Forming a breed club in the US

[lupis]

Originally Posted by Lunas Mom

Take, for instance, myself - Luna is my first CsV. I, however, have a Bachelor's Degree majoring in Animal Behavior and have been training, competing, titling and working dogs for over 17 years - dogs of every breed and I have training in almost EVERY dog sport from skijoring (a massive failure trying to use my Malinois - they tend to run in circles and I kept getting wrapped around trees) to waterwork, frisbee, agility, herding, schH... you name it, I have tried it. I have titled dogs in Obedience, Rally and SchH, as well as having great success in the conformation ring with trips to Eukanuba (invitation only) and Westminster and even got invited to Crufts!

Not words are important but what you do. I also beginner as owner but i read forum for years. Maybe you have experiences in other breed but you select wolfdogs like beginner. You write "work" "working" and what... you buy antiworking dog. you know to select good puppy you have to check puppies, parents, see character, speak with owners. for have good dog for work is to read and choose, And not to buy first offered puppy.

[Gypsy Wolf]

Just because you have been on a forum for years does not make you an expert or more experienced than I am. Yes, I am a beginner when it comes to actually LIVING with a vlcak - since there are only a handful here in the country, there is little chance I would have to spend time with one casually.
And I did not buy the first pup that came along... not that I have to defend myself against the accusatory tone of your posts, but I have been in contact with several kennels throughout Europe as well as one here in the U.S. for the last year or so, quietly researching what I like/did not like, etc.
Just because I am not blabbing all over the forum doesn't mean I am not doing my homework. You seem to be a lot of talk and I see no action.
I am more than happy with my choice when it comes to working ability. Perhaps your idea of working is quite different than mine. For me, I want a dog who is "game" to try anything, stable and responsive in public, likes bitework, is intelligent and flashy in obedience, committed to the Track, has excellent, sound conformtaion and has decent prey drive. I don't need a vlcak that is such a drivey dog that I can't live with it. I need a dog who I can snuggle with, too, and can live in harmony with my other pets (though the cats are not thrilled with her)...
Luna, so far, has fulfilled these requirements, and we hope to have a successful adventure with her. And even if she isn't the "ultimate" working dog, I am quite satisfied with her.
Put your money where your mouth is - how many dogs have you titled?

[yukidomari]

I have heard through the grapevine that when the AKC chooses to recognize a breed (move it from FSS to Misc.) the official American breed club it selects is not allowed to make rules regarding which dogs be registered - the AKC will always register any dog with correct papers. This also means that the parent club cannot stipulate what health tests must be done either. This is why every single breed club has a Code of Ethics that merely 'suggest' which tests be done, but can NEVER use the lack of said testing as a condition of registration.

The AKC has been known to pass over parent clubs with strict mandatory rules (see Leonberger, Cav King Charles Spaniel) and pick some fraction club that doesn't, as the Nationally recognized club. Once the AKC recognizes a national club, it stops accepting pedigrees/registrations from other clubs. So it leaves all the other clubs with more stringent rules between the choice to forever remain unrecognized and unable to have pedigrees, or to join up with a club with lax rules.

I had thought for a long time that such rules regarding health testing were the responsibility of the breed club, and that the AKC was merely just the record holder/guarantor. So many times you hear the argument "it's not the AKC, it's the national breed club's responsibility to enforce Code of Ethics"...

It's increasingly clear that this is not so, that the AKC personally picks and chooses breed clubs that suit its agenda, and the AKC's agenda is clearly only for growing numbers and to build popularity, even at the cost of health.

For these reasons and more I am now against AKC recognition of this
breed and will not personally be registering all and any future CsVs I will be importing with the FSS.

[Mikael]

Originally Posted by yukidomari

I had thought for a long time that such rules regarding health testing were the For these reasons and more I am now against AKC recognition of this
breed and will not personally be registering all and any future CsVs I will be importing with the FSS.

OK, will you keep them registered in Europe under the FCI ???

Best regards / Mikael

[yukidomari]

Mikael - I PM'd you.

[Gypsy Wolf]

Though there are a lot of things I DON'T like about AKC, it still is the "more recognized" registrar here in the U.S.
As AKC is just a registry, it CANNOT impose such rulings as health requirements - though why you would blame the AKC for that is beyond me... If you want to "blame" anyone - it is the parent club that has control over the breed, not the AKC - they only approve/disapprove changes to by-laws and standards. As far as health test requirements, personally I think such things should be done by a responsible breeder - and if the person is not a responsible breeder, only idiots would buy from them anyway...
Our breed club needs to incorporate and have approved by-laws and then AKC will incorporate said "parent club" - so it really boils down to whoever gets their butt in gear to develop a functioning breed club first....
Personally, I feel that affiliating with the AKC has some advantages for a burgeoning breed - I dual-register my dogs with AKC and UKC (who I prefer as a regisry, actually) and it opens up more venues in which to compete, as well.

[yukidomari]

Originally Posted by Lunas Mom

Though there are a lot of things I DON'T like about AKC, it still is the "more recognized" registrar here in the U.S.
As AKC is just a registry, it CANNOT impose such rulings as health requirements - though why you would blame the AKC for that is beyond me... If you want to "blame" anyone - it is the parent club that has control over the breed, not the AKC - they only approve/disapprove changes to by-laws and standards.

Please reread the post. I said "This also means that the parent club cannot stipulate what health tests must be done either. This is why every single breed club has a Code of Ethics that merely 'suggest' which tests be done, but can NEVER use the lack of said testing as a condition of registration. "


I am well aware that the AKC doesn't impose health requirements. They simply choose the breed club that won't require it. In fact it is the AKC's method to pick the breed club that will not reinforce stringent standards on health testing as a requirement of registration. Again, reference the newly recognized Leonberger. It is not simply who 'gets their butts in gear' first. For reference, the CKCS parent club, the original club, was simply passed over because they would not compromise on their testing requirements.

As I previously stated, the AKC likes to pick splinter clubs that like to cater to the easiest way to promote a breed. Just because a club was first doesn't prevent that. I don't know how it was not sufficiently apparent that the post is directed at the AKC's selection of parent clubs. I have never said once that the AKC is responsible for enforcing health testing.