An Open Letter to the Kennel Club: You Haven’t Earned the Right to Statutory Powers

Yesterday we learned that the Kennel Club has asked the government to give it statutory powers to insist that all dogs bred must be registered with the Kennel Club’s accredited breeder scheme. This is a request that is sure to draw massive objections from breeders and dog experts alike who do not agree that the Kennel Club accredited breeder scheme is anywhere near good enough to be given such a monopolistic, immense cash generative position which would effectively put them in control of ALL dogs, not just pedigree ones.

Let us take a second to remind ourselves how we got where we are today. We are where we are because reform and review of ALL Kennel Club recognised breeds is SO desperate the Kennel Club has agreed to undertake and complete it by early next year. We have got to this state of emergency despite the Kennel Club having a single, unchallenged position of governance over pedigree dogs and pedigree dog affairs for more than 100 years.

The club is effectively asking the Government to purposely create a monopoly position for them, which is a ludicrous suggestion, especially giving how poor the governance of pedigree dogs has been for the past 100 years - overseen by the Kennel Club - which has lead us to the state we have arrived at today.

The Kennel Club’s main argument for being allowed to have this statutory power is because, it claims, it is unable to refuse registrations of puppies ‘by law’ from breeders who refuse to health test their stock.

It says it has the power to refuse registrations under its accredited breeder scheme but many in the dog world, including some Kennel Club supporters, have been resoundingly critical of the scheme, some accusing it as a platform to sell more puppies by sub-standard breeders.

If the Kennel Club wished to rid itself of the obligation to register puppies under its normal registry why not simply shut down its registry and ONLY operate the accredited breeder scheme?

The Kennel Club has claimed for several months following the hail of criticism it has come under since the broadcast of Pedigree Dogs Exposed that it does not want to get tough on breeders for fear of other registries springing up as, they say, happened in America under similar circumstances.

What the club has done by asking the British government to grant it a monopoly position is try to minimise its own exposure to competition - which is, quite simply, illegal in the UK and so is an unrealistic thing to even ask for when it could, of its own volition, operate the accredited breeder scheme exclusively. Surely there is no law of the land that dictates the KC has to keep operating its registry if it feels it is so flawed as to have no real control over whose puppies it can and can’t take registrations for?

The Kennel Club has also failed to account for the notion that a competing registry may actually be significantly BETTER than their own and has instead - rather arrogantly - assumed that ANY competing registry would be sub-par, failing therefore to recognise that the KC itself has openly admitted how flawed its own registry system is as they continue to accept registrations from non-health tested dogs and puppies bred by puppy farmers.

K9 Magazine’s message to the Kennel Club:

Reform the health standards and get tough with the breeders. This is a good move, long overdue by big congratulations for recognising the need to act and to act now.

Accept the fact that you need to get your own house in order before you can even begin to dream about being given government powers - you are not the government, people didn’t vote for you. You are a private member’s club who have done a frankly appalling job of safeguarding the health and welfare of many of the breeds under your governance for far, far too long. That’s why we’re where we are today.

You have done nothing, nothing at all to qualify you to be given statutory powers to govern ALL breeders, including those involved in non Kennel Club recognised breeds especially when your accredited breeder scheme is still far from ‘the answer’.

Many high quality breeders have distanced themselves from your rules in order to improve the health of their breeds whilst you have continued to register puppies from bad breeders and puppy farmers. If you really wanted to show the world that you were committed to the future of dogs and of you being in the best position to address those problems, shut down your flawed registry and operate the accredited breeder scheme only - that way, although you will clearly lose money, you will prove that your motivation and commitment is to protect and improve the health and future of the pedigree dog.

Or, why not simply ask the government to change the ‘law’ you cite which you say prevents you from refusing registrations from non health tested stock? Why not ask for the Govt to clarify this position? Which is based, you say, on the concept that a non health testing breeder or a puppy farmer would be entitled to sue you (privately) if you refused their registration - which, in and of itself, does not sound quite the same as it being ‘against the law’ to refuse registrations.

Why not test this concept? How much could you possibly stand to lose fighting a test case against a breeder who wishes to sue you because you refuse their registration on the grounds of non compliance with health testing regulations? You would have the support of the dog lovers all over the country to fight such a case rather than stand behind the ‘threat’ of bad breeder deciding to take private legal action against the Kennel Club.

What you have asked for from the government, from MY government who I vote for, is far too much and is totally unjustified, undeserved and is a position which you are simply not qualified for - you have 100 years of sub-par governance to overcome, an agreement to look at the health of your breeds because of the public outrage which has compelled you to do so is not, in anyone’s book, qualifying criteria to be given government powers - similar to the DVLA who exclusively deal with registrations on cars in order to make them legal. If you want to be like the DVLA and have the monopoly on who can and can’t breed dogs and who they can and can’t register them with, then it’s simple - the KC needs to become a department of Government and the public should have the chance to vote them in and vote them out.

It IS progress that you have accepted the need for urgent reform. It is a shame that you didn’t take this attitude earlier in the process. Accusing the major animal charities of ’stabbing you in the back’ because the pulled out of Crufts, describing the BBC’s position as ‘untenable’ for their having the temerity to dare to broadcast Pedigree Dogs Exposed, complaining to Ofcom about the programme, insisting in media interviews that you (unlike the RSPCA) ‘didn’t need an hour of television’ to spur you in to action. Because from where we stand, it seems like you actually did - at least you have now recognised how the public feels.

So please, keep up the committment to put right the wrongs, but to be rewarded with a lucrative, monopolistic contract to register all dogs and be placed in charge of ALL breeders? Let’s be realistic shall we? You haven’t come even close to earning such a position.

Author Details
Ryan O'Meara is editor-in-chief of K9 Magazine, the lifestyle magazine for dog lovers. He lives in the East Midlands with his own two dogs, Mia and Chloe. Ryan's homepage. - See this author's webpage

Related posts:

1. The Kennel Club Accredited Breeder Scheme - Has it Failed Already?
2. An Open Letter to the Kennel Club: Simply Saying You are ‘Deed not Breed’ is not Enough. It’s Time to PROVE it!
3. Kennel Club ‘Deeply Concerned’ About Conditions of Accredited Breeder’s Dogs
4. Animal Shelters and Rescues ‘to blame’ for Rottweiler Attacks - Sensational Claim
5. Breed Club STILL Recommending Healthy Puppies Be Killed - Kennel Club ‘Extremely Concerned’