Cited by A Lover of Dogs and Fair Play to Our Dogs, 'The Training of Kennelmaids', Our Dogs 111 (27th May 1938), p. 684.
Description:

‘Sir,- I was interested in a recent letter which you published from some unfortunate victim of the “Kennelmaid Ramp”.

My daughter, whose chief interest in life is dogs, wished to take her training some time ago, and, being ignorant of the procedure, made arrangements with some kennel people in the place we then lived, and agreed to pay £3 per week. Of course she soon found out from other people that this was an exorbitant sum, especially as she received no kennel training at all, merely doing the routine work of the kennel, whereas she had been promised stripping, instruction in the running of a kennel, whelping, care of dogs in sickness and in health, and in addition she was promised that she would go to shows and receive instruction there as to various pointers of value. She had one meal a day provided, she went to one show, and was left alone as soon as she arrived there, and had to find her own way about; nor did she get any “pointers” even at the judging of the specific breeds in which she was interested.

She left that place and went elsewhere, where she paid less (I am not sure of the sum), received good training, with valuable help and information about her work, in which she was, and is, keenly interested.

She intended running her own kennels on a modest scale, but unfortunately financial trouble and losses in the family prevented her from “carrying on” after she had bred her first very fine litter of pups; and she tried to get a post. I would never have believed that it was possible to get such “offers” as she has had. She has sold some of her puppies, but wished, if possible, to retain the bitch and two pups, and wanted to have those with her, being willing to take less, or no, salary if she could take her dogs to a “job.” But, if people told her they could take her dogs (and surely there is generally room in a kennel; she was prepared to find her own kennels and food), it was soon found that the little time given to her dogs was resented; her full time had to be given, and the less money paid for food given the more of her time was expected.

This girl has had training and about three years’ good experience with dogs; she studies everything that she can lay hands on, and has wonderful knowledge of dogs in health and in sickness, and nothing is too much trouble to do for these animals she loves. But what sort of salaries are offered? One lady wrote to say that she was willing that X should have her own dogs if she provided the kennels; the girl was to do kennel work, exercising (she is a tremendous walker and loves it), was to do housework, have no salary, and the good person added: “You understand, of course, that you would have to provide food for your dogs and for yourself.” What, then, was the reward for the very hard work she was being asked to do?

Another wrote that she required help with household duties and with large kennels, and added, most graciously, that she would be prepared to pay salary when proficient. I can imagine that, with such a person, no one ever becomes proficient. As soon as the salary is mentioned the good lady, no doubt, finds that the unfortunate creature is no good, and proceeds to find another “mug.” Salaries seem, as a rule, to run about 7s. 6d. to 10s. for absolutely full time service, and for trained girls with experience. My daughter has just been offered a job where she would be required, in addition, to do house work, some cooking, “help” with two children, take and interest in chickens, “help” with washing, for a maid’s wage of £1 per week! Oh no, the dear soul “never pays more than 12s. 6d. per week.” And one knows what the “helping” means; one ends up doing everthing. A “daily help” is supposed to be there, but when my daughter asked what the “help” did, she was told that she was “in the kitchen.” Doing what? Since she evidently did not do the cooking or washing up.

I hear that maids have formed a “union,” or about to do so; I would suggest that kennelmaids do likewise, and get some return for the outlay of money and energy. Boarding kennels, which are simply raking in the shekels, are mean to a degree when it comes to the salaries for their kennel hands. The Bible axiom means nothing to them, and they do not believe that “a labourer, truly, is worthy of his hire.” Then, too, the “pin money girl” crabs things for those who need the salary.'

Cited by Canis to Our Dogs, 'The Training of Kennelmaids', Our Dogs 111 (3rd June 1938), p. 770.
Description:

'Sir,- Speaking as a breeder, I think it would be an exceedingly excellent thing for all concerned if kennelmaids would form a union. The ramp in kennelmaids is to be deplored as much by the breeder as by the poor kennelmaid; and that there is a ramp no one can deny.

But it should be noted that half the trouble is due to the girls themselves, who, in too many cases, come from “aristocratic” surroundings, and fancy themselves as kennelmaids because they consider they will have in that position a social cachet denied to them if they were to take up other professions, and they suffer for their snobbery by being well rooked by unscrupulous “trainers.” If the supply of these “genteel” would-be kennelmaids were to cease, matters would be very different.

I am at the present moment training a completely untrained girl at the moment. Her food is found, and during the period of her training she is receiving a nominal wage of 5s. per week. Nothing whatever is taken from her, either in premium, board, or any other way. Just so soon as she reaches a reasonable degree of efficiency her wage will be increased, and thence pro rata according to her ability; and the sooner she commences to be a help instead of a liability the better I shall like it.

I consider this is a perfectly fair arrangement. The cost of the girl, including her food, is considerably over £1 per week to me. In return for that she assists (or hopes that in due course she will be competent to assist) in the kennels. As the amount of assistance she can give depends on the success of my training of her, it is as much to my benefit to train her properly as it is to her benefit to respond to that training.

She certainly gets plenty of dirty work. That is necessary. When she is competent herself to take charge of an under-kennelmaid, then she will be able to pass the dirty work on.

I have preferred engaging a completely untrained kennelmaid, and training her myself, to engaging one trained at some “ramp” kennel, for the simple reason that girls trained at these establishments are encouraged to develop a superiority complex. They might be capable of supervising a large kennel of their own some day, if some charitable person gave them a thousand pounds capital to start off with; but they will never be capable of making a business out of it and running it at a profit on little or no capital at all.

The entire process is wrong, and the girls are as much at fault as the unscrupulous persons who take advantage of them. They pay huge premuims to be trained (?) in large kennels replete with labour-saving devices which no ordinary breeder would be able to afford and still show a profit, and when they go into service properly, or start a kennel of their own, they are helpless – quite incapable of  making their own tools, in emergency, and using them. I have very little sympathy for them. Let them offer their services to some working kennel, in return for training, their keep, and a nominal wage. They might lose the delightful social cachet from running around in jodpurs and looking superior, but they would learn something worth learning and save themselves from being stung into the bargain.'