Let’s Not Fight The Wrong Battle
Kathy Lorentzen
As I closed out last month’s article on keeping the sport in the sport of dogs, I made a comment that those of us who have some senior status in the dog world should be ‘welcoming to all and offer the benefit of our knowledge and experience where it is needed’.
And I absolutely think that we should do just that. However, over the past month I have been noticing some alarming trends that are appearing in the show and breeding world that I think need some exploration.
First, let’s look at the ‘welcoming’ part
It seems like there are far too many breeders today who have developed the attitude that they, and perhaps a small group of their peers, ‘own’ their chosen breed and therefore should have the right to control nearly everything that goes on where that breed is concerned. Newcomers are often viewed with suspicion, and sometimes are treated with downright hostility. Particularly if said newcomer has done something in the past, even though innocently enough through lack of knowledge, that is viewed as unacceptable by said group.
In my opinion, the advent of the internet has been both a blessing and a curse for the dog world. Access to the World Wide Web has allowed easier communication to those far away from us, more timely access to important information and given us the opportunity to share our beloved dogs with the world.
It has also spawned the ‘group lists’, which I, for the most part anyway, consider to be demon seed, particularly when a bunch of pontificating, self-appointed saviors of a breed get on one and start ripping apart someone that they think isn’t toeing the line according to their rules. The person in question is often a newcomer and is frequently ostracized without being given the benefit of the doubt or an offer of help. Sometimes the treatment is so rude and unforgiving that the poor newcomer goes running as fast as possible in the opposite direction, not wanting anything to do with a so called sport that is dominated by a bunch of possibly well-meaning, but overbearing, zealots. I have noticed that little is sacred in the eyes of the ‘listers’. They have no problem naming names, criticizing, condemning or pointing fingers. Someone states a personal opinion as fact, ten more people jump in with ‘absolutely, I agree’ and suddenly the atmosphere becomes reminiscent of an old cowboy movie where the angry lynch mob is clamoring for the hanging of the suspect (before trial, of course!) and the poor sheriff is attempting to keep them at bay with a single barrel shotgun.
I long for the day when, if somebody wanted to trash someone else, they had to get on the telephone, and do it one person at a time. The process was a lot longer, and less dangerous. Things that are put down in print and passed around, such as in e-mail or on a list, are kept out there and seem to be readily accepted as truth. Phone conversations fade away and are forgotten, and a whole lot less damage is done in the end. We would all be well served if we remembered this.
Offering the benefit of our knowledge and experience
The key part of that entire phrase is ‘where it is needed’. As smart as we all might think we are, sometimes people can get by just fine making their own decisions, even if those decisions go against what is currently accepted as correct by that group of breeders who are out to save their breed from the big bad world around it.
There is a lot of pontificating going on about the right and wrong way things in the dog-breeding world should be done. Small groups of overzealous breeders and owners are attempting to control everything that goes on in their respective breed, from how many litters a responsible breeder can have in a year to whether or not particular people should have a right to attempt to purchase a dog of their breed. In some instances, of course there is merit to these discussions. In other cases, their views are perceived as elitist and exclusionary and serve yet again to drive people away from a breed, or from the sport of dogs altogether.
Often there is so much bickering going on amongst the people involved in a breed that the goal of being in it ‘for the breed’ is totally lost in the pursuit of being the one who is perceived as having the most influence and power. Instead of making sound decisions based upon what is good for the future of the breed, decisions are made based upon where it will ‘get’ someone, and how it might serve to hinder someone else in their quest to be successful and have lovely, representative dogs.
None of this is good for the future of our sport or our respective breeds. There is a big difference between gently offering help, knowledge, guidance and support and attempting to dictate what people should or shouldn’t do. You cannot legislate ethics or morality in the dog world anymore than you can anywhere else.
Most unfortunately, while breeders and owners are caught up in their narrow-minded power struggles over who should be breeding dogs and where the public should buy a puppy, powerful groups like PETA and HSUS are gathering their forces and using their millions of dollars in an attempt to see that everyone’s rights as dog owners and breeders are removed. This is where our battle lies, and if we do not stop the petty bickering and join hands in the face of the real enemy, the rest of it will be a moot point anyway. I read a chilling article the other day about how the Animal Rights Movement is attempting to change the accepted language in the world from ‘dog owner’ to ‘dog guardian’. This is an attempt at a paradigm shift of monstrous proportions and is aimed at removing all our inherent rights as ‘owners’. The extremists are also attempting another language change, which is from the term ‘pets’ to ‘companion animals’.
Michael Mountain, of the Best Friends Animal Sanctuary, has been quoted as saying, "People of other genders, races and even age groups were once treated as property in this country. Now, it is time for 'people' of other species to be accorded the same simple dignity of being recognized, not as someone else's property but as beings in their own right.”
Whoa. Dogs are not ‘people of another species’. They ARE another species. This guardian campaign is an attempt at blurring the boundaries between the species and removing our rights as owners. Guardianship is a term that has always been applied to humans, and it implies equality. Ownership implies responsibility. We need to be responsible for the dogs we OWN, and for their actions. Not equal to them.
I love my dogs. I have never lived one single day of my life without at least one by my side. My dogs share my home, offer me unconditional love and bring a smile to my face regardless of my mood.
I’d like to retain the right to own them. And to responsibly breed them. And to responsibly sell them to people that I deem worthy of having one. Those rights are at risk in this country. We are being seriously challenged by the Animal Rights Extremists. We need to join together and get involved by paying attention to what is going on in our state legislatures, by exposing the true agendas of organizations such as PETA and HSUS and by recognizing that we won’t have a breed to bicker over if we don’t focus on the real enemy. What’s that old quote, “I have met the enemy, and he is us?” Well folks, it’s time we realized that we are going to be our own worst enemies if we don’t come together and fight the real battle. After we win, we can go back to nit-picking the little stuff.
Correspondence is invited at vincefan@centurytel.net
|
