Ankc - What Changes Would You Like To See?

[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.

[SparkyTansy]

. 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.

Just on this one, agree with Woofen... people laughed at the neuter title... people didn't support it and many breeders wouldn't encourage their puppy buyers to have a go even if they wanted to. The neuter title is for dogs on Main register.... and the limit was brought in to stop people from registering and showing dogs that are not suitable. Where does that leave pet people that might want to have a go?

we have a small club with several members who would like to try showing. The first show that has offered neuter this year is in July and we have three members who will be eligible to show their dogs. We have gained permission from their breeders and they are joined and entered. these are people who have ex show dogs but would never have known about showing if we hadn't encouraged them to come down and see what it is all about.

[GRD]

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??

.

The ANKC can be slow at implementing things, this is partly due to the fact that there are 8 seperate member bodies the majority of which have to be in agreement on changes. Sometimes this means the original proposal has to be reworked several times before it gets passed. The Neuter title was the culmination of 5 years of work before it gained acceptence.

The National Conformation Rules will not be a quick process. Given that there is to be member consultation which will take several months, the writing and review stages, the mandatory 12 months notification of rule changes along with needing to start these new rules at the beginning of a year, I think January 2014 is a likely start time.

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......)

The situation were about half on the member bodies do not wish to offer the title is one that can only be overcome with pressure from the membership. Every class offered at any show is optional, there are no National regulations stating that any particular classes must be offered. Having the Neuter Title rules adopted was a great feat in it self, to impose regulations on these classes that were not imposed on any other class would have seen it defeated. However the situation where the classes are offered, but no points are awarded is one that will be addressed.

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.

Personally I think this is a great idea, however it would take a very detailed proposal with costings and a list of several candidates willing to offer their time to provide such services for it to be considered. The ANKC web site has the list of committee members for the Canine Health and Welfare Committee, approach your states representitive to get this discussed at that committee. This would be the first step in a long process, but one that would certainly be beneficial.

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.

Yes an ANKC media campaign could get the message out to the general public, but it would need the member bodies to actually run it. I believe that Dogs Victoria has started to address this with the formation of the Companion Dog Club (I think that is the correct name), lobby your controlling body to do the same.

[SwaY]

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.

Great !

[GRD]

. 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.

Just on this one, agree with Woofen... people laughed at the neuter title... people didn't support it and many breeders wouldn't encourage their puppy buyers to have a go even if they wanted to. The neuter title is for dogs on Main register.... and the limit was brought in to stop people from registering and showing dogs that are not suitable. Where does that leave pet people that might want to have a go?

we have a small club with several members who would like to try showing. The first show that has offered neuter this year is in July and we have three members who will be eligible to show their dogs. We have gained permission from their breeders and they are joined and entered. these are people who have ex show dogs but would never have known about showing if we hadn't encouraged them to come down and see what it is all about.

From reading the Neuter Title thread both members and clubs are starting to support it, this title has been in place for less than 12 months and it is growing. Given time and pressure from the members it will continue to grow to where it will be considered part and parcel of the show world, not some novelty class. Unless breeders are willing to transfer neutered dogs on the limited register to the main register (and this should only be done if they are good examples of the breed)then unfortunately they can never compete in the show ring as we know it.

BUT

If a Companion Dog Club or similar was established by the controlling bodies I can see this as an avenue for these dogs to have their own shows. Once again it would be a long process to make it happen, but a couple of determind people in each state could achieve it. We need to look outside of the box to attract new members and to remain relevent, this are the sort of things we need to look at. The person who has a dog on limited register or not registered for that matter may catch the showing bug from this type of activity and their next dog may just be on the main register. Don't be put off by negativity, gather support and keep putting the issue forward.

I have to make it clear the thoughts and opinions expressed on this thread are my own and should in no way be construed as those of the ANKC or any member body of the ANKC.

[Guest DBT]

I would like to see the ANKC (and state bodies) step up to the plate and stop openly supporting pedigree puppy farming.

When i get monthly journals that state litters registered over the past month ....and the same prefix has 3 or more breeds, a dozen litters or more over those 3 breeds, not one titled breeding dog and the majority of litters in each breed sired by the same dog..... month in month out. How can this be seen as anything other than registered pedigree puppy farming??

Oh, and then flick to the exports section to find whole litters being sent to the same destination etc.

I am NOT trying to tar all breeders with the same brush. I just see this kind of stuff in the journal and i can see where the likes of our gardening guru friend get their fodder from.

Until i see rules put in place to stop this type of scenario, i won't have much respect for the ANKC and what is allegedly stands for.

Edited June 25, 2011 by DBT

[GRD]

Federal Restriction of Trade legsislation really limits what can be done in this regard. Rules are in place, but anyone committed to puppy farming pedigree dogs only has to take this to court for these rules to be declared a restriction of trade. I do not believe that there is any support for puppy farming, open or otherwise from within the organisations, but once again they are severally restricted in what they can do about it.

The export trade has really dried up with the major exporter closing up shop in Australia due to the downturn in the U.S economy. hopefully it will never go back to the way it was.

I would love to see a participation clause being added to the breeding rules, ie you must participate in either conformation or performance events a certain number of time per year to hold a breeder prefix. Responses from legal eagles on this have been that it too is a restriction of trade and could not be legally enforced.

I would like to see the ANKC (and state bodies) step up to the plate and stop openly supporting pedigree puppy farming.

When i get monthly journals that state litters registered over the past month ....and the same prefix has 3 or more breeds, a dozen litters or more over those 3 breeds, not one titled breeding dog and the majority of litters in each breed sired by the same dog..... month in month out. How can this be seen as anything other than registered pedigree puppy farming??

Oh, and then flick to the exports section to find whole litters being sent to the same destination etc.

I am NOT trying to tar all breeders with the same brush. I just see this kind of stuff in the journal and i can see where the likes of our gardening guru friend get their fodder from.

Until i see rules put in place to stop this type of scenario, i won't have much respect for the ANKC and what is allegedly stands for.

[Guest DBT]

Thankyou for such a thoughtful response.

The very first point under Objects Of The Council in the ANKC constitution....

" To encourage and promote in every way the general improvement of the recreation, sport, standard,breeding, exhibition and training of registered purebred dogs'

I can fully understand the ANKC may have difficulty in regards to restriction of trade. Is there not a way they can ban, suspend or not take members whose sole objective is to participate in purebreed pedigree puppy farming based on the fact that these members are not abiding by the constitution?

I like your idea regarding participation.

Federal Restriction of Trade legsislation really limits what can be done in this regard. Rules are in place, but anyone committed to puppy farming pedigree dogs only has to take this to court for these rules to be declared a restriction of trade. I do not believe that there is any support for puppy farming, open or otherwise from within the organisations, but once again they are severally restricted in what they can do about it.

The export trade has really dried up with the major exporter closing up shop in Australia due to the downturn in the U.S economy. hopefully it will never go back to the way it was.

I would love to see a participation clause being added to the breeding rules, ie you must participate in either conformation or performance events a certain number of time per year to hold a breeder prefix. Responses from legal eagles on this have been that it too is a restriction of trade and could not be legally enforced.

I would like to see the ANKC (and state bodies) step up to the plate and stop openly supporting pedigree puppy farming.

When i get monthly journals that state litters registered over the past month ....and the same prefix has 3 or more breeds, a dozen litters or more over those 3 breeds, not one titled breeding dog and the majority of litters in each breed sired by the same dog..... month in month out. How can this be seen as anything other than registered pedigree puppy farming??

Oh, and then flick to the exports section to find whole litters being sent to the same destination etc.

I am NOT trying to tar all breeders with the same brush. I just see this kind of stuff in the journal and i can see where the likes of our gardening guru friend get their fodder from.

Until i see rules put in place to stop this type of scenario, i won't have much respect for the ANKC and what is allegedly stands for.

Edited June 25, 2011 by DBT

[wayrod]

Some really interesting points/ideas have been raised and many are achievable now.

Edited June 25, 2011 by wayrod