The American Kennel Club and The Hartford Insurance Company: Unholy Union for Owners of Specific Breeds

Anyone that's visited the American Kennel Club website recently has no doubt seen the  banner ads for "The Hartford Insurance Company" and the opportunity to save money on your auto insurance policy. Sounds good, right?  In this day and age, everyone is looking to save a buck or two.


But if you dig a little deeper into The Hartford Insurance Company, and their policies on homeowners insurance and specific breeds of dogs,  the allure of being able to save a few bucks should turn your stomach.


Yep, The Hartford DISCRIMINATES against dog owners that own breeds of dogs that are on their "list".  What list, you ask? The list of specific breeds of dogs that have the highest rate of bite instances, which are: Rottweilers, "Pitbulls", Presa Canarios, Staffordshire Terriers, and Bull Terriers. 


How did The Hartford constuct such a list? 
I was curious, so I called them. Below is part of my conversation with the representative:


ME: I'm interested in a homeowner's policy, are there limitations on pets?
REP: Yes, if you own a specific breed of dog, such as a Rottweiler or Pit Bull. What dogs do you own?
ME: Rottweilers
REP: I'm so sorry, they are such sweet dogs, but we don't write homeowners policies for Rottweilers.
ME: Are there other breeds that you won't write a policy for?
REP: Yes, there are 5 breeds: Rottweilers, Pitbulls, Presa Canarios, Stafford Terriers, and Bull Terriers
ME: Why those 5 breeds?
REP: Because they have the highest rate of bite/attack instances in the U.S.
ME:  How did they arrive at this conclusion?
REP: Well, the company looks at bite reports, and statistics by breed (her words, NOT mine)..to determine the breeds. And these breeds, especially Rottweilers and Pitbulls and Presas, are always at the top of the list of bites.
ME: Do you realize that there is NO reliable statistical data kept by anyone, that tracks dog bite instances by breed? 
REP: Well, they compile the list based on police reports and bite reports.
ME: Do you realize that our very own Centers For Disease Control stopped trying to track dog bites by breed around 20 years ago due to MISIDENTIFICATION of breeds by police, animal control and the public?
REP: (no answer) 
ME: What if someone owned one of these dogs and the dog had earned a title, such as obedience? Would they be able to get homeowners insurance?
REP: Oh, yes! If you own one of these breeds and it has earned its CGC, we would most definitely write a policy for you! And we would need a copy of the certificate.
ME: You do realize that any dog can bite a person or another animal even WITH a CGC....
*********
I didn't give the rep a chance to answer my question. Quite frankly, I was boiling to the point of almost saying very bad things, but I bit my tongue. Hard.


 Breed discrimination and homeowners insurance , sadly, is nothing new to those of us that own Rottweilers, or any other misaligned breed of dog.  However, when one of the most prestigious purebred dog registries (namely The American Kennel Club)-- that vehemently OPPOSES all forms of breed specific legislation AND breed specific policies-- gets into bed with one of these insurance companies, one has to ask, "WHAT THE HELL??"


"The American Kennel Club believes that insurance companies should determine coverage of a dog-owning household based on the dog's deeds, not the dogs breed." For the full text of the AKC's policy on homeowner's insurance and dangerous dogs, click here.

" The Hartford pays a royalty fee to AKC for use of AKC's intellectual property. "

Apparently, The Hardford pays the AKC to use its logo in advertising their insurance (click link above and read the fine print).  It should be made clear that the AKC is not selling insurance; they are merely making a few greenbacks by throwing owners of certain breeds of dogs under the bus, AND promoting their Canine Good Citizen program. More dollars for them!


I am not knocking the CGC. It is a great introductory program into the world of AKC dog obedience. I've been both an evaluator, and the one holding the leash. I am all for obedience training.  But the question is: why should any company, organization, or municipality put upon us stipulations on owning a breed of dog?  Any breed, not just the ones perceived as "dangerous".  


Oh, and by the way, I was also told by The Hartford that "rescue dogs" and "shelter dogs" would not qualify even if they obtained their CGC. 


What Do We Do? Get Ready to Write Letters!


Even if you don't own one of the breeds that made The Hartford's "List", you should write anyway!  Why? Because breed discriminatory policies and practices can be changed to include YOUR BREED by the stroke of a pen and at the whim of the ones writing them.


Write to the American Kennel Club board of directors  and to the AKC  Government Relations Department and express your anger over their unholy alliance with The Hartford, and their blatant breed specific discriminating policies. A letter to The Hartford is also in order; maybe expressing your disdain for any company that discriminates against homeowners based on the BREED of dog they own, and that you will not do business with such a company.


Let the American Kennel Club know that they should practice what they preach when it comes to not tolerating dog breed discrimination----we demand they stand by their owners and breeders, and not throw us under the bus for a few measly bucks.

What If It Was Your Breed?

I am a Rottweiler owner.  Rottweilers (in this country) are a docked breed.  Our standard says so.

The AKC standard for my breed says, "Tail docked short".  I can't for the life of me figure out why there are exhibitors that continue to enter, and have shown, Rottweilers with natural tails.  Can't they read?  I'm sure they can, but what about the judges?  Do they know what our standard says? 

There are many opportunities in various venues to compete with purebred dogs:  the AKC, the UKC, European-style shows, agility, tracking, herding, obedience, etc, etc....And yet, I read things like, "it's my right to show my tailed dog, they can't excuse me for that!"....Well, yes "they" (being judges, I assume) CAN!  If a person can't deal with the fact that showing a natural tail in our breed (in AKC conformation) means that your dog may get excused, then go to another venue!

The UKC, for example, allows either a docked or natural tail for my breed in conformation, so do the European-style shows.  The AKC standard, however, says, "tail docked short"...our standard makes absolutely ZERO reference to a natural tail.  (so, um, just how would an AKC judge "know" what a natural tail is supposed to look like since it is not described in our standard?) 

I guess those that choose to enter and exhibit a tailed dog expect the judge to just overlook that tail...just take a guess at what it is supposed to be, when every other aspect of our breed is spelled out.

Far be it from me to tell people what breed to own, or what to do with them when it comes to breeding decisions, or whether or not to dock or crop.  Yep, it's your choice on whether to enter your tailed dog or not; just remember that it is the JUDGE'S CHOICE to throw you out on your tail, or place your dog last.

Dog Owners: We are NOT Done MORE HSUS Bills Must Die

We aren't done in Illinois. While the anti dock/crop bill appears to have been defeated, there are still ***2*** MAJOR issues that need our attention.  We are a large, powerful group and the "KILL THE BILLS" phone-a-thon is working!  Keep up the pressure!  The first being the hearing TOMORROW, MARCH 11, in Springfield, HB198 and SB53, the anti breeder bill.   PLEASE use the links provided at the AKC for sample letters you can personalize to help KILL this BILL!  The Illinois Veterinary Medical Association and the AKC remain opposed.

The second bill requiring our help is the MSN ordinance in Chicago.   Hearing on Thursday, MARCH 12...The Chicago Veterinary Med. Ass'n, the Illinois State Veterinary Med Ass'n AND the AKC are OPPOSED to this ordinance and all of its amendments.

I have it on good authority from someone involved in the fight that the HSUS has PROMISED to take this MSN ordinance in ALL directions of the country, should it pass. It is CRUCIAL we all step up to the plate and help each other and preserve our rights to ***choose*** when, where and how invasive surgical procedures are done.

For great sample letters that you can personalize and send to the Chicago Aldermen, please visit the following AKC link by clicking HERE .

URGENT, ANTI-BREEDER BILL TO BE HEARD WEDNESDAY, MARCH 11, SPRINGFIELD, IL

 Please VOICE your opposition via fax, email and phone to save hobby breeders in Illinois.  This is another HSUS backed bill designed to eliminate breeders.  DO NOT LET THEM WIN.

The following is from the AKC.  For sample letters, for everyone both in and out of state, please click HERE

House Bill 198 and Senate Bill 53


These bills are supposedly an attempt to address “puppy mills” and irresponsible dog breeders in Illinois. However, these bills affect many small-scale hobby breeders and create unreasonable standards for
commercial breeders who are in compliance with current state and federal laws. Their passage will not improve enforcement or the lives of animals in Illinois.

The Illinois Department of Agriculture already has a licensing program in place which requires breeders with more than 5 intact females to be licensed. The “puppy mill” that sparked the introduction of this bill was not licensed as current law required and was being investigated by the Department of Agriculture.

Although draft amendments that have been circulating would allow the Department of Agriculture to administer the bill (current bill language establishes a new program in the Department of Financial and Professional Regulations), the provisions continue to be burdensome and will not improve animal welfare.

Enforcement of current laws is the most effective way to address animal care issues in Illinois.

House Bill 198 is scheduled to be heard:

Wednesday, March 11, 2009
2:00 p.m.
House Business & Occupational Licenses Committee
Illinois State Capitol, Stratton Building
Room D-1
Springfield, IL

Senate Bill 53 is scheduled to be heard:

Wednesday, March 11, 2009
3:00 p.m.
Senate Licensed Activities Committee
Illinois State Capitol, Room 409
Springfield, IL

What You Can Do:

* Call your Illinois State Representative and State Senator TODAY.
Tell them that you are a constituent and ask them to oppose HB 198, SB 53

*Personalize sample letters to send to your representatives. Due to the speed at which these items may move, we highly suggest sending your message in an email or by fax. Click here to find out who represents you in the Illinois State Legislature. (please go to link above to find your rep AND for sample letters)

HSUS Agenda: Eliminate Pet Breeding

Nothing says, "Happy New Year" like introducing bad laws. Here we are just 23 days into January and the HSUS led Animal Rights foot-soldiers are introducing BSL (Breed Specific Legislation), MSN (Mandatory Spay/Neuter), and breeder limits/breeder 'permits' type legislation.

First The Good News: MONTANA

Since I always seem to be the bearer of bad news, I thought I would share some VICTORY news for a change! Just a few short weeks after being introduced into the Montana legislature, HB 191 has been rejected by lawmakers. The bill sought to ban 'pit bull type' dogs (Am Staffs, American Pit Bull Terriers, etc) from being bred or bought in the state...Thankfully, lawmakers quickly killed this bill stating that it was an ineffective way to combat dog attacks! Big paws up to those that wrote, called, or faxed their opposition !! There is strength in numbers, folks!

HSUS Agenda: Mandatory Spay/Neuter Law Introduced in FLORIDA

After the death of California's proposed AB 1634 (the bill that wouldn't DIE..and tried to mandate spaying/castrating of every dog 4mos of age and older), the HSUS (the Humane Society of the United States), vowed to take mandatory spay/neuter (MSN) across the United States. MSN has been signed into law in several U.S cities including Los Angeles, West Palm Beach Co, FL, and is being pushed in Chicago, IL.

The HSUS has yet to have MSN signed into state law anywhere, but that doesn't keep the wealthiest Animal Rights group on the face of the planet from trying. Florida's legislative session does not officially begin until March, but the Animal Rights lunatic fringe has introduced House Bill 451, which seeks to Require owners of every dog or cat in Florida to have each animal sterilized within 30 days of the animal reaching four months of age, or within 30 days of the owner receiving the animal.

The American Kennel Club, along with the National Animal Interest Alliance Trust of Florida, have issued alerts on this AR driven piece of legislation. Diane McKinney of The NAIA Trust of Florida has issued the following statement with permission to crosspost:

"Please let people know that NAIA Trust of Florida is working on talking points on this bill as well as several more....an announcement will be coming out as quickly as possible....another FYI, our legislative session in Florida doesn't even START until March 3, 2009! So it's not as though we don't have a "little" bit of time to get this stuff together.....I think we're doing pretty well considering that we JUST found out about this - what YESTERDAY? Let the games begin! "

I cannot stress to Florida residents how important it is to join together and defeat this bill. Our dogs are our property. That includes their reproductive parts. The decision on whether to spay/neuter should be left where it belongs: with the animal's owner and their veterinarian not with the government. There are risks to any surgical procedure, including spaying/neutering, and ESPECIALLY doing so at too early of an age.

HSUS Agenda Targets Illinois and Colorado

Bills have been introduced in Illinois and Colorado that will negatively impact dog breeders and owners. The Illinois bill (HB 198) is 45 PAGES and would limit the number of dogs they can own and requires licensing for anyone who maintains three or more females (even if they are not bred) "for the purpose of the sale of their offspring." The bill would also mandate unannounced inspections, fingerprinting, and require breeders to pay an unspecified license fee. It is important that ALL fanciers, responsible dog owners, and breeders work together to oppose this burdensome and ineffective legislation. Please visit the American Kennel Club's website for important contact information of Illinois Senators!!!! The AKC also has a sample letter that you can personalize and send!

The Colorado bill ,HB 1172, seeks to dictate to breeders how many UN-altered dogs they may own over the age of 6 mos. More HSUS/Animal Rights driven laws designed to make the breeding/owning of pets more expensive and restrictive. Don't let the HSUS win! Don't drink their poison Kool-Aid and fall for the ruse of trying to eliminate so called "puppymills"...The number of animals one can own is a personal choice and is different for everyone. The Colorado Federation of Dog Clubs is aware of this pending bill and The Responsible Dog Owners of the Western States (RDOWS) has sent a letter to the powers that be in Colorado asking for this lunatic fringe proposed law to be struck down.


THIS MEANS WAR!

The HSUS is waging war on OUR rights to own, breed and keep animals. The bills I have listed above are just a sampling of what we have in store this legislative session. The bickering and bitching and finger-pointing among dog breeders/owners has got to STOP if any of us hope to have a future with our dogs.

When one area of the country is targeted by HSUS backed legislation, we are ALL sitting ducks. Just because you do not see your state listed yet does NOT mean you are in the clear. The legislative sessions are just beginning in many states and soon it will be your turn to fight with whatever draconian law the HSUS has in store for you and your dogs.

Will you be ready? Do you know who your legislators are? Will you stand shoulder to shoulder with fellow dog owners and breeders to preserve the rights for all, including yourself? Or will egos and poison Kool-Aid prevail?

When the AR came for the unlicensed puppy mills,

I remained silent;

I was not an unlicensed puppy mill.

When they confiscated dogs from those who had one too many for their local ordinances,
I remained silent;
I was not over my local limit of dogs.

When they came for the Pit Bulls similar breeds,
I did not speak out;
I was not an owner of a Bully breed.

When they came for the Commercial Breeders,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Commercial Breeder.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out......(Author Unknown)

URGENT:All Dog Clubs and Owners BSL TEXAS CA Residents: MSN Riverside County CA

I cannot stress the importance of unity among ALL dog owners, breeders, and dog clubs when it comes to standing up to BAD laws.  No matter where we live, we will all eventually be faced with laws that will threaten our choices in the breeds of dogs we may own, when or if to spay or neuter, both of which often deny us of our RIGHT to due process under law.

The following alert is from the Texas Responsible Pet Owners Alliance and they need help from dog clubs, training clubs, registries, parent clubs, etc from ALL of us.  Please take a moment, and if you are your club's Legislative Liaison or an officer in a club duly authorized to do so, JOIN onto the brief being filed with the Texas Attorney General...
Please EMAIL Zandra Anderson  if your organization is willing to help !!!

TX-RPOA E-News

From RPOA Texas Outreach and
Responsible Pet Owners Alliance
"Animal welfare, not animal 'rights'
and, yes, there is a difference."
Permission granted to crosspost.

January 12, 2009

Urgent request from Responsible Pet Owners Alliance (RPOA)

NEEDS IMMEDIATE ACTION!

In late November Greg Abbott, Texas attorney general, wrote a letter to
Responsible Pet Owners Alliance in regard to his office issuing an opinion on
whether existing state law prohibiting breed specific legislation applies
"only" to dogs already declared dangerous or whether it prohibits
"any" ordinance specific to one breed of dog in Texas.

This opinion was requested by Rep. Tony Goolsby who is no longer in office.
RPOA was asked by the attorney general's office if we wanted to submit a
brief and has hired Zandra Anderson, Houston attorney, to do this for us.

We immediately contacted all our friends on the national level and others who
helped us at the state legislature during the last session regarding the
Dangerous Dog Law to ask if they would submit a brief also. RPOA requested an
extension of the deadline due to the holidays and received an extension until
January 20th.

There's no time to contact everyone again individually so please see that
your state or national club has either already submitted a brief or would they
like to take advantage of a new opportunity to sign on to the RPOA brief being
prepared by Zandra for RPOA -- much less time consuming! Zandra says no
signatures are needed.


Zandra needs an email saying it is okay to add your group and only needs:


1. Name of group
2. Name of person with group
3. Title of person (e.g. pres, founder, officer, legislative liaison, etc.)
Zandra needs this information BY JANUARY 15TH in order to meet the deadline set
by the AG's office. We're seeking the support of all registries' kennel clubs, breed clubs or performance event clubs, rescues, search & rescue teams, therapy groups, etc.


This must be a unified effort to preserve our right to own the dog breed of our
choice. I'm sure you're aware that breed specific legislation in other
areas now encompasses more and more dog breeds. Texas Municipal League and
Texas cities individually are urging legislators to change state law during
every legislative session to allow breed specific legislation. We need your
help.

RPOA Texas Outreach (501 C4)
Responsible Pet Owners Alliance (501 C3)
900 NE Loop 410 #311-D
San Antonio, TX 78209
Website: http://www.responsiblepetowners.org/

URGENT ACTION:  FROM AKC, RIVERSIDE CO, CALIFORNIA SPAY/NEUTER/MICROCHIPPING   JANUARY 13, 2009

Attend the Board of Supervisors Meeting January 13th

9 am, Tuesday January 13th
Board Chambers
4080 Lemon Street
Riverside, CA 92501

Monday, January 12, 2009]


The Riverside County Board of Supervisors will hold a hearing tomorrow morning at 9 am to discuss an ordinance that would require the spaying/neutering of any dog or cat for even a minor violation of the animal control ordinance and would force pet owners to microchip all their animals and register the microchips with the county. It is vital that responsible dog owners and breeders attend the hearing to oppose this measure.



Provisions of the Proposed Ordinance



Requires that all dogs and cats be spayed or neutered unless the owner has purchased an intact animal license. Current law requires owners to license their pets and mandates that the license fee for an intact animal be twice that for a sterilized animal. This will not change under the new ordinance. However, keeping that license would become much tougher.

Any animal that is picked up at-large will be required to be spayed/neutered prior to being returned to the owner. Any violation of the animal control ordinance can trigger a requirement that the animal(s) be sterilized. A few of the examples used in the ordinance include failure to posses a current rabies vaccination, failure to license, leash law violations, animals left unattended in a car and failure to provide adequate care.

A dog would have to be spayed/neutered if there are 2 complaints, verified by the department that the dog has run at-large, or the owner is found to be neglectful. (AKC staff is concerned at the vagueness of this language. It does not appear to require that the owners be cited for the alleged violations or that the owner is convicted of animal cruelty charges.)

If an owner has one intact license revoked, they can have all their intact licenses revoked. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume if one dog was picked up at-large and sterilized, then all dogs owned by this person would be required to be sterilized.

There is no exemption for dogs picked up at-large that do not reside in Riverside County. If a fancier were in town for an event and their dog somehow got loose, it would only be returned after being spayed/neutered.

Requires that any advertisement for the sale of an unaltered dog or cat include the intact license number for that animal. Since animals are not required to be licensed until they are 4 months old, it is unclear how this would impact the sale of puppies younger than four months.

Requires that all dogs and cats be implanted with a microchip and that the microchip be registered with the county. Exemptions are provided if a veterinarian states in writing that it is dangerous to the animals health or would negatively impact the animal’s athletic abilities. Animals that are kenneled or trained in Riverside, but whose owners do not live in the jurisdiction are not required to implant microchips.

This ordinance would require the sterilization of any animal that was picked up by animal control, even on a first offense. This is unreasonable as even responsible owners can have an animal escape due to a mistake by a meter reader, gardener, friend or relative leaving a gate open. We agree that steps should be taken to address owners who habitually allow their animals to run at-large, but such a severe response is not justified by a single incident.


This issue is one of utmost importance to those who participate in our dog shows and events. In 2008, almost 14,000 responsible dog owners participated in 75 AKC-approved events held in Riverside County. When you take into account what these participants spend on hotel rooms, gasoline, food, souvenirs and entertainment, the revenue generated by these events is easily over $7 million annually. Clubs will be reluctant to hold events in an area where an escaped dog would be sterilized on a first offense. Passage of a mandatory spay/neuter ordinance in Riverside County would send a clear message that AKC events are not welcome in the community.


The AKC opposes the concept of mandatory spay/neuter of purebred dogs. Instead, we support reasonable and enforceable laws that protect the welfare and health of purebred dogs and do not restrict the right of responsible breeders and owners. Mandatory spay/neuter is an ineffective solution to animal control problems because it fails to address the heart of the issue—irresponsible ownership. These laws are extremely difficult to enforce and can be evaded by irresponsible animal owners who won’t licensing their pets. This proposed ordinance will unfairly punish responsible owners who are already complying with local animal control laws, while irresponsible owners continue to make problems for the community and local shelters.


The American Kennel Club also opposes mandatory microchipping. As part of our ongoing efforts to promote responsible dog ownership, the AKC encourages dog owners to properly identify their pets. We believe, however, that the final decision about identification—whether by collar, tattoo or microchip—should be made by the owner, not the government.


What You Can Do    Please click the "what you can do" link for addresses of supervisors and telephone numbers.

Christmas Card Exchange: Something Positive For The Holidays & Our Dogs

I was out of town yesterday dropping off my bitch, "Tori", to go to a Rottweiler Specialty.

When I finally got home last night, I was elated to find a positive email. Thus, the reason for this post. And I just love a challenge, don't you???

The question I'm frequently asked by folks who are new to this legislation stuff is, "What can I do to help?"

Of course, my response is to write, fax or call the powers that be when something comes up law-wise that is not favorable to responsible dog ownership or breeding....let the lawmakers know that whatever law du`jour they are proposing doesn't sit well and if they proceed in passing it, they have lost a constituent...a.k.a "a VOTE".

Likewise, all of us should write/call/fax when lawmakers/decison-makers actually do a 'good thing'. (Which isn't that often when it comes to dogs/animals these days )

We are face-less in this fight for our rights, and so are our dogs. Lawmakers need to know that there are REAL people with REAL dogs out here that care about what they do in regards to laws that effect us.

I am pleased to announce the joining of forces between the Doberman Pinscher Club of America (DPCA) and the American Rottweiler Club . Two parent clubs that definately "get it" when it comes to the fight for dog-owner/breeder rights and the animal "rights" agenda.

Please take a moment and read the following, and then JUST DO IT! Send out a lousy extra 12 Christmas cards to *your* powers that be WITH a picture of you and/or your dog(s). Become more than just a "letter" to the politicians...a picture is worth a thousand words, folks.

DOBERMAN PINSCHER CLUB OF AMERICA
AMERICAN ROTTWEILER CLUB
CHRISTMAS/HOLIDAY CARD CHALLENGE

The point of this Challenge is personal contact between dog owners and legislators. Sure, they
hear from us when we fax or email about a piece of legislation but we all know they rarely read
those messages, they simply tally pros and cons. A card will be a personal, positive contact.

The aim here is to have each official receive a Christmas/Holiday/New Year's greeting from their dog (cat) owning constituents. We ask that you send cards to your Governor, district officials as well as your city and county officials. At best this would only involve sending an extra dozen cards which will have you and your dog's (or cat's) photo and a comment such as those listed below. If these officials are people you voted for, state that you have supported them in the past and hope to continue your support. If you did not vote for them let them know that depending on their position on dog related issues, you would certainly consider changing party affiliation to support the candidate most sensitive to the interests of their pet owning constituency.

If you own Conformation dogs, include a win picture or photo of you, the dog and ribbons and
trophies. Sign the card “Proud owner of an AKC Champion (breed)”.

If you own a dog with performance titles, include a photo of the dog out duck hunting, with the
sheep, whatever, and sign the card, “Proud working partner to a (title/event) dog. i.e. “Proud
working partner to a Field Trial Champion (breed)”.

If you own a dog with a CGC from AKC, include a photo of you, the dog, and the certificate. Sign
the card, “Proud owner of a Canine Good Citizen (breed)”.

If you own a Therapy Dog, include a photo with you, the dog, a Senior Citizen or hospitalized
child. Sign the card, “Active partners bringing joy to shut-ins, Mary and Fluffy”.

If you own a Tracking Dog, especially one certified for Search and Rescue, include a photo of
yourself and the dog - preferably working or “in uniform” and sign the card, “proudly serving the community of (city/county) with Search and Rescue efforts, Mary and Sport”.

If you own a Service Dog, include a photo of the two of you, or of the dog and it's backpack or
performing a service like opening the door or retrieving something. Sign the card, “Blessed with
the service of “Fluffy” my service dog and constant companion, Mary Smith”.

If your dog assists with a reading program in the local school, include a picture of you, the dog
and some kids and sign the it, “Proudly helping children to read better, John and Rex”.

If you are a Judge, include a nice BIS win photo with everyone looking good, you, the handler, and the dog. Sign it, “Proud judge of AKC dog shows, Joe Judge, Lic. ####”.

If your dog does agility, include a really nice action shot of the dog and sign the card,
“Enthusiastic participants in the sport of Agility, Speedy and Mary Smith”.

For friends/family who own dogs obtained from a shelter or rescue, include a photo and sign the
card, “Proud Adopter of Charlie, rescue dog from (shelter/rescue group), The Jones Family”.

Puppy buyers should send cards stating “sharing our lives with a (breed) purchased from a
responsible hobby breeder, The Smith Family”.

Kennel & Training Clubs, vets, groomers and rescues should do the same with messages like:
· Successfully hosting all breed shows in (city/county) for XXX years.
· Successfully helping owners train their dogs to be good citizens in (city/county).
· Providing quality medical care to (city/county) pets.
· Keeping (city/county) canine residents well groomed for xxx years.
· Proudly re-homing “thrown away” dogs and cats in (city/county) to new forever homes.

ALWAYS use “owner”, “owners”, “owned by” - NEVER use the words “guardian”or“caretaker”.

We think you get the drift here what we are looking for - positive contact from constituents to
elected officials. If enough people do this, including friends and family with photos of them, the
kids, and the family pet(s) signed “Happily sharing family life with our (breed/mixed) dog(s)”,
legislators will realize just how many constituents are out there with pets. You could even neatly
write at the bottom of the card, “My Dog Votes”.

Naturally, you would be free to elaborate on your card, but keep it simple, not related to any
particular legislation.

The cost of a couple more Christmas/Holiday cards, stamps, and photos is negligible compared
to what you will suffer should anti-dog legislation be enacted in your community, county, or state.

In the case of state or federal officials, the cards should be sent to their home/district offices - not their State Capital address.

Please crosspost this DPCA/ARC Challenge to appropriate lists and all kennel clubs, trainers,
judges, veterinarians, groomers, and pet owners. Together we can make a positive impression on our officials - let them know we are out there; let them know we are voters; let them put faces to their 2 and 4 footed constituents.

The American Rottweiler Club has partnered with the DPCA in issuing this Challenge. Will your
club or organization join us?

Thank you,
Dana M. Johnson Jan Cooper
DPCA Legislative Director ARC Legislative Chair

It is suggested that kennel clubs post this Challenge on their websites along with the
appropriated addresses for state and local officials – making it very easy for members and friends to participate in this effort.
Art Work by Deborah McClelland, Jarde English Cockers

(Note: Although Jan Cooper is no longer the ARC Legislative Chair, the American Rottweiler Club stands behind this project.)

More Photos....(This is WHY I Fight..)

I thought I would share some more photos of my dogs herding....The first two are of my girl, "Tori", at the wee age of 8 weeks being introduced to ducks for the first time. It's truly amazing to watch a dog do what it was bred to do. "Tori" also has earned 3 points in the breed ring towards her AKC Championship title. She is now 15 months old...my how time flies...

Below, is one of my boys, "Seger", pictured earning the first leg of his HT (Herding Tested title) at Purina Farms. "Seger" is an AKC Champion and also has his RN (Rally Novice title), CGC (AKC Canine Good Citizen), HT (Herding Tested title, has one leg towards his PT (Pre-Trial Tested title, herding) and has passed his TT (Temperament Test, issued by the American Temperament Test Society)


"Seger" demonstrating his finesse` on ducks for the first time

"Lynyrd guides the little lamb"

Last, and certainly not least, is "Lynyrd". (yes, he is named after the band) "Lynyrd" is shown above guiding the little lamb. The lamb didn't want to go with the others around the field, that's when "Lynyrd's" ability kicked in. He went to the lamb and brought him back to the others. "Lynyrd" is also an AKC Champion (with multiple group placements and specialty wins) and has earned his RN, HT, PT and CGC.

This is why I fight for my rights, and the rights of others, to own and breed purebred dogs. It's imperative to be able to preserve and protect them if we want to have future generations of herders, retrievers, ratters and companions.