What has AKC done for us?

Larry G · Post by **Larry G** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 7:38 pm

AKC is powerful. It is the governing body of the club I attend, and I have been told that ONLY AKC dogs are allowed to run there, even practice. Violating this rule could result in the club's charter being revoked.

I am nervous sending in papers for registration to AKC. Once I sent in some online, never got them, but my credit card was charged. I phoned, and a nasty woman told me their computers had malfunctioned and I would not be getting any papers. No refund either.

So.... you can see how I view AKC registration as a necessary evil. On the plus side, AKC pups sell for a good price. The idea that the dogs are 100% "pure" is appealing to puppy buyers. They feel if a breeder keeps AKC papers they have a better chance of getting a healthy, intelligent pup. Show them a ped full of champions like this one on a dog I just placed

http://www.pawvillage.com/pedigree/pedi ... S4RYAWUR0M

and the deal is done. Tell them all you have is some grade stock and they are thinking "free to a good home".

Ha ha actually on that particular dog he was "free to a good home" but he was far from being a puppy!

TC · Post by TC » Tue Jan 30, 2007 8:18 pm

I am interested in the comment about shooting over hounds at "every" AKC trial. I have marshalled and worked at almost every LP on hare at the AKC club I belong to here in N.Y. over the past 4 years and have attended and ran hounds at numerous SPO on rabbit trials. I have NEVER seen anyone shoot over anything....ever at any of these trials.

Wow Hillbilly hate to say it but if these Clubs are running SPO they ARE NOT Following the Rules!!!!!!

SMALL PACK OPTION (page 40)
When hounds are required to be cast to search for
game and to be tested for gunshyness, the Premium List
and any advertising shall state “Small Pack Option.”
Hounds must be scored on searching ability. Hounds
that fail to search for game or inter fere with the other
hounds that are searching for game must be ordered up
by the Judges.
Hounds must be tested for gunshyness in all classes
and gunfire shall only be simulated by means of a blank
cartridge.
The Field Trial Committee shall decide in which
series the testing for gunshyness shall take place. Not
until all the hounds have settled down in full pursuit of
game and they can be observed by one or both Judges,
shall the Judges ask the Marshal to fire a single blank
car tridge from within normal gunshot range of the
pack. Only firearms that are incapable of discharging
live ammunition are permitted. All calibers greater
than .32 are acceptable. Under no circumstances shall
a hound that is being judged for gunshyness be shot over
unless it is working fresh scent, or unless it has been
given ample time to hark to the pack if game is being
pursued vigorously by the pack. The Judges may request
that the Marshal fire additional blank cartridges under
the same conditions above until they are satisfied that
the pack is free from gunshy hounds. No hounds shall be
demerited or picked up for harking to gunfire

jonnyringo · Post by **jonnyringo** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 8:57 pm

Larry G wrote:
I am nervous sending in papers for registration to AKC. Once I sent in some online, never got them, but my credit card was charged. I phoned, and a nasty woman told me their computers had malfunctioned and I would not be getting any papers. No refund either.

BS

burbba · Post by **burbba** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 9:57 pm

I dont see how the ARHA can be considered the "trial" expert. I read someone say their trials are the closest to gun dogs...

An FC in the ARHA LP format makes FC with ONE win, and 100 pts... with 50 pts awarded for a single trial (big 4 or 5, cant remember). AKC forces a dog to win 3 different trials, and then get 100 points, with no emphasis on any one trial. Points awarded are based on the number of entries. second gets 1/2 of total entries (50 entries, second gets 25 pts)

This has started on a tangent, so in closing.... who or what organization Set the BREED STANDARD for the beagle? I'm thinking it was the akc...

Larry G · Post by **Larry G** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 9:58 pm

Johnnyringo wrote:

BS

Yeah, Ringo, that's kinda what I told the nasty lady... she was not amused. I had to resend the appliction with a check. I did get the papers, finally, but not the refund.

Larry G · Post by **Larry G** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 10:01 pm

Burba wrote:

AKC forces a dog to win 3 different trials, and then get 100 points, with no emphasis on any one trial. Points awarded are based on the number of entries. second gets 1/2 of total entries (50 entries, second gets 25 pts)

Last I heard it was 120 points

Larry G · Post by **Larry G** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 10:12 pm

TC wrote:
Wow Hillbilly hate to say it but if these Clubs are running SPO they ARE NOT Following the Rules!!!!!!

But, it is not required for AKC brace and LP on hare as far as I know... I think that was the point he was making. The SPO blank shot is sometimes not much of a test for gunshyness IMHO either. Hope this doesn't escalate into another debate about whether gunshyness is inherited or manmade.

Post by **Bev** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 10:44 pm

Just for the record, UKC started DNAing dogs first, then AKC followed in their footsteps. AKC would like you to think they were the first but they weren't. The two registries are only 4 years apart in age. Ironically, the UKC will recognize AKC DNA registration, but AKC will not recognize UKC's, lol. I borrow your idea, then I don't honor it when you do it? LOL. The only thing that separates those two registries on that issue is $$$ in my opinion, not interest in preserving the purity of the pedigree. My dogs are AKC registered, make no mistake, but I will go to the mat for the integrity of UKC's registry and what they do for preserving the working breeds. Both registries provide a good service at a reasonable price, IMO.

Rick.....I'll show you a picture...(lol).

TOUCHSTONEBGLS · Post by **TOUCHSTONEBGLS** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 11:37 pm

The AKC did not write THE breed standard but they do have A breed standard which they can change or missinterpret however suits them. As with many AKC breeds the standard can be bent or even changed to suit the "flavor of the month". One such example was when the Dalmatian breeders began promoting the 50-50 body to height proportion. Ironic to stifle a dogs movement that was bred to travel many miles with a coach. The working aspects of a breed are of less value to AKC than what the parent club wants. Have seen a dal lacking eye rim pigmentation(a major fault) win the National. Now it is not uncommon to see dals with poor nose or eye pigment. 30 years ago they were sold as pets. Now they are shown, championed, and bred. Same as any registry can do. Some registries do care more about performance dogs. If AKC had ever cared about the importance of both form and function the breed wouldn't be in the mess it is in today. Show dogs with NO hunt!?? why? Did you ever see some of the structure on those brace dogs. How do you rationalize giving any type of Championship to a dog that is downright deformed. They have had a hundred + years to promote excellent hunting dogs sound in structure and function and instead they have created a huge mess. Most of the current AKC standard was written by members of the National Beagle Club NBC. It was addopted from the English standard. When settlers came to the US they braught all sorts of hound muts to get food and dogs to do other work, protect, etc. The small hounds were called beagles. They formed the basis of what eventually became AKC. Some imported dogs from England which greatly improved the breed in the US. They also wrote the standard. Keep in mind the original standard was written by sportsmen who defined the physical characteristics that best suits the beagles task in the field. Over 100 years later how many field trialers have any understanding of how the breed standard directly suits the beagles function. Very few have even minimal understanding. I have done a lot with AKC and have even judged at AKC Specialty shows. But good golly how long will it take to wake up and smell the coffee. The UBGF is at least working in the right direction but they represent such a small percentage of AKC registered beagles. The money machine has grown too large to overcome and correct the damage to our breed. Relatively few breeders are actively developing beagles in accordance to both great hunting abbility and correct physical structure. They will have the greatest impact on the future of our breed regardless of which registry they choose to do it in. The success of UKC registered beagles at the NBC Tripple Challenge helps illustrate the point.

BIG AL · Post by **BIG AL** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 12:52 am

UKC may be only four years younger than AKC but I remember registering my beagle with UKC in the late 1980's as foundation stock.

TomMN · Post by **TomMN** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:29 am

"UKC may be only four years younger than AKC but I remember registering my beagle with UKC in the late 1980's as foundation stock."

AKC is busy trying to hand out papers to every coonhound in can right now. Up until this time the only AKC registered coonhounds were Black and Tans that could not hunt but fit someones misguided idea of a good show dog.

Beagles were a breed of hunting hounds long before AKC or UKC came along. It's what they do to protect and strengthen the breed that concerns me. AKC almost let beagles be turned into a hobby hound usless for the purpose the breed was created for (like it has done for many other breeds). It still to this day hands out field champion titles (brace beagles) and show champion titles to beagles that can't circle a rabbit to the gun.

UKC is far from perfect but if you want to show your beagle in a UKC show you have to hunt it. When you fill out your papers to single register your beagle with UKC you will be asked if it is used for hunting.

It is up to people like us to look after the breed that our fourfathers left us and to make sure they continue to be useful for hunting rabbits. If AKC wants to help us that is wonderful. If they don't then we need to go somewhere else.

AKC needs us. We don't need them, in spite of what many of you think.

Post by **Bev** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 6:35 am

Tom, all the registries need us, we don't need them. Just like we could all wash our own cars for the rest of our life instead of taking them thru the car wash. We cut cut our own hair instead of going to the barber. The car wash is nice and the barber is definitely one of life's little perks that we don't mind paying for - so we don't have to do it ourselves, and we get a presentable-looking product. Even better, we don't have a million hands taking care of the pedigrees (can you imagine if we all relied on everyone else's handwritten pedigrees - written based on "best I can remember, his daddy was...?) Better to have all that info kept in one spot - or two spots, then everyone gets the same info. They do provide us a valuable service, but you're right, we don't NEED them.

Dan, currently AKC does not own the written Beagle standard. The NBC still owns it. I believe AKC has tried to buy it, but the NBC ain't sellin', lol.

TC · Post by TC » Wed Jan 31, 2007 10:41 am

If I personally Was gonna Buy a Dog and there were 2 that were the same in every Aspect one registered AKC the other UKC i would put my money on the UKC hound Just for the very Reasons Dan Stated earlier....
Should have heard some of the comments we used to get when we were Runnin Our AKC show Dogs in the field!!!!!
If i had to choose between the tow AKC and UKC today it would be UKC!!!!
look at the background of most of the upper managers at AKC
All business no Dogs or previously Employed by
USDA
HSUS
ALF
Just to name a few!!!!
Oh And by the way Who Did AKC purchase the coonhound registry From????
UKC has Shared over and over again has AKC???????
AND you wont see any UKC registered Dogs at PETSMART!!!!!

mybeagles · Post by **mybeagles** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 10:48 am

Hillbilly, have you ever made the winners pack? In SPO they usually shoot over the winners pack rather than over each class......

Post by **Bev** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:44 am

They're doing it wrong, then. They're suppose to shoot over every pack. What if a gundog got beat out of an earlier series by a gunSHY dog, just to eventually get eliminated itself in the winners pack. The gunshy dogs should be removed before the winners pack is run. If this is done, then there's no gunshy dogs and no reason to shoot over them in the winners pack, because they've all been shot over by then.