Page 244 - ShowSight - January 2020

Candid Candidates - Part Two
BY LINDA AYERS TURNER KNORR continued
• Events clustering outside of the home territories of Clubs creating the need for extensive travel adding substantial costs to exhibit. This impacts growing the conformation sport as there no local events to showcase conformation and purebred dogs.
• Smaller shows have made the need to travel for coveted majors for many breeds a requirement adding even more expense.... especially the growing number of low entry breeds.
• The local political environment has worked against the purpose bred dog breeder in terms of dog limits, breeding restrictions, and zoning.
•The above creates a disconnect with potential new exhibitors. There are actions that can be taken and must be...but this will be a heavy lift and will take time. In a nutshell we must:
• We must find ways to reduce the travel time to show dogs providing more day trips for most exhibitors.
• We must offer a runaway to learn conformation where rewards can come early with reasonable effort...this can be done with new titles that are meant to develop new exhibitors.
• Local shows are a critical component both to provide venues to show but also to expose the public to purpose bred dogs.
• We must be willing to “test and learn” to find the right mix of changes which will result in growth of the conformation sport.
The journey starts with a single step and we must start taking those steps.
3. The AKC performs/supports many activities that benefit dogs and their owners. This support is limited by the financial resources that AKC has available. How can AKC increase its revenue in order to further benefit the world of dogs?
For the past several years the AKC has generated around $8M in positive cashflow annually and this doesn’t include the unreal- ized gains on investments. The balance sheet is strong. We have the move to 101 Park Avenue behind us. By most any measure we have enjoyed financial success.
In spite of this financial success we are still leaving money on the table both in failure to grow our registration complement conver- sion (the number of ‘blue slips’ which are ultimately used to register a dog with AKC) and continuing decline in our legacy sports of conformation, performance and obedience.
Our Mission first and foremost says AKC is “dedicated to upholding the integrity of its Registry, promoting the sport of pure- bred dogs and breeding for type and function.” We must turn our attention to investing in our mission.
Simply by focusing on “blue slips” alone we can increase AKC revenues substantially to continue our good works programs such as AKC Canine Health Foundation and the AKC Humane Fund.
In terms of non-traditional investments, we should always look for opportunities that complement our mission but, for now, we need to be laser focused on growing our traditional sources of income.
Our reserves are strong and our current cashflow should be put to work to further our Mission.
4. The AKC is a not-for profit organization while all of the other competing canine sport organizations or registries in the U.S. are for profit. Yet, it is a common belief that the AKC “is all about the money”. What are your thoughts about the apparent inconsistency?
AKC is not “all about the money” but I understand that per- ception when our Clubs are struggling. Our Clubs don’t see AKC seeking solutions to their problems. AKC is a volunteer organi- zation—and that sometimes gets forgotten. AKC Clubs put on events, represent AKC in their communities, breed the dogs, etc. and often find it hard to keep their Club viable.
AKC must be successful financially but its how AKC spends the surplus that matters. Right now, I don’t think we are investing in a
way that will sustain our Clubs or our Mission. Until our Clubs see real investment in the things that matter to them and the benefits of those investments, I don’t expect that attitude to change.
5. Do you feel that ventures like the LINK collar and the Doggie Day Care are consistent with AKC’s mission?
I don’t believe they are inconsistent with the Mission provid- ed we are not forgetting why we do them—to create other reve- nue streams to support our Mission without doing it on back of our Clubs.
6. There are 75 breeds in the AKC Foundation Stock Ser- vice program, 64 of them are in three groups. What are your thoughts on bringing new breeds into full recognition and their impact on our current Group structure? What is your opinion of how this recognition may be simplified or improved?
The first question is how we preserve the breeds we have. Cur- rently we have over 50% of our breeds as “low entry” meaning there are less than 3,500 entries a year at shows. Of the 50% over half of them have less than 1,000 entries a year. Many judges get those breeds without ever seeing one.
It is also true that, with occasional exception, once we recognize a breed and it moves through the FSS process litters and entries typ- ically drop for that breed. We must focus on the breeds we have and do everything possible to sustain those breeds. Diverting resources to these very small breeds in numbers does not make sense.
My recommendation is raising the bar for recognition and make the process take longer to make sure it isn’t being driven by “family and friends” but is truly a nationwide effort.
We need to make sure there is real staying power for the aspiring breed. I do not suggest we not have the FSS process, but we do need to rethink how we admit this very small in number breeds as we strive to have a “big tent” for all dog lovers.
In terms of groups the chances of seeing one of these breeds in their designated groups is statically small except perhaps at Royal Canin or Westminster. I don’t think we need to worry at this point about group bloat due to these breeds. Let’s see what happens in the show ring and then decide if we need to adjust or add groups.
7. What are you thoughts regarding term limits for AKC Del- egate Committees and members of the AKC Board Of Directors? I don’t support term limits. The ballot box is where term limits are determined by the voter. The voter needs to do their homework and make informed choices. They, whether it be Delegate Commit- tees or Board of Directors, need the ability to choose from the best candidates and term limits can deprive the Delegates of that choice. 8. How do you reconcile the fact that often the AKC Board of Directors must make decisions that may not please the Delegate body yet may be necessary to fulfill their fiduciary responsibility
to AKC?
Not every decision made by the Board is going to be embraced by the Delegates and/or Fancy. The responsibility of the Board is defined under New York State law and carrying out those fiduciary duties will sometimes conflict with “popular” opinion. The Board has much more information to inform decisions than is available to us as Delegates. There is an obligation for as much transparency as possible. As a past Board Member, I was always willing to share the rationale for a decision if possible. As a past AKC Director I do find that Delegate’s often do not approach Directors with questions regarding decisions but, as humans do, form opinions without all the facts. It would be helpful to create a forum where interactions with Directors would be easy. One such idea is to hold, at every Delegate meeting, an exchange with the Chair and several Direc- tors where questions can be asked.On appropriate issues, during my previous Board service, the Board did seek Delegate Committee input. There were few cases were the committee recommendation was not incorporated.
236 • ShowSight Magazine, January 2020