SPOT CHECKS

Billed as the largest dog show in the world, Crufts, in Birmingham, England, is taking place from the 11th through the 14th of this month with 22,000+ dogs entered.

After last year's bad press, and the ensuing BBC investigative documentary, Pedigree Dogs Exposed the show this year promises "healthy and happy, fit for function" dogs.

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=44215931

Not just "show" (conformation) dogs but a variety of other dogs who work will be taking part in fly ball, agility, jumping competitions with presentations and demonstrations by Police Dogs, Friends For Life and various others.

This year, a warning went out to breed clubs that there will be extra checks to ensure dogs have not been cosmetically altered for the show ring.

I'm not jumping on the PETA bandwagon here. I show my own dogs and breed them.

I am concerned with the ethics demonstrated by some of the breeders and exhibitors and with the kennel clubs turning a blind eye to their own rules and regulations governing the show ring.

"Although the rules do not specifically ban the use of cosmetics on dogs, they do forbid anything that alters an animal's appearance for the show ring."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/7385746/Crufts-on-alert-for-dogs-in-make-up.htmlup.html

Am I missing something here--?

BAN: to prohibit especially by legal means, also : to prohibit the use, ...

FORBID:: to proscribe from or as if from the position of one in authority : command against.

Anyone who is familiar with the conformation show ring knows the practice of 'tweaking' a dog's appearance has become far too acceptable at shows.

I can't ever remember hearing of a dog being disqualified for cosmetic alteration of its appearance.

If you have, please enlighten me.

From applying eyeliner to dye jobs to the more involving surgical procedures such as correcting a dog's tail carriage by nicking the tendons or the implantation of 'nuticles.'

While there are pet owners who want testicles in their dog's empty scrotum after the dog has been neutered, it's NOT acceptable in the conformation ring!http://greatreporter.com/mambo/content/view/1526/16/

One of the big companies that offers a white chalk for dog's coats states right on their site the "Dry white chalk in block form may be used for the cleaning but must be removed from the coat before the dog enters the ring."

Take a look at the selection this company offers then consider who exactly would be using these products:

http://www.hubintsecured.co.uk/acatalog/Camouflage_Products_-_NOT_for_the_UK_Showring.html

Winners Circle . . .hmm. Does the name imply something? Just when would a companion or pet dog have whitening powder applied to its coat?

Perhaps before meeting his doggy friends at the park for a play?

Would a conscientious owner stop to apply ear weight to hold their dog's ears down before heading out to the beach on a windy day?

(guess I should try that product on my girl on windy days!)

How the officials are planning to carry out these 'spot checks' is not made clear.

Will they be lurking in the grooming area? Will they go over each dog at ringside before it enters the ring to be judged?

Will the exhibitors who are found guilty be disciplined?

Will they be asked to leave with their cosmetically-enhanced dog?

I think not.

Unfortunately, I believe the threat of extra checks or any checks for that matter, will remain quietly on paper.

JUDGING THE JUDGES

Conformation: the form & structure, make and shape; arrangement of the parts in conformance with breed standard demands.


Conformation Dog Show: a competitive exhibition of dogs at which the dogs are judged in accordance with an established standard of perfection for each breed.

In the 1880's the first dog shows were held in Canada, under the rules of the AKC (American Kennel Club).

In England, the Kennel Club (KC) held its first show in 1859. It was a social affair, held by the aristocrats as a fund-raiser for charities.

Before the Kennel Clubs came into existence, shows were a meeting place where owners gathered to show off their breeding stock, many times amid much chaos and recounting of stories in a bar or a hotel. The dogs were mostly hunting dogs, working terriers and spaniels.

A far cry from what we experience today!

There are about 245 working-group judges in Canada (these judges are licensed to judge the dogs who are in the working group) and 121 all-breed judges (these judges can judge all 7 groups; sporting, hound, working, terrier, toy, non-sporting, and herding).

So why would we need to go out of country for judges and pay the extra dollars for their airfare and accommodations?

Simply because there seems to be a disrespect and contempt for a large number of the judges in Ontario. Some of their judging skills smell worse than a three-week old liver treat forgotten in a jacket pocket.

If a judge doesn't want to be in the ring judging-why accept the assignment and be miserable to both dog and handler?

If there are judges who aren't familiar enough with the standard of a breed they are judging then perhaps the CKC should be reviewing their licensing practices.

A mandatory re-testing every five years for judges of the breed standards might not be a bad idea either.

There are also politics played in the show ring where unfortunately, many times, the best dog does not win.

There are various reasons for this, whether it's simply judges preferring a handler on the other end of the leash, or not being familiar enough with the standard of the breed being judged.

Perhaps some judge needs new glasses and can't recognize a dog who should be excused for lameness, limping around the ring-and instead points to it as the winner.

Exhibitor's stories abound in all breeds.

There's a difference between judges putting up their personal, preferred type and judges just not knowing the breed standard of the dogs in front of them!

One lady was horrified, after paying her entry fee, only to be asked by the judge, "What do you call this colour of dane?"

She politely answered that it's referred to as a Harlequin (black torn patches on a white base coat).

The judge then went back to her copy of the Great Dane standard open at the table and looked it up.

Not acceptable!!

Had it been me, I hope I would have excused myself from the ring and filed a complaint against the judge.

Knowing all we know about ring politics, we still enter our dogs . . . under judges who hopefully haven't been influenced by the glossy win-pictures of dogs staring at them from every page in the dog magazines that are sent to them free of charge.

Breeders want to get those ten points that make up a CKC championship, whether their dog warrants it or not, so we enter. Some of us pick our judges--some enter a show in spite of the quality of the judge lineup.

Interestingly enough (and high time) a statement was made at an Ontario show recently when the only day a judge from Ontario was judging Great Danes, they had the lowest number of entries. The other three days, with Australian judges, the entries were above normal.

I don't believe the over-all lower entries at shows are due to the economic downturn or the price of gas . . . or the hike in entry fees.

I believe we're just tiring of paying dollars to get the opinion of those who don't know or don't care about our breeds. Some of our judges seem to just be going through the motions.

No matter, we go to shows, we socialize, we discuss, we congratulate, we share our passion for our dogs.

Imagine dog shows being more like stock shows--where breeders come together to consider and inspect one anothers stock objectively, without professional handlers, or ribbons or a Best In Show rosette. A place where breeders and interested parties gather to compare, discuss, learn and share.