Wednesday, January 11, 2012

Why we won't shut up

Jess has taken down the post explaining why we fight against arbitrary breeding regs and requested I remove the link. I will let my own words stand for now.

Virtually EVERY DOG THAT APPEARS HERE REGULARLY, or that I have ever bred, is ineligible to breed under Los Angeles and fer Chrissake EL PASO rules, and arguably or at least practically speaking by Albuquerque ones, be they rare breeds, salukis blocked by SCOA factions because they come from improper countries or have "bad" colors, lurchers, or longdogs. I am tired of hearing (A) it won't affect me (B) I'll just ignore it (C) I live in a rural place. You know my favorite Trotsky paraphrase: You may not be interested in "X", but "X" IS interested in you.

More cheerful programming to resume soon. Below, useless forbidden mutts here and in Kyrgizstan.


Richard Anderson said...

Steve, as someone who serves as an elected official (Truckee Town Council), I want to stress how important it is that people who share your opinion need to make their perspectives known when animal breeding regulations are being reviewed for approval. Practically, this means paying attention to city council and county supervisorial agendas (always a good idea anyway), as well as getting to know, on a personal basis, gov't animal control staff and the folks who run the local SPCA and Humane Society chapters, as they're the ones who may be the source of new regulatory proposals. I'm guessing El Paso's regs passed because no one who could critique them was paying attention.

Anonymous said...

I have to agree 100% with Richard Anderson's post - most of the anti-breeder regulations and animal code these days does not come from "purebred dog show breeders" but begins with Animal Rights activists such as PETA or HSUS. These people do not want humans and animals to interact at all, and in fact are looking to restructure society beginning with changing the human/animal bond by the use of radical animal control code, beginning at the grass roots levels. It doesn't stop with dogs, it extends to every agricultural use of animals, even to the use of wool, leather, eggs and dairy products ... Of course there will be no hunting, or ownership of animals at all ... one of their chief tactics is to set all "categories" of animal owners against one another - the idea that "show breeders" are plotting against all other uses of dogs is pretty much bunkum, and if you're living in an area that has passed a set of draconian laws which prohibit the way you use your dogs, it is probably because when the laws were adopted, there was no one in the trenches to fight them.

I've spent more hours of my life than I care to think about fighting AR laws which would make it impossible to own any kind of dog, train the dog, hunt with the dog, breed the dog, etc. You must as Richard says, begin at the very immediate, local level; get acquainted with your city council members and reps, gather together with all the people in your area who are "dog people" and please give each other a chance ... I've never read any of the kinds of guidelines that Jess suggests, and there are more people in Afghan Hounds than she realizes who appreciate and are preserving the Oriental sighthound ... remember, the idea of "divide and conquer" comes from the animal rights advocates, not from within the dog fanciers community.

Black Dog Lady

Steve Bodio said...

BDL: I agree that is where it STARTS, but in the west AKC and show people have definitely collaborated, perhaps in the "throw them to the crocodile and maybe it won't eat us" principle but also because they seem to see it as a blunt tool to eliminate not only Jess's "mongrels' but also "primitive impure" (quote) dogs like mine. The saluki situation is ugly even for me and I mostly stand outside-- I have had mail from a show saluki JUDGE denying that my "lurchers" were salukis because they had visible muscles, and another swearing true saluki people would go after and sterilize any offspring of my "mongrels". As the Greeks said to the Persians, "Molon labe."

Jess gets worse in her comments which she does not moderate. I'm too damn old-- I just delete-- so far. But most owners of registered dogs in Albuquerque-- there were exceptions-- made little effort to fight HEART; a lot of self- proclaimed purebred owners wrote to the Albuquerque Journal approving it. On longdogs it was at least rumored that who could care about vicious coyote hounds owned by rednecks and "Mexicans" (instead of rich newcomers??)

Without a doubt AR, PETA, HSUS are the initiators of this pernicious nonsense, and will come for these foolish innocents next-- they are deluding themselves if they think legal liaisons with these people will save them, but many persist in trying.

I used to think Gail was over- the- top paranoid when she declaimed "first they came for the chickenfighters." Now I fear she was on to something.

In Albuquerque, the same people who felonized that pastime now want mandated water bowl styles and washable whelping pens with permanent floor drains for all dogs' breeding (instead of my couch) and WILL STERILIZE EVEN A LICENSED BREEDING DOG if it gets free and is picked up. Where were all the breed clubs?

Luisa said...

Over the years I've formed some strong opinions on the subject of good dogs and people I'd buy a dog from.

Steve, I know you've already seen these -- you commented on the second one -- but here are [links to] a couple of my own posts on this topic. The first post is the abridged version of an email exchange with a supporter -- later opponent -- of California's first mandatory spay/neuter bill. The second post has much to do with my admiration for the "meat, hide and stock dogs" owned by Henry Chappell and his fellow East Texas hunters. I'd buy a crossbred pup from Donny Lynch in a New York minute.

On titles and codes of ethics [or, "How can you tell if a dog is worth breeding if he doesn't have a title?" Answer: Watch him work.]

Conspiracy of dunces

Anonymous said...

Steve, I'm right there with you on the LA, CA and Albuquerque ordinances when they were passed ... I was even a member of an organized national group who wrote letters to the Albuquerque CC to protest their animal control philosophy ... they even wanted grooming shops to turn over records of all of their customers who owned purebred dogs ... I also remember the Red Hat Ladies who supported the council woman who introduced and rammed that set of code through the council. I think the chief problem in Albuquerque and all of NM is that there are precious few purebred show breeders to get organized to fight this kind of thing ... that is another tactic that HSUS & PETA use to get a foot in the door ... propose and pass this legislation in states and cities where there are few people who will be interested in the laws - I also remember CA well, when the club members out there sorta spilled the bag to the Bay Area paper reporter, who then claimed to have discovered "blood sport" participation in the area - that was when they tried to shut down OFC, and if you will recall that was shortly after the UK law against hunting with hounds was passed - the HSUS CEO Pacelle has sworn to put an end to hunting with hounds in the US ... he's gonna do it state by state ...

The foot hold was gained in CA in the LA/Hollywood area where the liberal movie star nutsos support both HSUS and PETA because they think they are animal welfare groups who finance animal shelters ... they think anyone who breeds a dog is a puppy mill ... the show breeders in that state are mostly old time fanciers who assumed that the AKC was going to support them and that they had enough cache' to put a stop to the nonsense, and believed they could strike a compromise if they didn't nip the problem in the bud. HSUS has also passed laws which will put chicken ranchers out of business, and they're going after beef and dairy as well. California just got totally out of hand, as did NM, which is why I would never have voted for Richards, and why no one east of the mississippi will vote for Perry. Santorum cooked his goose years ago when he tried to introduce PAWS and took Pacelle with him to the White House to meet with Bush ... it is going to be an ongoing fight, they will never quite, but it behooves each of us who loves our way of live to fight them with every ounce of our being.


Anonymous said...

Who was it that said "Never underestimate the power of large numbers of stupid people?"...L.B.

Anonymous said...

@LB - I'm hoping that large numbers of stupid people get angrier and angrier ... I'm an old broad, but I've done a few "demonstrations" in my lifetime, and I could probably be talked into "occupying" something, if the right opportunity presented itself.


Anonymous said...

Uh, I was referring to the large numbers of stupid people trying to outlaw everything!...L.B.

Anonymous said...

Things will get better when more individuals keep intact dogs and breed dogs. S/N, although good for many dogs and owners, has been transformed into a kind of irrational rite of passage.

The big mistake of the dog fancy-- after they set themselves up as the pinnacle of dog breeding-- is that they made dog breeding too exclusive. They defined themselves the rarified few, creating the idea that no one out side of their group should breed dogs. When you make yourself too exclusive it can backfire so that people turn against you. Now not only does almost nobody want to breed dogs, breeding and breeders are generally frowned upon. S/N contracts and discouraging “other people” from breeding have made intact dogs and the people who keep them and breed them oddities in society.

Unless the general public becomes personally invested in dog breeding (by owning intact dogs, breeding themselves, or knowing breeders), they won’t care about our arguments about personal freedom. They will just see dog breeders as killing shelter dogs, somehow not understanding that the dogs who they love have selective breeding in their background.


Anonymous said...

I have always found the term of disdain used by AKC show people--"Backyard Breeders" somewhat amusing. I mean, exactly WHERE do they breed THEIR dogs? The front yard? In some exclusive, private, purebred dog bordello? Perhaps a hotel somewhere near Disneyland? Or are they beamed up to Alien spaceships? If the latter is true, Steve, you better watch out, because there are probably a lot of AKC breeder rendezvous sites near you!...L.B.

Retrieverman said...


I totally agree with you.

More people need to breeding dogs-- not only for the reasons you've elucidated here, but because one of the factors that is driving gene loss in purebred dogs is that only a few dogs per litter are producing puppies. Many of these breeds-- including mine-- have concentrated on producing from only elite sires, and this elitism exists in show and performance lines.

The demand for dogs continues to grow-- even in a recession and a slow growth "recovery." More people are going to have to breed dogs to meet the demand.

Anonymous said...

Steve, if there is a Mother Ship landing pad near you, or a transporter hidden in those hills, I want to know about it immediately; I am ready to be beamed up at a moment's notice!