staff member, the current funding from the states/territories does not even cover this. Any salaries for such positions would mean an increased cost to all members.

The Health and Welfare committee is chaired by a vet who has been involved in the dog world for many years.

To try and bridge the division between showing and other sports.

The Neuter Title was developed in part to try and attract exhibitors from the performance disciplines across to conformation, only time will tell if has any effect. I would love to hear some other suggestions on how to achieve this.

Edited June 24, 2011 by GRD

[Jumabaar]

I will jump in here with a couple of responses.

I would like to see consistent rules/regs nationally.

A National set of Conformation Rules (as per all other ANKC disciplines) WILL be an agenda item for the ANKC Board Meeting in October, PLEASE let your State/Territory body know you support it so they will support it. The motion being put forward will include member input and consultation.

I really think that the ANKC needs to make themselves bigger and louder. They need to be in the media, they need to have a voice.

A national media campaign is being investigated.

I would like to see one national body with offices in each state and territory. So no dogsnsw, dogact, dogsvic etc just the ANKC.

I don't see this happening in my lifetime, there is to much of a disparity in members and funds for the larger states give up what they have worked for.

Also why not a veterinary geneticist on staff?

The ANKC only has 1 full time staff member, the current funding from the states/territories does not even cover this. Any salaries for such positions would mean an increased cost to all members.

The Health and Welfare committee is chaired by a vet who has been involved in the dog world for many years.

To try and bridge the division between showing and other sports.

The Neuter Title was developed in part to try and attract exhibitors from the performance disciplines across to conformation, only time will tell if has any effect. I would love to hear some other suggestions on how to achieve this.

OK how about an ANKC that is not slow- These are not new problems. There has been a need for media coverage for a number of years, and the National set of Conformation Rules- just how long before that will actually come into effect IF it passes??

With Neuter- it would have been a good idea if it had been a national movement. The slow start in Victoria, and QLD ignoring it has made it into a bit of a joke. (Opps that debacle comes back to the National set of Conformation rules doesnt it......)

Perhaps the ANKC needs to prioritise getting good Veterinary information to its members. It is lovely that you have a Vet as a committee member, but are they willing to answer emails about genetic questions, write genetic lectures to deliver to members and advise on breeding programs? In the state of high visibility the community has regarding genetic issues asking the states for funding for even one geneticist to be available free, or at a low charge to members would be a good PR move and significantly help members who do not know enough about genetics to have a positive contribution to their breed.

And you didnt address getting in the general punters- having them join would provide additional funding to your other projects!!. The pet owners who dont want to compete in sports on conformation! They want a voice to stand up for them with the government. And where are the programs to promote responsible dog ownership- I assume they would be education seminars??

To get members you have to be seen doing something for them. You need breeders telling their puppy owners that it is worth joining, and you need vets telling THEIR clients it is worth joining.

[Jumabaar]

I will jump in here with a couple of responses.

I would like to see consistent rules/regs nationally.

A National set of Conformation Rules (as per all other ANKC disciplines) WILL be an agenda item for the ANKC Board Meeting in October, PLEASE let your State/Territory body know you support it so they will support it. The motion being put forward will include member input and consultation.

I really think that the ANKC needs to make themselves bigger and louder. They need to be in the media, they need to have a voice.

A national media campaign is being investigated.

I would like to see one national body with offices in each state and territory. So no dogsnsw, dogact, dogsvic etc just the ANKC.

I don't see this happening in my lifetime, there is to much of a disparity in members and funds for the larger states give up what they have worked for.

Also why not a veterinary geneticist on staff?

The ANKC only has 1 full time staff member, the current funding from the states/territories does not even cover this. Any salaries for such positions would mean an increased cost to all members.

The Health and Welfare committee is chaired by a vet who has been involved in the dog world for many years.

To try and bridge the division between showing and other sports.

The Neuter Title was developed in part to try and attract exhibitors from the performance disciplines across to conformation, only time will tell if has any effect. I would love to hear some other suggestions on how to achieve this.

OK how about an ANKC that is not slow- These are not new problems. There has been a need for media coverage for a number of years, and the National set of Conformation Rules- just how long before that will actually come into effect IF it passes??

With Neuter- it would have been a good idea if it had been a national movement. The slow start in Victoria, and QLD ignoring it has made it into a bit of a joke. (Opps that debacle comes back to the National set of Conformation rules doesnt it......)

Perhaps the ANKC needs to prioritise getting good Veterinary information to its members. It is lovely that you have a Vet as a committee member, but are they willing to answer emails about genetic questions, write genetic lectures to deliver to members and advise on breeding programs? In the state of high visibility the community has regarding genetic issues asking the states for funding for even one geneticist to be available free, or at a low charge to members would be a good PR move and significantly help members who do not know enough about genetics to have a positive contribution to their breed.

And you didnt address getting in the general punters- having them join would provide additional funding to your other projects!!. The pet owners who dont want to compete in sports on conformation! They want a voice to stand up for them with the government. And where are the programs to promote responsible dog ownership- I assume they would be education seminars??

To get members you have to be seen doing something for them. You need breeders telling their puppy owners that it is worth joining, and you need vets telling THEIR clients it is worth joining.

[Jumabaar]

I will jump in here with a couple of responses.

I would like to see consistent rules/regs nationally.

A National set of Conformation Rules (as per all other ANKC disciplines) WILL be an agenda item for the ANKC Board Meeting in October, PLEASE let your State/Territory body know you support it so they will support it. The motion being put forward will include member input and consultation.

I really think that the ANKC needs to make themselves bigger and louder. They need to be in the media, they need to have a voice.

A national media campaign is being investigated.

I would like to see one national body with offices in each state and territory. So no dogsnsw, dogact, dogsvic etc just the ANKC.

I don't see this happening in my lifetime, there is to much of a disparity in members and funds for the larger states give up what they have worked for.

Also why not a veterinary geneticist on staff?

The ANKC only has 1 full time staff member, the current funding from the states/territories does not even cover this. Any salaries for such positions would mean an increased cost to all members.

The Health and Welfare committee is chaired by a vet who has been involved in the dog world for many years.

To try and bridge the division between showing and other sports.

The Neuter Title was developed in part to try and attract exhibitors from the performance disciplines across to conformation, only time will tell if has any effect. I would love to hear some other suggestions on how to achieve this.

OK how about an ANKC that is not slow- These are not new problems. There has been a need for media coverage for a number of years, and the National set of Conformation Rules- just how long before that will actually come into effect IF it passes??

With Neuter- it would have been a good idea if it had been a national movement. The slow start in Victoria, and QLD ignoring it has made it into a bit of a joke. (Opps that debacle comes back to the National set of Conformation rules doesnt it......)

Perhaps the ANKC needs to prioritise getting good Veterinary information to its members. It is lovely that you have a Vet as a committee member, but are they willing to answer emails about genetic questions, write genetic lectures to deliver to members and advise on breeding programs? In the state of high visibility the community has regarding genetic issues asking the states for funding for even one geneticist to be available free, or at a low charge to members would be a good PR move and significantly help members who do not know enough about genetics to have a positive contribution to their breed.

And you didnt address getting in the general punters- having them join would provide additional funding to your other projects!!. The pet owners who dont want to compete in sports on conformation! They want a voice to stand up for them with the government. And where are the programs to promote responsible dog ownership- I assume they would be education seminars??

To get members you have to be seen doing something for them. You need breeders telling their puppy owners that it is worth joining, and you need vets telling THEIR clients it is worth joining.