Dogs In Review Magazine Novemeber Issue | Page 13

EDITOR’S PAGE Breeders: Taking Back Our Rightful Place W 10 DOGSinREVIEW.com one donates more dollars to health research than parent clubs and responsible breeders. No one does more for rescue than concerned breeders and breed clubs. Yet the media paints the fancy as uncaring snobs who breed exaggerated, unhealthy dogs and devote their time to entering shows and winning ribbons. Many of the reporters in the mainstream media are in their 20s and 30s and have grown up, as Susi Szeremy says, “with the rescue movement driving the conversation about responsible dog ownership.” The throngs of people who visit the Meet the Breeds events in New York and Orlando clearly illustrate the power of influencing people in person. The public wants to see our dogs, and we need to market ourselves more forcefully to capitalize on that interest. The days of living in an ivory The key question is: How accessible are we to individuals who want a puppy but don’t know where to look? tower and waiting for reservations on our well-bred puppies will not sustain us. The key question is: How accessible are we to individuals who want a puppy but don’t know where to look? It is imperative that we make ourselves available — online and offline — to those who are looking for information on dogs. Bad breeders with good marketing skills must never be the only option. Allan Reznik, Editor [email protected] Correction: In the August 2016 “Best in Show Winners of the Past” article, the Mazelaine Kennels’ owners were misidentified. The owners were Mazie and John Phelps Wagner. JULIE LYNN MUELLER elcome to the November Breeders Issue. At a time when “Adopt, Don’t Shop!” has become the mantra for the animal rights zealots and too many good breeders are reluctant to produce even an occasional well-planned litter, we hope this issue helps restore the pride and optimism that seems to be missing from the sport these days. In “Growing Our Web Presence” (page 30), columnist Susi Szeremy challenges us to take back our rightful place as the public’s go-to authorities on dogs by facing substandard breeders in the very place where they do such a thriving business: online. In Susi’s words, “Websites that hawk puppies from substandard breeders and stud services with nary a health test are precisely where reputable fanciers need to be… We could be the first line of defense, a preemptive strike against disreputable breeders by placing ads that tell visitors, ‘We know this breed. Come to us first!’ Saving our sport and our breeds begins with educating one person at a time. Does it really matter where we find them? The person looking for a puppy who doesn’t know enough to contact the AKC first is exactly the person we need to reach. Kennel clubs should be all over this, but aren’t.” Too true. For years, good breeders could be complacent, knowing they had reservations for their show prospects along with their well-bred companion puppies without needing to advertise. But suddenly we have a generation of consumers who do everything online, from shopping for a home to buying clothes to restocking their refrigerator every week. Is it any surprise that they would Google “French Bulldog” or “King Charles Spaniel” to find a pet, and blissfully type in their credit card number? But what if good breeders could be found in the same place, offering prospective owners a healthy, sound alternative, along with a lifetime of mentoring and support? It’s the value added that we as responsible breeders have always provided — advice on everything from grooming to boarding. Now it’s time to be more vocal about these services as we attempt to restore our good name. No