Do we need a new ckcs club.........

[RodRussell]

That was the "spin" from the people (prominent or not!) who left the club to start the new club. I don't know anyone who was there at the time who voted to remain independent who believes that there was any "miscommunication." We may have been a bit naive to think that there would not be a splinter group but I think most would vote the same if we could do it again. One of the biggest issues was that most of us wanted to remain autonomous so that the club's Code of Ethics could be tied to registration privileges since AKC parent clubs have no control over registration and have no enforceable COE.

We hear the same lament over and over from breed clubs in the US and the UK - "we can't enforce our COE because we don't have control over registration.....whine, whine" - well by golly, the CKCSC could enforce a COE because a breeder lost registration privileges if found to be in violation of the club COE. If you sold puppies through a broker or pet store, for example, you couldn't register your litters anymore; etc. The COE could be specifically tailored to our breed, and the club had the clout it needed to really enforce the COE, so the COE became a requirement rather than a "suggestion." Breeders toed the line whether they wanted to or not because there were real consequences if they did not.

Had the club chosen to do so, there could have been REAL progress made toward tying some basic health testing requirements to the ability to register litters. CKCSC registration could have truly "meant" something to puppy buyers, but unfortunately there was never agreement among the various factions to take that groundbreaking step and the health protocols remained "suggestions." (I sat through many a long meeting where this was debated.)

The other big issue was puppy mills. We knew that Cavaliers would be extremely attractive to millers once they had the "AKC stamp of approval."

Pat

Right on, gal!

 

[WoodHaven]

Yes, that was a big disappointment to me........I only know of two breeders who stood by their convictions and did not dual register their breeding stock. But dual registration happened NOT because breeders had changed their minds about AKC, but because they feared that the old club would go out of business and disappear and they would be left with breeding stock that could not then be registered with AKC and would thus be "worthless" (since there was a very short window that AKC would accept CKCSC registered dogs into the AKC) and they would only have registration with a defunct registering body. So this was a business decision rather than an ethical decision, and had nothing to do with a change of heart or mind but rather was a protection of monetary investment in breeding stock.

Pat

The stud books were open for quite a while--some anti akc breeders were there within the first months.

 

[Pat]

"Pound sand"????

I'm sitting here laughing because we Americans have hijacked your thread. And you thought that you in the UK had a monopoly on passionate club politics!!!

Ah well, my original point was that we talked over here about yet another club but I don't think that would have helped matters at all.

Turning discussion back over to you on the other side of the pond now...........

Pat

 

[WoodHaven]

That was the "spin" from the people (prominent or not!) who left the club to start the new club. I don't know anyone who was there at the time who voted to remain independent who believes that there was any "miscommunication." We may have been a bit naive to think that there would not be a splinter group but I think most would vote the same if we could do it again. One of the biggest issues was that most of us wanted to remain autonomous so that the club's Code of Ethics could be tied to registration privileges since AKC parent clubs have no control over registration and have no enforceable COE.

We hear the same lament over and over from breed clubs in the US and the UK - "we can't enforce our COE because we don't have control over registration.....whine, whine" - well by golly, the CKCSC could enforce a COE because a breeder lost registration privileges if found to be in violation of the club COE. If you sold puppies through a broker or pet store, for example, you couldn't register your litters anymore; etc. The COE could be specifically tailored to our breed, and the club had the clout it needed to really enforce the COE, so the COE became a requirement rather than a "suggestion." Breeders toed the line whether they wanted to or not because there were real consequences if they did not.

Had the club chosen to do so, there could have been REAL progress made toward tying some basic health testing requirements to the ability to register litters. CKCSC registration could have truly "meant" something to puppy buyers, but unfortunately there was never agreement among the various factions to take that groundbreaking step and the health protocols remained "suggestions." (I sat through many a long meeting where this was debated.)

The other big issue was puppy mills. We knew that Cavaliers would be extremely attractive to millers once they had the "AKC stamp of approval."

Pat

Pat,
If I had to choose a CKCSC, USA only registered cavalier or an AKC only registered cavalier-- guess which one I'd pick. I don't believe there is a registering body in the world that recognizes the CKCSC registration... btw, every cavalier here is dual registered, every pup I've ever bred is dual registered. I do the paperwork and I pay the fees.

The ladies that worked the CKCSC, USA in the early days wanted AKC recognition. Why... IT is the USA's registering body for dogs.

You don't need the AKC's stamp of approval for puppymills-- they require paperwork and inspections. There are 4- 5 other 'registrations' in the USA that give you a piece of paper, no questions asked.

 

[Pat]

The stud books were open for quite a while--some anti akc breeders were there within the first months.

As I recall it was two years.....or maybe three......that the stud book was open to CKCSC registered dogs. Nevertheless there was fear that the CKCSC would go belly up and/or the rules would change and the stud book would be closed so people did move quickly to protect their investment in their breeding programs and to "cover all bases." Again.......I was disappointed.

Pat

 

[WoodHaven]

As I recall it was two years.....or maybe three......that the stud book was open to CKCSC registered dogs. Nevertheless there was fear that the CKCSC would go belly up and/or the rules would change and the stud book would be closed so people did move quickly to protect their investment in their breeding programs and to "cover all bases." Again.......I was disappointed.

Pat

Ms. Twigg is a delight to talk to... I spent hours with her one night. She liked to talk about Maxholt dogs. She carried pictures (black and white) on her to show.

 

[RodRussell]

Ms. Twigg is a delight to talk to... I spent hours with her one night. She liked to talk about Maxholt dogs. She carried pictures (black and white) on her to show.

Joan Twigg can look at a CKCSC,USA Cavalier and tell you which breeder bred it, and sometimes even who the sire was.

 

[Pat]

Pat,
If I had to choose a CKCSC, USA only registered cavalier or an AKC only registered cavalier-- guess which one I'd pick.

The ladies that worked the CKCSC, USA in the early days wanted AKC recognition. Why... IT is the USA's registering body for dogs.

You don't need the AKC's stamp of approval for puppymills-- they require paperwork and inspections. There are 4- 5 other 'registrations' in the USA that give you a piece of paper, no questions asked.

Of course you would pick AKC - but it's a business decision based on showing, breeding, etc.

I actually can speak for those ladies, because Liz Spalding is a dear friend. THEY CHANGED THEIR MINDS after they saw what they had achieved as an independent breed club/registry and what AKC had become! (Well, Trudy was dead and Sally was no longer involved.........but Liz was the strongest anti-AKC breeder around during the vote and she is one of two who never dual registered Cavaliers. She is also the reason that I found myself sitting on the national BOD.)

This happened before AKC initiated new requirements such as DNA registration of studs, etc. and before the new bogus registries emerged. Then, there was pretty much only AKC and UKC as US multiple breed registries. We were also not the only independent clubs to "resist" - remember what happened with border collies and JRT's.

Pat

 

[Pat]

I don't understand the reference to Joan......unless you are saying that she was one who did not dual register. If so, then the number moves from two to three breeders.

Now I'm really nostalgic for the old days (but NOT the fighting!)......I'd move heaven and earth to have another Kilspindie..........when Susie dies it will truly be the end of an era for me.....

I remember Joan and Oliver's all time favorite girl - Tuesday - who was a McGoogan (spelling?). She was treated like a queen and was absolutely "rotten."

Pat

 

[RodRussell]

I don't believe there is a registering body in the world that recognizes the CKCSC registration...

That would only be because of AKC recognition and the international agreements it has with other countries' kennel clubs to not recognize non-AKC registries.

btw, every cavalier here is dual registered, every pup I've ever bred is dual registered. I do the paperwork and I pay the fees.

If you register your litter puppies with AKC, then I tip me hat to you! I have been campaigning for three years to get AKC parent clubs to urge their members to register all of their puppies along with the litters. The closest I have come thus far is to get AKC to roll out the AKC Registration Pledge Challenge this past June -- see http://www.akc.org/regpledge/ -- a rather lame version of my proposal.

You don't need the AKC's stamp of approval for puppymills-- they require paperwork and inspections. There are 4- 5 other 'registrations' in the USA that give you a piece of paper, no questions asked.

You are talking about now, not then, in 1993 and 1994. Back then, there were no Cavaliers in puppy mills because AKC had not recognized the breed. And back then, AKC's inspections were a lot less arduous than now.

 

[WoodHaven]

That would only be because of AKC recognition and the international agreements it has with other countries' kennel clubs to not recognize non-AKC registries.



If you register your litter puppies with AKC, then I tip me hat to you! I have been campaigning for three years to get AKC parent clubs to urge their members to register all of their puppies along with the litters. The closest I have come thus far is to get AKC to roll out the AKC Registration Pledge Challenge this past June -- see http://www.akc.org/regpledge/ -- a rather lame version of my proposal.



You are talking about now, not then, in 1993 and 1994. Back then, there were no Cavaliers in puppy mills because AKC had not recognized the breed. And back then, AKC's inspections were a lot less arduous than now.

The AKC has made it easier for breeders (I sound like a commercial) to register a full litter to themselves first. I had to register puppies in the old club and I wanted their names to match in the AKC -- so I do it and pay for it.

Does this sound familiar-- per AKC
"Full Litter Registration also creates an added incentive for fanciers to successfully participate in the AKC Registration Pledge Challenge currently underway. By using Full Litter you are guaranteeing that 100% of your puppies are ultimately registered with AKC."

 

[Margaret C]

"Pound sand"????

I'm sitting here laughing because we Americans have hijacked your thread. And you thought that you in the UK had a monopoly on passionate club politics!!!

Ah well, my original point was that we talked over here about yet another club but I don't think that would have helped matters at all.

Turning discussion back over to you on the other side of the pond now...........

Pat

Fascinating stuff.
I know some of the history of the 'Old Club' 'New Club' as I was around when it was happening.
I'm enjoying hearing what really happened & why.

 

[WoodHaven]

I don't understand the reference to Joan......unless you are saying that she was one who did not dual register. If so, then the number moves from two to three breeders.

Now I'm really nostalgic for the old days (but NOT the fighting!)......I'd move heaven and earth to have another Kilspindie..........when Susie dies it will truly be the end of an era for me.....

I remember Joan and Oliver's all time favorite girl - Tuesday - who was a McGoogan (spelling?). She was treated like a queen and was absolutely "rotten."

Pat

What I am saying is that I did try to get some information from people who were there first hand. Coming in to this issue after the fall out -- you hear a lot of 'they said, he said, she said' etc... but facts are sometimes harder to get. I spent an evening with Pat Winter(Cobblestone) in Pennsylvania during an old club show. We had just started trying to find our first show pup. She takes a Thanksgiving picture with her 'WHOLE' family. I remember asking, "do all those dogs live with you"--lol.

Yes, the Twiggs never went to the AKC.

We started our own AKC regional cavalier club 7 years ago (there are about 20 now in the US)-- We have our own CofE and ethics board.

 

[Pat]

Ah, yes I have one of Pat's photos on display in my home office. I think she hot glue-gunned the dogs' butts to the front steps. (I realize that I just made up that verb!) I think it was Pat (or maybe Anne....) who introduced me to Rod.

Rod, do you remember making xerox copies of flyers and doing mass mailings to all club members? We didn't have the internet, and I purchased my first fax machine then to make communication easier.

I sat on the national ethics committee back then, and we took our responsibilities very, very seriously. Again, there were serious consequences if one had an ethics charge against them that was upheld as there could be fines or other penalties up to expulsion. Then, if a breeder lost the ability to register his/her puppies/litters and show, there was a real impact. COEs are fine, but with no serious consequences for violating the COE, they don't have any "teeth."

Pat (feeling very old.....)

 

[WoodHaven]

I sat on the national ethics committee back then, and we took our responsibilities very, very seriously. Again, there were serious consequences if one had an ethics charge against them that was upheld as there could be fines or other penalties up to expulsion. Then, if a breeder lost the ability to register his/her puppies/litters and show, there was a real impact. COEs are fine, but with no serious consequences for violating the COE, they don't have any "teeth."

Pat (feeling very old.....)

That consequence only has teeth IF the breeders/owners want to stay with the club. IF they make the hobby of dog owning and breeding too onerous-- people can and do leave. I know of a half dozen that have quit the CKCSC in the last couple of years due to problems in that system.

I myself got charged $250 EXTRA to register a litter-- due to a glitch in registration in ENGLAND three generations back.

 

[Pat]

That consequence only has teeth IF the breeders/owners want to stay with the club.

My point EXACTLY! Back then, the CKCSC was the only game in town so serious breeders had to comply with the COE to be able to breed and show registered dogs. If they decided to leave because the rules were too stringent - nobody cared!

Now, there are multiple choices (and most of them have COEs not tied to registration) so breeders can do as they please with few consequences.

Pat

 

[RodRussell]

The AKC has made it easier for breeders (I sound like a commercial) to register a full litter to themselves first. I had to register puppies in the old club and I wanted their names to match in the AKC -- so I do it and pay for it.

Does this sound familiar-- per AKC
"Full Litter Registration also creates an added incentive for fanciers to successfully participate in the AKC Registration Pledge Challenge currently underway. By using Full Litter you are guaranteeing that 100% of your puppies are ultimately registered with AKC."

Full litter registration became available recently but has been rarely utilized, like under 2% of all litter registrations. It started out as temporary test program a couple of years ago, and I encouraged David Roberts of AKC's registration department to not end it when its initial time ran out. The AKC board agreed with his recommendation to extend it.

Then, in June the AKC board agreed to offer this AKC Registration Pledge Challenge program, where parent clubs are to urge their members to, in turn, urge their puppy buyers to register their puppies. This is not what I proposed. I proposed that the parent clubs urge their breeder-members to register the puppies with the litters under the full registration program. AKC thought that was trying to go too far too quickly, so the pledge challenge program is a watered down compromise, like a first step towards combining litter and puppy registration as the usual way of doing business.

Full litter registration is a no-brainer for CKCSC,USA members, since all puppies are registered with their litters in the CKCSC,USA. But most AKC-only breeders, of all breeds, have viewed blue slips as the puppy buyers' responsibility. This has been so for decades. So, I suggested that the breeders be given a discount for registering the puppies and the litters at the same time.

Maybe, sometime, AKC will convince its parent clubs, and the parent clubs in turn will convince their members, to use full litter registration all the time. At least that option is still available, rather than AKC ending the full litter registration program after the end of its test period.

 

[WoodHaven]

My point EXACTLY! Back then, the CKCSC was the only game in town so serious breeders had to comply with the COE to be able to breed and show registered dogs. If they decided to leave because the rules were too stringent - nobody cared!

Now, there are multiple choices (and most of them have COEs not tied to registration) so breeders can do as they please with few consequences.

Pat

Most cavaliers are not born of show breeders-- those would be the only ones that would care. Most people I've sold cavaliers to have never heard of the CKCSC, USA
AND-- someone has to press charges, many infractions aren't caught.

No, our c of e isn't connected with registration-- but being a member means you will abide by the rules, or risk fines/expulsion.

 

[Cathy T]

What an absolutely fascinating conversation this has turned into!! You all have enlightened me so much about things I wasn't aware of. I knew about "old club" and "new club" and knew about the differences, but have learned so much more from this conversation. How enlightening to havd you "oldies" (and I don't mean that in age I mean that in experience) give us your thoughts and perspectives.

I absolutely love being a member of my regional Cavalier Club. I have learned so much, met so many wonderful people....and have so many more Cavalier experiences than I ever would have had without my club. Two of my very dearest friends I've met through my club. We have riveting speakers at every meeting. We discuss health testing, feeding, vaccinations, training....everything. And I have such wonderful resources to go to if I have an issue with my dog. I think I am lucky that our club is still relatively small. It's a very intimate group, I know everyone in my club and that makes it really special.

 

[RodRussell]

Ah, yes I have one of Pat's photos on display in my home office. I think she hot glue-gunned the dogs' butts to the front steps. (I realize that I just made up that verb!) I think it was Pat (or maybe Anne....) who introduced me to Rod.

Rod, do you remember making xerox copies of flyers and doing mass mailings to all club members? We didn't have the internet, and I purchased my first fax machine then to make communication easier.

I sat on the national ethics committee back then, and we took our responsibilities very, very seriously. Again, there were serious consequences if one had an ethics charge against them that was upheld as there could be fines or other penalties up to expulsion. Then, if a breeder lost the ability to register his/her puppies/litters and show, there was a real impact. COEs are fine, but with no serious consequences for violating the COE, they don't have any "teeth."

Pat (feeling very old.....)

It was either Pat Winters or Anne Eckersley who introduced us. All of those dogs in Pat Winters' annual photos were heavily leashed, and the real troublesome ones usually were wedged between the legs of the humans in the photos. There is one of Pat Winters' annual photos in Bruce Fields' book, at the start of a chapter (for you UKers to look up).

Back then, we prepared flyers and sent out mass mailings (like, about what questions to ask breeders about health), and we also photocopied research journal articles about MVD and passed them around, too. Pat Winters carried several copies of MVD articles in that big bag she had at the shows, and she gave copies to anyone who seemed interested.