THE AMERICAN KENNEL CLUB
James P. Crowley
Secretary

May 3,1999

Rita Biddle, President
Akita Club of America
12525 S. Forest Hill Rd.
Eagle, Ml 48822

Dear Rita,

This is a follow-up to a meeting at AKC between Dennis Sprung and myself and the committee for ACA preparing the opinion poll.

I just want to be certain that there is no misunderstanding as to AKC's position.

First of all, AKC is completely neutral on the question of dividing the Akita breed. The AKC Board will not even consider the question unless it is asked to do so by the ACA.

Much of the discussion at this meeting dealt with how the breed would be split. If the ACA requests the AKC to consider this, the final determination as to if and how it would be done would rest with the AKC Board, of course, considering the input of ACA. Dennis and myself could say what the board would probably approve or not approve based upon the logistics and precedents. Until a formal detailed proposal is made, however, we could not guarantee that the AKC Board will act favorably on it.

There were questions on requirements for a new breed. In the most recent cases the Board has required a foundation stock in the mid-hundreds, with a good geographic distribution of owners and breeders with several different lines to ensure a sufficient gene pool.  I deliberately did not give absolute minimums on any of these items, as we try to be as flexible as possible in evaluating each case fairly and reasonably.

If the numbers are too small to warrant immediate show eligibility as a breed in the Working Group, temporary assignment to the Miscellaneous Class is an option. Dogs in Miscellaneous have full registration but just can't compete for show championships. When the numbers have been built up through breeding, imports and/or open registration, the breed would be moved into the Working Group for competition unless the ACA requests another group.

Open registration has been used for a number of new breeds, e.g. Australian Shepherds, Border Collies, Cavaliers.  For a set period requested by the Parent Club., usually 1-3 years, AKC will accept the pedigrees of a single breed registry in the U.S. With JKC concurrence, that could include a breed registry in Japan maintaining records for dogs in the U.S.

The ballot should make it clear that the membership does or does not want to consider a split before the club goes to the time, expense, and effort of preparing and voting on club bylaw amendments and on amendments to the existing Akita standard as well as the preparation of a new one for the new breed. While the decision rests with ACA, it would seem that there should be at least 2/3 answering the poll favorably in order to proceed. If a bare majority is in favor of the split, it would be highly unlikely that the 2/3 necessary for bylaw and standard changes would be forthcoming later.

As to the method of splitting, if approved by ACA and AKC, pedigrees, rather than phenotype, was suggested. In my personal opinion, and I emphasize it is not official AKC opinion, this seems to make the most sense. It is clean, will not result in split litters and will avoid disputes based on subjective opinions for dogs that could go either way.

I am sure other issues will come up, particularly after the FCI acts in June. If the club has any other questions, please feel free to contact me.

Sincerely,
James P. Crowley