The Canine Review’s Response to Breeders

Dear Breeders,

A private, closed Breeder Preservationist Facebook group whose members include several reputable breeders, has an administrator who has taken it upon herself to act as a media ombudsman and instruct each of you to self-censor by disregarding The Canine Review because we had the audacity to take on the mission of holding all of you accountable for your deservedly prominent roles as the people who bring us our dogs, along with animal shelters and rescue organizations (we start profiling the latter later in 2020).

Just after we launched and published our 10,000 word report on the AKC’s stunning quality control challenges and how its business model makes those quality control lapses unsurprising, a website and lobbying group whose members include one of the breeders we reported on in our AKC story launched a campaign to discredit the magazine. We reported five examples of breeders, including one breeder in Pennsylvania: Donna Stanley of Endless Mountain Labradors, who is the individual behind the Cavalry Group attacks.

Ms. Stanley is unhappy with our reporting because it does not reflect well on her business. We encourage all of you to read the report in full so you can see why she’s pushing back so hard. You should also note that TCR has not received a single communication from any of the five breeders disputing any single FACT we reported.

The Canine Review loves the work most breeders are doing. We also believe that there is a desperate need for accountability in the dog world.

There are so many people doing great work, and they deserve recognition. More important, our readers – as paying customers – are owed fact-based intelligence. Perhaps they are coming to us because they are looking to add a puppy to their families and want to research breeders or shelters.  Rather than roll the dice, cross their fingers, and rely on word-of-mouth recommendations, we believe there are individuals who want clear-eyed, dispassionate facts before they take time out of their own busy lives to contact or visit Breeder X or Shelter ABC.

We are not out to smear groups, ideas, individuals, or to do anything else except gather information and provide a service.

Marlene Groves, who oversees the Preservationists page, says that she is blocking members even from mentioning TCR. “Important Admin Note: We recently posted the article by the Cavalry Group to help inform folks about a new an [SIC] extremely negative group [news organization, not a group] The Canine Review, which we DO NOT SUPPORT, and we DO NOT WANT THEIR INFORMATION ON THIS PAGE. Please do not forward or send items which attack the AKC, dog breeders our sport, us, etc. to this page. (They will be declined!)”

But great breeders should want to talk to TCR reporters because they should be desperate to set themselves apart from the kind of subpar breeders we reported on in our AKC story.  Why would a breeder like Zoa Rockenstein or Nancibeth Koutstaal (two recent TCR profiles) want to be associated with an operation like Endless Mt. Labradors or Raebark (examples of subpar Breeders of Merit in our AKC report)?

Similarly, the animal shelters and rescues who have competent management, distinguished behavior and enrichment programs, loyal base of volunteers and donors, etc. should want to set themselves apart.

Our only agenda is to help our readers learn more about everyone so they can be more informed.

On a related note, I am attaching here The Canine Review’s exchanges with breeder Donna Stanley in full so all can see that we were in no way “harassing” Ms. Stanley, as she/Cavalry is claiming.  To the contrary, we were giving her the opportunity to respond to our questions about her operation. It is one of our bedrock policies that we always call (and then email) for comment, which is what we did here.



Most sincerely,

Emily J. Brill

Editor and Publisher

The Canine Review

follow the canine review on twitter

like us on facebook