angelsun

I can as well having a breed that was all but extinct by the mid 1950's. One man snuck one of the last known purely bred German Pinschers over the wall from East Germany and bred her with a combination of three Min Pins which were more typey to GP's (remembering that MinPins came genetically years ago from the GP with the help of others) These three MP's were bred to the GP or offspring of her along with brother/sister, father/daughter etc. Inbreeding definately..nothing "Linebred" about that! Because of this however, my breed gained a new chance at life. All of the GP lines go back to this one "eve" and the three min pins. There was others introduced later on to help strengthen the breed but not much. I have a highly inbred breed which I chose to linebreed on. I am also annoyed to hear the blanket statement that purebred dogs are inbred=unhealthy=bad. What most documentaries don't tell you is that without that inbreeding and linebreeding, people like Mr.Clunes would not have his cockers or labrador.

I totally agree with what you're saying. WE are the cause of the styles of dogs that WE claim to hate and are in our opinions, bad representatives of the breed! WE are the ones that over angulate because Ch.Angle Angle Who's Got The Angle, won the Royal three times running and then the Breed specialty right after that! WE are the ones that breed over coats because Ch.Puffy Fluffy was top dog all breeds ten years ago and we figured it MUST be because he's got ALL that coat! WE are the ones that breed so much bone into our moderate breed because Ch.Brick Outhouse was top in his breed for three years running. Were these dogs correct and to the standard? Probably not....they won for flash, flare and good advertising in many cases and new breeders came along, saw the rosettes and sashes and wanted a piece of it, so they breed to it. Yes they got these things..and more and more of these dogs showed up in the rings. They became the majority because everyone grabbed the 'flavour of the month'. Those breeders wise enough to not jump on the fashion trend, continued to follow their blueprint, but got left behind as the judges awarded what they saw the most frequent. WE are to blame for the judges doing this...as mentioned, they can only judge what we the breeder puts in front of them. They can only judge what we the breeders take to them for their judges education seminars. We can't blame the judges....we have created our monsters.

Glad to hear you will let nature take its course. I had a litter of 11 Manchesters once, where the Xray simply didn't show them all. The vet said.."more than 8" and that was the best he could give me!! Try to relax and enjoy the experience.

Here's another frog dog and contrary to what some think, it doesn't ensure no hip issues, but it certainly looks cute!

With most shows in the middle of fairly large spaces...why would anyone need to practice within the confines of a ring compared with simply moving over to an empty space? The grass or surface is the same, we don't use mats outside or solid barriers which would create a different visual space, so practicing in the paddock beside the show venue is more or less the same. There is no rule in Victoria prohibiting practicing in rings when they are not in use. I beleive the clubs have the right to put in place that rule should they wish to, and in some cases it's sensible if the weather isn't great, the less tromping around the better! What irks me to no end, are those that go into the rings to toilet their dogs when there is ample acreage around to take care of that. What I also notice, is that the ones doing it, go to the ring they are NOT going to be showing in (uhm...'scuse me, but someone ELSE will be using that ring later!) to exercise their dogs. I find it lazy, and down right rude watching people do this, and have said as much, only to be glared at like as though I am the one at fault! NO, there is no rule against using the ring to toilet the dogs, HOWEVER would these people like the rest of us to walk our dogs and let them lift or pee inside their gazebo for example and simply walk away? It's time the lazy owners stretch their legs, take their dogs for a proper walk more than 10 feet from their little personal space they have set up. We have between on average 2 and 9 dogs with us at shows any given weekend. Yes it takes time to ensure they all get walked properly and yes, we ALWAYS go the opposite direction of the rings. Only very occasionally will one of the girls piddle on the way to the ring, and the boys are not permitted to lift on the corner posts or ropes or anything else for that matter inside or outside the ring. (my other major complaint when it comes to boy dogs!) No rules say I must do this, but it's the RIGHT thing to do in my opinion!

I beleive the term double handling implies and referres to the deliberate use of something outside the ring to attempt to make the dog inside the ring appear more attentive. The word deliberate comes to play here and should be remembered. If my dog catches sight of something outside the ring that was simply a good chance for focus, it is not double handling. If I instruct someone to stand in a certain spot, walk a dog past or generally create the attraction, this is double handling. It is pure good chance that a dog catches sight of something outside the ring when it was never planned, and as a result shows its focus and attention. This happened to me frequently when my GP's saw a Manchester or similar looking dog outside the ring or in the next ring. They lived with them and I'm sure when they saw one, figured 'mum' had brought one along and didn't tell them! It's not double handling unless I've told the owner of that dog to be in a certain spot at a certain time, and move to make sure the dog remains focused. There have been many cases of exhibitors accused of double handling when in fact it was just timing. I had this recently happen to me, when I was in the ring with my pinscher and the German Shepherds were in the ring adjacent. My dog saw her 'dad' and stood on her toes...she saw the shepherds and figured they were part of her mob and REALLY stood on her toes, tail wagging etc. yes it looked great....until her dad (with the boy I usually show) was made to go around the ring, and as he ran by, my girl decided that it looked fun and she was going to run with dad too!! (amazing how such a small dog can have so much power and pull at the end of a lead!) Because she couldn't go with him....her focus was lost because she then threw a tantrum, refusing to stand still, face the right way or do much of anything...even so much as spitting out the bait I offered....in this case, unintentional double handling which worked great at first, backfired badly in the end! I was still accused of doubling though...funny, we must have had a lot of pull to arrange to be in the rings at exactly the same time and pull it off!!

My question is to the bold part..why? Because he has emotional attachment to you or because his pedigree is one of a kind or dying away (which often has valid reasons which should be explored) My other question is....why? why because you own a male, (speaking as a general, not specific target 'you') it seems as though the automatic conclusion is to let him be used at stud? Do you (see reference to 'you' as noted above) feel you will make money from this action? Of course there is an emotional attachment to the him but also his breeder is in her mid-late 80's and has retired after breeding, showing and judging for around 45 years so I would be partially continuing her lines. I am not wanting to do this to make money If I do maked a little bit of money it would be a sideeffect the main reason as I said is to keep the bloodline going in some small way. What I ment when I wrote "at least in part" was that a pup is not made soley from 1 lot of DNA so part of any pups bred would be him. You have answered your question....get that breeder to mentor you and guide you. She will know what he would be good with or not and advise you. She would have connections to help promote the dog if she felt that he was in fact good enough to be used at stud. While she is still here, use her expertise.

Many breeds still use the point system, but many others have let them lapse as the breed clubs (based on the input from the members) claimed that it wasn't relavent or simply not working. I would like to see points (priorities) assigned to breeds and have to be able to justify why the points are there and the level they are, in the first place. For those unaware, this is where often we hear the term 'this breed is a head breed' comes from, when the breeds points gave the most for the head of the dog in comparison to the rest of the dog.

My friend with Great Danes in Canada had her very first frozen implant litter and got 16 puppies from it...the natural matings she did a number of years later, produced none or less than 5. She sticks with frozen and generally comes out with more pups....if the lab can progesterone test without delay, the vets can implant at precisely the correct time for maximum success. Remember, we KNOW what the semen is (motility, thaw recovery etc) but we don't know what the bitch is doing regarding how many eggs are released and how she will accept their attachment to her uterus.....we are quick to blame either the implanting vet for a failure or small number, or the semen itself....don't forget the bitch must come into the equation as well.

My question is to the bold part..why? Because he has emotional attachment to you or because his pedigree is one of a kind or dying away (which often has valid reasons which should be explored) My other question is....why? why because you own a male, (speaking as a general, not specific target 'you') it seems as though the automatic conclusion is to let him be used at stud? Do you (see reference to 'you' as noted above) feel you will make money from this action? With a common breed as mentioned in the OP, unless the dog stands out in a crowd with both health and conforming to the breed standard, never mind what hunting instincts it might possess, it's unlikely that many with bitches will be interested. Yes there is occasionally a nugget of gold found in someones back yard in regards to an intact male that meets the needs of the bitch owner, but it's not overly a common occurance.

PREFERRED BREED TYPE Why The Stand-Out Best Dog Can Be A Loser E. Katie Gammill © TheDogPlace January 2009 - The Best of the Best or one that looks like the rest? Let's be honest. Something called "preferred type" is flooding the rings today and in many breeds, it has little to do with the Breed Standard. When "current type" does not equal correctness, the best dog can lose because in many rings, the fatal flaw is being a stand-out. "The best dog you'll ever breed may be the hardest dog you ever finish!" A dog show friend, absent from the sport for several years, attended some local shows with me. Welcoming the opportunity to view dogs in general after her sabbatical, she became visually distressed. Her despair increased when a "less than average" class dog received BOB. The waning quality in her beautiful breed breaks her heart. She stated it would be wasted effort to show a dog correct to the standard today, as some judges feel compelled to award dogs conforming to the majority of the entries. Observing other breeds, she remarks on the lack of neck, restricted front movement and the lack of rear follow through; we discuss "gay tails" and breed type variances. We watch faulty movement and see coats dragging the ground. Weak pasterns and sickle hocks complete the picture. She wonders what causes this to happen to functional dogs in such a short time. It seems the correct dogs have fallen victim to what one may refer to as the "Perfection of Mediocrity". Today, many breeders and owners turn to performance, choosing not to participate in a "crap shoot" where such variety in type confuses both judges and ringside. I make this statement at the expense of being tarred and feathered but increasingly, the best dog you'll ever breed may be the hardest dog you will ever finish. It will be the "odd man out" and look different from the majority of dogs represented in the ring. Why? Some judges, insecure in a breed and therefore lacking courage, choose to walk "different" dogs rather than stick their neck out. Understandable, but should those lacking confidence be passing judgment on another's dog? My old mentor said, "The pendulum of type swings to and fro, but those remaining true to the standard triumph in the end." Those dedicated breeders have the knowledge to restore a breed to its initial form once it hits bottom. Should a judge reward a dog to suggest it could possibly assist in correcting breed faults? NO! It is a breeder's responsibility to incorporate such animals into their programs, regardless of success in the show ring. Judges are to judge to the written standard to the best of their ability, fairly and efficiently. They avoid awarding "drags of a breed" when possible but judges have little insight into the Pandora's Box of breeding. A respected dog person of long standing approached me with this statement while at a seminar. "A judge CAN NOT GO WRONG by putting up winners conforming to the majority of the type of dogs in the ring on a given day." My response was "Surely not!" Well, I believe it now! After observing an all breed judge from ringside, I watched two outstanding individuals "walk" because they looked different from the rest of the short neck, sickle hock, smaller than average dogs lacking side gait that toddled around the ring like fuzzy little caricatures of the breed. This strange "look alike" perspective takes over in many breed rings and not just among judges. Asking a breeder what their standard said about head planes, the response was: "What are parallel planes?" We discussed the occipital bone, short and medium muzzles, balanced heads, etc. Reading a standard and applying it can be two different things. Judges should have the ability to articulate why one dog wins over another. So is that why they make terminology common among standards - to make it easier for judges? If anyone can describe a bulldog and an afghan using the same language, please step forward. Removing the "point system" from the old standards has had a negative affect. In a final decision between two comparable individuals, one has an idea where to hang their hat regarding prioritizing. Should we just BREED TO WIN or should we BREED TO THE STANDARD and expect judges to judge to the Standard? It is a "Judas Kiss" to any breed when a judge puts up a dog simply because it looks like the majority in the ring. It encourages people to breed to "winners" rather than to a breed standard. In judge's education, they address soundness but type takes priority. Educators assume that new applicants understand structure and corresponding movement. Type without soundness is as detrimental to a breed as soundness without type. A bad front and bad rear working in sequence produces "balance". Do two wrongs make a right? The goal is "a balance between type and soundness". A breed must be able to walk to the water bowl without falling over its own feet! This brings us to the next question. Are not judges "protectors of the breed standards?" Judges education is NOT at fault. Perhaps the problem is what some judging applicants do NOT bring to the table! It is a privilege to pass judgment on a breed but one has the responsibility of understanding "Basic Dog 101". The AKC's required anatomy test neither assures someone's knowledge nor is it any guarantee a judge has the ability to analyze structure and movement. Some breeder judges today send dogs with a handler giving little thought as to their quality or future effect on a breed. Shouldn't breeder judges be especially careful to send correct dogs for public observation? Breeders have a responsibility to put out "the best of the best" rather than a dog that wins simply because it "looks like the rest." By so doing, they are sending false signals to both ringside and new judges. When judges say, "This must be what the breeders want as the ring is flooded with this type" it is detrimental to any breed. It IS NOT about "what breeders want." Breeders and judges have a responsibility to breed and judge to standard. Should handlers show dogs for clients when they KNOW the dog or bitch is not a good representative of the breed? Breeders and exhibitors have a responsibility to promote only dogs that DO represent their breed standard and to sell as pets those who do not! A good handler should make every effort to finish a dog but they too are responsible and should be more selective regarding client dogs. Handlers who read the standard and who have the courage to turn down an inferior dog are to be admired. Advertisement does not always mean a dog represents "breed excellence". Handlers do not always present "good dogs". Advertising carries some influence and if a judge selects winners on advertising alone, they do a disservice to the breed and it reflects on their ability as a judge. "Priority judging" can be detrimental to breeds as Judges become caught up in selecting for individual virtues be it eye, ear set, feet, or coat color. That is why some specialty judges "put up pieces" rather than the whole package. Virtues are important, but a dog should "fill the eye". A single virtue cannot take precedence over a plethora of faults! Priority judging explains why many judges take so long to judge a class. Dismayed exhibitors approach me with serious concerns regarding the direction of our sport. Time and effort is required to understand what makes a breed "breed specific", and what constitutes "breed excellence". There is no short cut. Everyone is entitled to his/her opinion. However, it should be a knowledgeable opinion. Personal preference only enters in when two dogs are equal according to the breed standard. Another issue is "spot entering". Granted, today people enter under specific judges where they feel there is a chance of winning. However, why on a four-day weekend, do we see one point on Thursday, a major on Friday, one point on Saturday, and a major on Sunday? Should not one support the person who supports them by entering all four days? If there is a major, don't break it by not attending. Don't bump up a bitch or dog to BOB without first asking the other exhibitors their preference. Many people drive miles only to find someone failed to show up ringside or" bumped up" a new champion and broke the major. This co-operation is something we used to be able to count on. Today it is "iffy" at best. This is "sportsmanship"! Watch dogs go around the ring. Some are structurally inefficient. Some shoulders do not open up, the dog reaches from the elbow. Ask yourself why one dog out-moves another. Go analyze short coated dogs. Take this knowledge to your own breed ring and "look beneath the coat". Understand top lines, body shape, breed specific movement and toy/moderate/ giant. Do some study and then some soul searching. Ringside observers and breed enthusiasts look on in dismay today, wondering where the functional dogs of the past have gone. Sadly, some faults are so prevalent today they are viewed as "virtues". "Winning because of an exceptional breeding program takes the breed and breeders toward breed excellence. That should be the goal yesterday, and today." Requested to address this issue, I decided to take time to sit back and see the "big picture." The "big picture" is upon us, folks, and it is not pretty! My reason to become a judge was the challenge to select the best of the best according to a written standard. I love dogs! I love SOUND dogs with BREED TYPE! Both virtues, believe it or not, can be present in the same animal! Through combined efforts and a willingness to call "a spade a spade", our breeds WILL survive. Breeding for the sake of winning is a downhill slide. This alone assures the future of our breeds. Turning things around will take dedicated breeders and judges, critical handler selection, and educated exhibitors. Our sport deserves nothing less than the best of our intentions. ASK YOURSELF THESE QUESTIONS. 1.. Why do breeder judges "put dogs with handlers when they know the animal does not represent breed excellence? 2.. Why do handlers accept such dogs knowing once they finish, they will be "petted out"? 3.. Are you kennel blind and do you breed to standard? 4.. Should breeders and newcomers read the standard prior to stud and bitch selection? 5.. When will more mentors open up to newcomers? 6.. And lastly, are "gas money" and "filler" dogs destroying our sport? Putting a breed back on track requires ETHICAL HANDLERS, DEDICATED BREEDERS, AN UNDERSTANDING OF BREED STANDARDS and KNOWLEDGEABLE JUDGES WITH THE COURAGE TO MAKE RESPONSIBLE SELECTIONS. Being a judge is not for the faint of heart. Sending the best dog to the next level and being a part of its journey to the pinnacle of success is a thrill of a lifetime. There is but ONE standard. "Preferred breed type" is like a flavor of the month, very fleeting! BREEDERS, JUDGES AND EXHIBITORS HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT THEIR BREED STANDARDS. CURRENT FADS AND PERSONAL OPINIONS ARE FLEETING AND DESTRUCTIVE. Author bio, illustrations, photos: http://www.thedogplace.org/Breeder/ShowDog...ammill-0901.asp

PREFERRED BREED TYPE Why The Stand-Out Best Dog Can Be A Loser E. Katie Gammill © TheDogPlace January 2009 - The Best of the Best or one that looks like the rest? Let's be honest. Something called "preferred type" is flooding the rings today and in many breeds, it has little to do with the Breed Standard. When "current type" does not equal correctness, the best dog can lose because in many rings, the fatal flaw is being a stand-out. "The best dog you'll ever breed may be the hardest dog you ever finish!" A dog show friend, absent from the sport for several years, attended some local shows with me. Welcoming the opportunity to view dogs in general after her sabbatical, she became visually distressed. Her despair increased when a "less than average" class dog received BOB. The waning quality in her beautiful breed breaks her heart. She stated it would be wasted effort to show a dog correct to the standard today, as some judges feel compelled to award dogs conforming to the majority of the entries. Observing other breeds, she remarks on the lack of neck, restricted front movement and the lack of rear follow through; we discuss "gay tails" and breed type variances. We watch faulty movement and see coats dragging the ground. Weak pasterns and sickle hocks complete the picture. She wonders what causes this to happen to functional dogs in such a short time. It seems the correct dogs have fallen victim to what one may refer to as the "Perfection of Mediocrity". Today, many breeders and owners turn to performance, choosing not to participate in a "crap shoot" where such variety in type confuses both judges and ringside. I make this statement at the expense of being tarred and feathered but increasingly, the best dog you'll ever breed may be the hardest dog you will ever finish. It will be the "odd man out" and look different from the majority of dogs represented in the ring. Why? Some judges, insecure in a breed and therefore lacking courage, choose to walk "different" dogs rather than stick their neck out. Understandable, but should those lacking confidence be passing judgment on another's dog? My old mentor said, "The pendulum of type swings to and fro, but those remaining true to the standard triumph in the end." Those dedicated breeders have the knowledge to restore a breed to its initial form once it hits bottom. Should a judge reward a dog to suggest it could possibly assist in correcting breed faults? NO! It is a breeder's responsibility to incorporate such animals into their programs, regardless of success in the show ring. Judges are to judge to the written standard to the best of their ability, fairly and efficiently. They avoid awarding "drags of a breed" when possible but judges have little insight into the Pandora's Box of breeding. A respected dog person of long standing approached me with this statement while at a seminar. "A judge CAN NOT GO WRONG by putting up winners conforming to the majority of the type of dogs in the ring on a given day." My response was "Surely not!" Well, I believe it now! After observing an all breed judge from ringside, I watched two outstanding individuals "walk" because they looked different from the rest of the short neck, sickle hock, smaller than average dogs lacking side gait that toddled around the ring like fuzzy little caricatures of the breed. This strange "look alike" perspective takes over in many breed rings and not just among judges. Asking a breeder what their standard said about head planes, the response was: "What are parallel planes?" We discussed the occipital bone, short and medium muzzles, balanced heads, etc. Reading a standard and applying it can be two different things. Judges should have the ability to articulate why one dog wins over another. So is that why they make terminology common among standards - to make it easier for judges? If anyone can describe a bulldog and an afghan using the same language, please step forward. Removing the "point system" from the old standards has had a negative affect. In a final decision between two comparable individuals, one has an idea where to hang their hat regarding prioritizing. Should we just BREED TO WIN or should we BREED TO THE STANDARD and expect judges to judge to the Standard? It is a "Judas Kiss" to any breed when a judge puts up a dog simply because it looks like the majority in the ring. It encourages people to breed to "winners" rather than to a breed standard. In judge's education, they address soundness but type takes priority. Educators assume that new applicants understand structure and corresponding movement. Type without soundness is as detrimental to a breed as soundness without type. A bad front and bad rear working in sequence produces "balance". Do two wrongs make a right? The goal is "a balance between type and soundness". A breed must be able to walk to the water bowl without falling over its own feet! This brings us to the next question. Are not judges "protectors of the breed standards?" Judges education is NOT at fault. Perhaps the problem is what some judging applicants do NOT bring to the table! It is a privilege to pass judgment on a breed but one has the responsibility of understanding "Basic Dog 101". The AKC's required anatomy test neither assures someone's knowledge nor is it any guarantee a judge has the ability to analyze structure and movement. Some breeder judges today send dogs with a handler giving little thought as to their quality or future effect on a breed. Shouldn't breeder judges be especially careful to send correct dogs for public observation? Breeders have a responsibility to put out "the best of the best" rather than a dog that wins simply because it "looks like the rest." By so doing, they are sending false signals to both ringside and new judges. When judges say, "This must be what the breeders want as the ring is flooded with this type" it is detrimental to any breed. It IS NOT about "what breeders want." Breeders and judges have a responsibility to breed and judge to standard. Should handlers show dogs for clients when they KNOW the dog or bitch is not a good representative of the breed? Breeders and exhibitors have a responsibility to promote only dogs that DO represent their breed standard and to sell as pets those who do not! A good handler should make every effort to finish a dog but they too are responsible and should be more selective regarding client dogs. Handlers who read the standard and who have the courage to turn down an inferior dog are to be admired. Advertisement does not always mean a dog represents "breed excellence". Handlers do not always present "good dogs". Advertising carries some influence and if a judge selects winners on advertising alone, they do a disservice to the breed and it reflects on their ability as a judge. "Priority judging" can be detrimental to breeds as Judges become caught up in selecting for individual virtues be it eye, ear set, feet, or coat color. That is why some specialty judges "put up pieces" rather than the whole package. Virtues are important, but a dog should "fill the eye". A single virtue cannot take precedence over a plethora of faults! Priority judging explains why many judges take so long to judge a class. Dismayed exhibitors approach me with serious concerns regarding the direction of our sport. Time and effort is required to understand what makes a breed "breed specific", and what constitutes "breed excellence". There is no short cut. Everyone is entitled to his/her opinion. However, it should be a knowledgeable opinion. Personal preference only enters in when two dogs are equal according to the breed standard. Another issue is "spot entering". Granted, today people enter under specific judges where they feel there is a chance of winning. However, why on a four-day weekend, do we see one point on Thursday, a major on Friday, one point on Saturday, and a major on Sunday? Should not one support the person who supports them by entering all four days? If there is a major, don't break it by not attending. Don't bump up a bitch or dog to BOB without first asking the other exhibitors their preference. Many people drive miles only to find someone failed to show up ringside or" bumped up" a new champion and broke the major. This co-operation is something we used to be able to count on. Today it is "iffy" at best. This is "sportsmanship"! Watch dogs go around the ring. Some are structurally inefficient. Some shoulders do not open up, the dog reaches from the elbow. Ask yourself why one dog out-moves another. Go analyze short coated dogs. Take this knowledge to your own breed ring and "look beneath the coat". Understand top lines, body shape, breed specific movement and toy/moderate/ giant. Do some study and then some soul searching. Ringside observers and breed enthusiasts look on in dismay today, wondering where the functional dogs of the past have gone. Sadly, some faults are so prevalent today they are viewed as "virtues". "Winning because of an exceptional breeding program takes the breed and breeders toward breed excellence. That should be the goal yesterday, and today." Requested to address this issue, I decided to take time to sit back and see the "big picture." The "big picture" is upon us, folks, and it is not pretty! My reason to become a judge was the challenge to select the best of the best according to a written standard. I love dogs! I love SOUND dogs with BREED TYPE! Both virtues, believe it or not, can be present in the same animal! Through combined efforts and a willingness to call "a spade a spade", our breeds WILL survive. Breeding for the sake of winning is a downhill slide. This alone assures the future of our breeds. Turning things around will take dedicated breeders and judges, critical handler selection, and educated exhibitors. Our sport deserves nothing less than the best of our intentions. ASK YOURSELF THESE QUESTIONS. 1.. Why do breeder judges "put dogs with handlers when they know the animal does not represent breed excellence? 2.. Why do handlers accept such dogs knowing once they finish, they will be "petted out"? 3.. Are you kennel blind and do you breed to standard? 4.. Should breeders and newcomers read the standard prior to stud and bitch selection? 5.. When will more mentors open up to newcomers? 6.. And lastly, are "gas money" and "filler" dogs destroying our sport? Putting a breed back on track requires ETHICAL HANDLERS, DEDICATED BREEDERS, AN UNDERSTANDING OF BREED STANDARDS and KNOWLEDGEABLE JUDGES WITH THE COURAGE TO MAKE RESPONSIBLE SELECTIONS. Being a judge is not for the faint of heart. Sending the best dog to the next level and being a part of its journey to the pinnacle of success is a thrill of a lifetime. There is but ONE standard. "Preferred breed type" is like a flavor of the month, very fleeting! BREEDERS, JUDGES AND EXHIBITORS HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT THEIR BREED STANDARDS. CURRENT FADS AND PERSONAL OPINIONS ARE FLEETING AND DESTRUCTIVE. Author bio, illustrations, photos: http://www.thedogplace.org/Breeder/ShowDog...ammill-0901.asp

We'll be posting a date as soon as we come up with one. We are trying to work around conformation shows and obedience trials to ensure the best turn out we can.

BTW...people should remember that you CAN refuse to spar if asked. Some think that will kill you in the competition, but not so. As well, a number of breeds are not sparred and in one example (Manchester Terrier) it states in the breed standard that they are not a sparring breed. I was asked one time to spar and refused....I got put up anyway and the judge when handing me the rosette asked why I did not comply. I told him the standard said clearly we were not to be sparred...he flushed and redfaced apologized for asking me to do so, and said he would not make that mistake again! You see....it's never too late to learn something!

Many years ago, I watched the terrier group being judged. As they come in alphabetically, the airedale was examined, moved and gaited to the end of the line. At the end waited the little white westie who spun around on heel and took his 'sparring' stance. On the toes, neck arched beautifully, tail straight up and quivering. They were about three feet or more apart. The airedale responded also rolling up on his toes and tail up and neck arched. They stood there like statues and never a sound from either of them. They eyeballed each other, neither of them attempting to lunge or bark and both of them showing themselves off. The judge unfortunately was busy with the rest of the dogs in the line up and missed this show.....we the crowd watched it with glee and when the dogs finally broke off the stance....the crowd burst into applause. The judge looked around wondering what happened, and we all have the image of the king of terriers staring down at the cocky westie who wanted to be the king. No blood, no sound, no damage done. Both in the hands of very experienced handlers who kept a taut lead and knew what they were doing. Unlike so many that spar now, beleiving that it is nose to nose....it's not....the distance creates the spark to show off. We spar to show off the best of our dog, not to start a fight. I was fortunate to also be at the largest terrier show in the USA (Montgomery County in Pennsylvania) when Ms.Sandra Goose-Allan was judging the airedales and watched something I had never seen done before during the best of breed judging. Normally, a judge will bring out three boys to the centre of the ring and with distance and control, these boys will do their thing....we knew the ropes and we knew how to handle these big terriers safely. This day, we watched in awe as Ms.Allan instructed a female and a male to come out into the centre and spar. Four rows of spectators around the ring raised their eyebrows at this. The female came trotting out and saw the male....she tossed her head and began to flirt, showing her lovely neck and the tail up and quivering. The male saw the female and rolled up on his toes, puffing himself up to impress her and a few scratches on the grass thrown in for good measure. The spar only lasted 20 seconds or so, but I still get goosebumps thinking about it. Both dogs showing off what they had, no growling, no aggression. Experienced handlers making sure that everyone got a show, but that their dogs performed. Sparring is not done much anymore because of a number of things...the handlers can't do it/don't know how to do it and the judges (unless they are terrier specialists) don't know what to look for if they ask for it. It's unfortunate and a shame to see such an art dying off. It's not aggression, it's not fighting and it doesn't create a hidden monster in a dog. The terriers I showed KNEW when it was show time and in the ring, they KNEW when to turn it on and when to switch it off. Welsh, Airedale, Westie, Wire Fox...didn't matter....these dogs all played outside the ring with other terriers or anything else for that matter, but they knew when it was time to work and they did it beautifully. Credit to the handler? I'd like to think I had a part of that, but more credit to a great bunch of breeding programs to instil stability in the dog and enough brains to know how to turn on and off. I watch dogs today being bred without the drive to rat, or hunt, or handled a gunshot. Dogs that can't retrieve anymore or are terrified of sheep or cattle so couldn't herd. Having dogs that knew how to spar goes back to solid breeding programs and this doesn't include breeding an aggressive dog simply because it's a terrier and people accept them to be snot bags....no, I don't accept that, not for a moment.

So this is every terrier and every dog used to spark up a terrier in a line up Anglesun? Sorry but you are just plain dreaming. If there's ever a ring you watch your dog to keep it out of the close proximity of others when passing its Ring 2. I've seen and heard enough terrier handlers asking others to move their dogs away to know that a significant proportion of them don't share your optimisim about their dogs friendliness with strange dogs, particularly when both are entire males. I may not have been in the game for decades but I keep my eyes and ears open. I read the aggressive dog reports in the Canine Journal too. No, your interpretation, not my words. I have seen what I spoke of, regardless of if you or anyone else believes it or not. There are some terriers that are aggressive. No question...I can name quite a few of the top ones in the states that can't be near anyone else without risk of eating them. As for keeping an eye on the ring...it's not the terriers I worry about. Before the groups split and we had all the herding and working dogs together which amounted to about 45 breeds by the time you got to group, the dogs were sharper and it was a challenge to keep the fighting down. We had imported dogs from Europe which were very sharp and it wasn't rare to see the Dobe stare down the Dane and the Rottie jump into the middle of it for fun. We respected the working ring then, far more than we ever worried about the terrier ring. The problem as I see it, is simply too many getting involved with breeds they can't handle or present. Too many honestly beleive that sparring means fighting. Can't tell you how many times I get into discussions to explain what exactly sparring means, but for some reason, I don't know anything and am told I"m wrong. (see above) If in fact you were reading aggressive dog reports, you would also notice many working dogs listed as well as a fair share of utility dogs...funny how seldom do we see the toys in there? why...because as someone mentioned, the trolly dogs are forgiven for barking their heads off, charging the bars and generally creating more havoc than any terrier group I've seen here.....but it's ok, because they're toy dogs...sorry...I'll take the barking sammy in the ring any day over the feral behaviour of a mob of group one dogs ready to attack anything on four legs that moves, inspite of the reality that the passing dog doesn't even cast a glance, never mind posture aggressively!

We routinely teach the basics of agility along with obedience because I beleive that the two work nicely together, giving the dog great rewards (using agility) to combat potential boredom in obedience. Like any sport or activity, you teach dogs specific commands to specific actions. It's no different than people believing that you can't do obedience and conformation at the same time. Teach the dog to sit, teach the dog to stand...they know the difference if you have done your training correctly. Agility needs some basics in obedience of course, so I do recommend doing that first, but once you have some control and the dog has learned to respond, it's easy enough to work in agility stuff. In class, it's normal for us to do the circle heeling work and then at the end of the class do some agility work. The dogs have been warmed up properly to focus and the agility is the reward at the end. They consistantly perform wonderfully with this method and the feedback from our students is that the dogs really enjoy coming to class and know that they must do the first part before they get to do the second part. I equate it to saying to a kid they must eat their dinner before they get their dessert.

Did you ever consider that what you've learned and what the dogs on the "receiving end" interpret this behaviour as may differ? Well this is where the problem lies...because I have been in the game long enough, learned from some of the best in that group and know that these SAME dogs can meet in a yard somewhere and play quite happily...if they did percieve a threat, they certainly wouldn't be doing that now would they? I won't argue the finer points of sparring....since for those that don't know how it works, aren't in the terrier ring and haven't been taught that sparring is NOT fighting, they simply can't comment. It's a case of not 'been there/done that' because it's akin to someone who's never done obedience commenting on how easy it is to do that compared to conformation (yes that happens all the time )

Yes it is....which catagory would you fit into then? (retorical question as I've already been told by some of your collegues! )

It's' nice to see others that seem to feel that dogs being dogs is acceptable in the show ring. As for It's fairly easy to pick out these things in how people write about their experiences and yes, I do know a lot....I've shown dogs in three continents, titled hundreds of them over the years. I've seen the dogs that are robots burn out by the time they are two, because someone doesn't want them to be a dog. I've watched handlers snarl at others in the ring because in their opinion, they took up some of their space, their dog barked, twitched, farted or generally didn't do what that other person wanted. I've watched handlers step on dogs feet, handlers feet, discuss the next dog in the line up with the judge in an attempt to have that dog ignored. I could also throw back the same words...as the old hair dye commercial said "how old do you think I am?". As for being unacceptable to bait the Kerry Blue to the Chi.....if it's done right....it's not intimidating to the little one...however it seems that the small dogs are permitted to go off half cocked at the Great Dane for example and it's just fine? I learned to spar terriers (it's not called baiting by the way) with the big guns in both Canada and the states. I learned that it's not to elicit a fight, or show AGRESSION, as many beleive it to be and think therefore that the dogs on the receiving end are under threat. I apply the same principals of sparring to most of what I show. We don't refer to it that way of course because so many use it in a negative tone. But what you do when you turn a dog to face the one behind it because it shows better, is in fact sparring. So many think it's nose to nose and wait til the growls start and teeth flare....sorry....you're wrong. True sparring is an art form. Using dog behaviour to bring out animation is old school....long before the word 'bait' came into being. For those of you that rely on food to get 'ears' or keep attention.....try the UKC shows in the states where it's banned.... As for the comment thrown my way about perhaps being too 'american' and handling over the top....clearly you've not seen me handle here, and I will say again in case you missed it....it's refreshing to not have that nonsense happening here. I'ts nice to see dogs be dogs....waggy tails and barks and all the nonsense, and yes, those that whinge and complain need to really take a hard look at their hobby and remember that although we are there to compete, we are there to have some fun. Something that doesn't seem to be too plentiful I find when actions such as described in the original post occur. Sammy owners....bring on your bouncy barky furballs....I love it. I enjoy and can't help but break into a smile when I see that white sparkly fluff, wag that tail, smile as only a sammy can and bark with joy. It's not disturbing, or distracting....it reminds me why we are doing what we are doing. I'll be in that group with you, with my bouncy pinscher that likes to frog lay on the grass in the sun and roll around scratching their back with their belly in the air. And yes, if I am told to 'control my dog as it's being a distraction' they will get told to 'get stuffed'. I"m there to have some fun....it's too bad I seem to be in a minority.

Ours didnt arrive until the day before the show either not good enough when you have a coated breed and have to bath and dont know if your entered you put in a reply envolope and its not up to us to chase it up ! its up to secretary to get the numbers back to people earlier Is this a Victorian thing? I've only entered two sets of Victorian shows and each time numbers were never sent. Considering that you pay a mailing fee on Ozentries to get your numbers that's a bit rich in my book. I've never had issues with receiving numbers for NSW Shows. This past weekend was in Victoria but the show before for us was in NSW.

great idea and in Burqas ( sp??) that would be two fold and stop the face judging!! lol Only if we forced the handlers to wear paper bags over their heads....

Who told you that? I started my time in the dog show world in the terrier ring when terriers WERE real terriers and sparring was an artform. We baited off each other and if we were fortunate to be in the BIS ring, we did the same off the dog to the front and to the rear, in that case it would be a working dog (Utility) in front and a toy dog behind. We knew how close to be to not intimidate the toy dog, however it should be noted that many more toy dogs often went off and attempted to attack anything around it and the handlers did nothing to stop it. The terrier ring was tough and loud and intimidating then and our working group (Utility) was the same (before they split into the herding group as well) Not a place for the weak that's for sure! Perhaps this generation of showies just doesn't have the scar tissue that some of us oldies have and this is why we simply snort about the whingers complaining about something so simple as a dog barking in the ring?

I would put up with it and attempt to use your actions to my benefit. I've used the dog in front who's handler is squeeky obsessed to double handle my distracted dog. I've used the dog behind me who's being food baited (yes my dog is facing the wrong way, but held in a perfect stack) and used it to my advantage. That is called double handling. *eek* I, as a handler also have the option of leaving more room between yourself and your activities and myself and my dog. I can put myself between my dogs line of sight and you, I can sing, coo or whistle to my dog to drown you out if I need to. But then, that might be a distraction to someone else and they wouldn't get a fair go..... When you say: Someone else might take a HUGE offense with what you don't have an issue with....remember my question about asking everyone in the ring what is considered 'fair'. We'd never get an answer and we'd never finish a dog show. What is excessive in your opinion may not be in someone elses mind. It's not that easy, is it?

And what is your definition of a fair go? I"m sure if you asked all others in the ring, they would give a totally different answer. I know that I would not want to be told that to be 'fair' I must put my dog in the exact position indicated and not permit anything other than that. I know I would not want to be told that if my dog wanted to turn to face the moving dogs in the middle of the ring, it should not be permitted because that might be a distraction to the others. I certainly would not want to be told that I can't speak to my dog, because some people may find my voice distracts their dogs (yes it's happened) Is everyone willing to forgo the use of food and toys in the ring? Those that need them, would consider having them taken away to not be considered 'fair'.