Cites Fancier of 20 Years' Standing to Our Dogs, 'Kennel Pupils', Our Dogs 82 (23rd Jan. 1931), pp. 213-214.
Description:

‘Sir,- I feel it is my duty, as a kennelmaid, to reply to the somewhat disparaging letters on ‘kennel pupils’ published in your issue of Jan. 23. If you would allow me, I should like to say a few words in our defence.

Your correspondent who has had some experience with kennelmaids seems to have been very unfortunate; but surely, if she engaged the girls from a training school, and they were not efficient, it is up to her to expose the trainers and not the pupils. Nevertheless, it is not always the kennel owners who are to blame for sending out inefficient workers; they are in duty bound to give all a fair training, and it depends upon the ambitions of the pupils whether they succeed or fail. Those who succeed have a profession of which to be mighty proud; but the remainder, who look upon the work as a pastime, are the ones who bring about all the trouble.

My experience of training kennels must be one of many. As having received six months’ tuition in small Pekingese kennels, my ambition was to get somewhere where things were managed in a big way. So, with a little bluff, and by being perfectly candid and truthful with the owners, I was taken on in large breeding kennels, with the understanding that I had to work! And I must say, with all due respect to my employers, they were all out for enlarging the knowledge and experience of their staff and pupils. We were always present at post-mortems, and I was lucky enough to witness the end of a Caesarean operation. Our questions were willingly answered and out work was criticised, and, under supervision, we took the whelping cases in turn, and held ourselves responsible for the welfare of the bitch and litter – even to docking and dew-clawing! We were also allowed to assist the vet., and hear his views on the different cases.

Wishing all sincere kennelmaids the best of luck for 1931. – Yours, etc.,

A Kennelmaid.’

 

Relevant passage from 'Fancier':

‘Sir,- I am glad to see that at last attention has been called to the so-called training that is offered in many kennels. Advertisements appear constantly, many repeated week after week, claiming to give thorough tuition in all branches of kennel work. This term “all branches,” if taken literally, is a big one, and means not only complete training in the need of toydogs, but also the training of gundogs, obedience classes for Alsatians and the like, and training and preparing of all terriers, and I am prepared to say no one kennel does all this. I have been a breeder and exhibitor for a long time, and have met over and over again girls alleged to have been trained, and found that they know next to nothing, often not even the proper method of clearing a kennel.

It stands to reason that no reputable fancier is going to lodge, feed, and pay the laundry bill of a hefty girl besides giving of his knowledge which has taken years to acquire, or receive payment of 15s to £1 weekly, which is not enough to cover her food, in return for work, which must for some time be of negligible quality.

What your correspondent “Diehard” says is correct. It is only a catch for obtaining cheap labour, and it is high time attention was called to it. Sometimes girls, irrespective of class, are relegated to the kitchen, or put out into cheap lodgings, and are kept week in week out doing the drudgery of the kennel and gaining no knowledge whatever. Another bait is sometimes boating, tennis and the like. All kennels give reasonable time for leisure, but in no big kennel can a girl spend her afternoons in recreation, nor can the owner act as host. Dog breeding, like any other trade or profession, must have full time given to it, and a girl cannot hope to receive proper training by putting in a few hours daily.

The only remark of “Diehard’s” with which I disagree is that a prospective pupil should study the winning kennels. It is not always with the owners of the biggest winners that the greatest knowledge [213-214] exists. A man with a big bank balance and no doggy knowledge can always get advice and buy his winners. The purchase of dogs with one or two certificates is only too common, and often these kennels seldom have a home-bred winner.

If a girl wants to find the right person to teach her she can always apply to the secretary of the specialist club of the breed she fancies, or by visiting shows and talking to reputable breeders can obtain all the information she requires. To get good teaching she must expect to pay a reasonable fee that will cover board, lodging, and tuition. That good tuition can be obtained I have proved beyond doubt, but invariably the properly trained girls come from working kennels, where only one or two pupils are taken, and where they have individual tuition from the owners. Exploiting so-called pupils for cheap labour is simply flooding the market with inefficients who are not worth employing. Yours, etc.,

Fancier of 20 Years Standing.’

Cites L. Raymond-Mallock to Our Dogs, 'Kennel Pupils', Our Dogs 82 (23rd Jan 1931), p. 213.
Description:

‘Sir,- I feel it is my duty, as a kennelmaid, to reply to the somewhat disparaging letters on ‘kennel pupils’ published in your issue of Jan. 23. If you would allow me, I should like to say a few words in our defence.

Your correspondent who has had some experience with kennelmaids seems to have been very unfortunate; but surely, if she engaged the girls from a training school, and they were not efficient, it is up to her to expose the trainers and not the pupils. Nevertheless, it is not always the kennel owners who are to blame for sending out inefficient workers; they are in duty bound to give all a fair training, and it depends upon the ambitions of the pupils whether they succeed or fail. Those who succeed have a profession of which to be mighty proud; but the remainder, who look upon the work as a pastime, are the ones who bring about all the trouble.

My experience of training kennels must be one of many. As having received six months’ tuition in small Pekingese kennels, my ambition was to get somewhere where things were managed in a big way. So, with a little bluff, and by being perfectly candid and truthful with the owners, I was taken on in large breeding kennels, with the understanding that I had to work! And I must say, with all due respect to my employers, they were all out for enlarging the knowledge and experience of their staff and pupils. We were always present at post-mortems, and I was lucky enough to witness the end of a Caesarean operation. Our questions were willingly answered and out work was criticised, and, under supervision, we took the whelping cases in turn, and held ourselves responsible for the welfare of the bitch and litter – even to docking and dew-clawing! We were also allowed to assist the vet., and hear his views on the different cases.

Wishing all sincere kennelmaids the best of luck for 1931. – Yours, etc.,

A Kennelmaid.’

 

Relevant passage from Raymond-Mallock:

‘Sir,- I have read the letter entitled “Kennel Pupils” and signed “Diehard” in your issue of Jan. 16, and should like to add a few remarks, if I may. I have had some experience of kennelmaids who came to me as being thoroughly trained at big training schools, one girl having passed out first in her class.

The first girl was horrified when I asked her to remove a puppy’s dew claws, and said that where she was trained she had watched the vet. remove them, but could not undertake to do it herself. She knew nothing about scaling a dog’s teeth, no what proportion of peroxide to mix for a mouth wash. She told me that she could give a douche, but did not know how to mix it, and had no idea at all about diagnosing disease or what medicine to give for most common ailments. So much for the first kennelmaid.

The second had the grace to tell me when she arrived that she had had but little experience of whelping, because where she was trained the pupils were never allowed to take a hand themselves: they merely looked on. She had no idea when or how to give pituitrin, nor how to determine the puppy which was too long in birth. She had extraordinary ideas as to the use of boracic acid, and the treatment of wounds. In fact, neither of these girls would have been the smallest of use, yet they had both spent considerable time and money on what they were pleased to call their “training.” Until they came to me I really believe they thought they were competent to undertake the care of dogs.

Up to the present I have always trained my own kennelmaids, and shall continue to do so. – Yours, etc.,

Lillian Raymond-Mallock’