# Should Dog Showing Be Banned?



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

There is some contraversy in the Dog Showing world at the moment, as TV vet Emma Milne (Vet School, Vets In Practice) said at a BVA meeting that the showing of dogs should be banned, as it has no place in today's society & that it encourages unhealthy dogs to be bred for looks only. She also said that pure bred dogs should not be bred.

Discuss...


----------



## McQuillanX2 (Oct 29, 2009)

I'll go get my popcorn...


----------



## darren81 (Aug 13, 2009)

Whats wrong with purebred dogs...

And thought dog shows have healthy dogs that meet the breed standard.


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

Personally I think Emma Milne is talking twaddle, & if she got her way & the breeding of pure bred dogs was stopped, her profession would lose out on a lot of money. 

Responsible breeders follow the ethos of 'fit for function', ie that the dogs they breed are healthy & would be able to go on to perform the task they were originally designed to do.


----------



## JPP (Jun 8, 2009)

darren81 said:


> Whats wrong with purebred dogs...
> 
> And thought dog shows have healthy dogs that meet the breed standard.


some breed standards are unhealthy
breed standards are whatever they want them to be thats the problem.


----------



## selina20 (May 28, 2008)

Iv seen how dog shows can turn bad and for that reason we left from showing. However i do still enjoy watching dog shows etc. I also think that local shows are a fab day out and where else can u get the info on such a variety of breeds. I do feel something needs to be done with the breeding side of it but im not sure how they can control that.


----------



## darren81 (Aug 13, 2009)

JPP said:


> some breed standards are unhealthy
> breed standards are whatever they want them to be thats the problem.


Fair point Ive never really looked much into it.

Just prefer pedigree dogs myself but there are few exceptions.


----------



## JPP (Jun 8, 2009)

darren81 said:


> Fair point Ive never really looked much into it.
> 
> Just prefer pedigree dogs myself but there are few exceptions.


i only realised what goes on when i got my bullie and read some stuff and watched a documentary

its all just fashion for them, designer breeds


----------



## bladeblaster (Sep 30, 2008)

People have suggested 'showing' snakes, alomg the same lines as dog shows. I am very much against this.

Keeping and breeding animals should not be about showing off, or creating 'perfect ahem' specimens.


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

JPP said:


> some breed standards are unhealthy
> breed standards are whatever they want them to be thats the problem.


The Kennel Club now has a list of high priority breeds, & at shows that have classes for these breeds, there will be an undercover KC repesentative there watching what dogs are placed by the judge. Judges have a responsibility to place only dogs that are healthy, sound, fit for function, closely fit the breed standard, & are what would be encouraged in the breed. So the KC is trying to encourage the breeding & showing of the right dogs. And it will reprimand judges that are seen to be placing dogs that are not what is deemed to be fit for function.


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

JPP said:


> i only realised what goes on when i got my bullie and read some stuff and watched a documentary
> 
> its all just fashion for them, designer breeds


You read some stuff & watched a documentary? (no doubt the infamous BBC documentary) You based your opinion on just that?


----------



## miss_ferret (Feb 4, 2010)

banned no, a lot more regulated yes. when a 'pedigree dog breeder' is rewarded with wins and praise for breeding and winning shows with unhealthy dogs then something is not right.

a dogs a dog to me, i really dont care if its parents have a bit of paper, as long as it dose what i want it to (be a pet, do a job, whatever) then as long as its healthy i couldnt care less who its parents where. i wont love the dog any less for not being a 'pure bred'.


----------



## darren81 (Aug 13, 2009)

bladeblaster said:


> People have suggested 'showing' snakes, alomg the same lines as dog shows. I am very much against this.
> 
> Keeping and breeding animals should not be about showing off, or creating 'perfect ahem' specimens.


Well I remember where I got the love of rottweilers from its nothing to do with this status dog crap back on the isle of wight where I came from there were very few of them.

1 of my mums carers who she was very good friends with brought her rotty pup up the once it was so funny watching this pup chasing my brother around the kitchen fell in love with them I was 10ish.


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

bladeblaster said:


> People have suggested 'showing' snakes, alomg the same lines as dog shows. I am very much against this.
> 
> *Keeping and breeding animals should not be about* showing off, or *creating 'perfect ahem' specimens*.


Why? Surely it's better to only breed from animals that are the healthiest & are shown to not carry certain diseases or deformities?


----------



## JPP (Jun 8, 2009)

Zoo-Man said:


> You read some stuff & watched a documentary? (no doubt the infamous BBC documentary) You based your opinion on just that?


i dont claim to be an expert? but i have half a brain, if the people who bred these dogs cared there wouldnt be these unhealthy bad structured dogs


----------



## TalulaTarantula (Jan 21, 2011)

I dont think it should be banned at all, i believe it comes down to un resposnisble breeding i.e line breeding, i dont see why they have to breed dogs that are related when there are perfectly good un related show champions out there. I agree that alot of pedigree dogs do form health problems but this doesnt mean they arent happy, Ive been to crufts many times and the dogs are always happy and seem to feed off the whole showing atmosphere, the dog owners are always helpful and seem very knowledgable.
I also think that BBC documentary had a huge affect on the kennel club, it seemed to portray them as evil stuck up snobs that dont give a dam about their pets, It didnt give both sides of the story.
I grew up with pedigree showing GSD's that were KC reg, no they are not the germanic types you see now but they were bred to the breed standards, and aswell as looking good and placing in the show ring these dogs were happy healthy working dogs on our farm, we loved our dogs.

Anyways like i said before its down to breeding, if a dog has certain health problems or will pass on congenital health issues do not breed the dog simple.


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

JPP said:


> i dont claim to be an expert? but i have half a brain, if the people who bred these dogs cared there wouldnt be these unhealthy bad structured dogs


Thats why dogs that are not sound are not awarded with a placing at a dog show, as the unhealthy dogs that are not fit for function are not to be encouraged. Responsible breeders & exhibitors aim to better their breed.


----------



## feorag (Jul 31, 2007)

I voted no and personally I've always thought that Emma Milne was up her own *rse from the very beginning of the first TV show that featured her.

I think responsible dog breeding (and horse, and cat, and rat and all!) is what matters and those people breeding from poor quality animals and animals with known health problems and conformation faults should be stopped.


----------



## GothGirl (Apr 9, 2008)

Just because there is a breed standard does not mean that people listen to it.

The pug breed standard says that pugs should be

"Ideal weight 6.3-8.1 kgs (14-18 lbs). Should be hard of muscle but substance must not be confused with overweight."

I've gone to a lot of shows, and most pugs on show are fat. not muscly, fat. With breathing problems, and they win because people want them fat and judges want them fat.
Just because its written doesn't mean people listen to it.

I show my pug, and I love showing and she enjoys it, but there is more harm being done to the name of pedigree dogs by idiotic BYB who breed anything and everything, believeing there animal is "show quality" because it is the right colour or because its not a mongrel.. on that note however I have seen someone selling "show quality" Frugg Puppies... (French BulldogxPug) there are some absolute idiots out there that shouldn't own a dog, let alone breed them.

The show world is getting a lot better recently, there have been a lot of improvements and a lot of changes for the better.

Its not a question of wether showing is good or bad, but that idiotic owners shouldn't be allowed to own animals or be sell puppies with a hefty price tag under the pretence that they are show quality


----------



## Elina (Jul 22, 2009)

I do not think it should be stopped. 
Two of my dogs are rescues and are 'mutts' and I love them to bits but I have no idea if they are prone to certain health problems where as with Sprite I know what Papillon's are prone to get and thus I, and my vet can look out for these things. 
Sprite was also from a kennel club accredited breeder which means that both of her parents were tested for these illnesses and would NOT have been bred if the tests showed anything. If people did not show dogs there would be no accredited breeders and I believe that many breeds would be allot less healthy for it. 

I think dog showing is a great thing and for breeds such as Papillon's the standards are a good thing as it means that people are breeding the same dogs not their idea of what that breed of dog should look like. I agree with some that it needs some work though. 

Over in the US Alaskan Klee kai owners have some issues when showing their dogs as allot of the time the judges seem to have not read the breed standards and are awarding titles to dogs that look very different to what the breed standard would suggest the bred should look like. 

Does this happen with any breeds over here? 
-Elina


----------



## GothGirl (Apr 9, 2008)

Elina said:


> I do not think it should be stopped.
> Two of my dogs are rescues and are 'mutts' and I love them to bits but I have no idea if they are prone to certain health problems where as with Sprite I know what Papillon's are prone to get and thus I, and my vet can look out for these things.
> Sprite was also from a kennel club accredited breeder which means that both of her parents were tested for these illnesses and would NOT have been bred if the tests showed anything. If people did not show dogs there would be no accredited breeders and I believe that many breeds would be allot less healthy for it.
> 
> ...


I'm not sure about that but in every breed you get downright favouritism, whereby despite there being numerous accepted colours for a breed, the judge will place their favourite coloured dogs even if they are not the best example.

Ie most judges favour fawn pugs, even though apricot, silver and black are all accepted.
Most judges will place a fawn dog over another coloured dog even if the other is a better example as fawn is the favoured colour.


----------



## selina20 (May 28, 2008)

If you banned showing we would end up with thousands of dogs being dumped and killed.

Not all people that show are bad people. A lot of them their dogs are part of the family and lead fantastic lives and the showing is a bonus. As with anything a few individuals have let the side down.


----------



## sarahc (Jan 7, 2009)

I don't think it should be banned.I agree with putting more health tests in and alterations to the standards being made for health and welfare.However most breed clubs have health tests as part of their criteria but how many people opt to get a pup from one of these reputable breeders and how many opt for getting one the easy way,no questions asked from a breeder with a pet bitch or a BYB in it for the cash?How many good breeders are there v BYB's I wonder.I wanted to show dogs but found out I wasn't cut out for it,puppies are the bi product of success and I couldn't bare the worry of homing them.If you don't like it you don't have to participate.I didn't chuck my dogs out when I decided it wasn't for me either,I love them and I kept them all including the puppies.


----------



## SpiritSerpents (Mar 20, 2011)

There are certain breeds that I feel should be banned from being shown.

Sharpeis, neopolitan mastiffs, pugs, bulldogs, german shepherds, and basset hounds are just a few.

Skin issues, spinal deformities, inability to breed/give birth without direct human intervention, breathing problems, trachea problems, heart problems, joint issues, ataxia....

Bassets used to be handsome, functional dogs for example. The current style of basset can't accomplish squat, have severe joint issues, and massive skin problems.


----------



## EquineArcher (Feb 13, 2010)

Showing isn't a problem, bad breeding and a de-railing of the breed "type" is. 

To me, a dog should be able to run, jump, play, breed, nurse, see etc etc without human help, pain, discomfort or distress. Eg: pugs that can't breathe, daschunds with back problems.

Fat does seem to be popular though- same in horse shows. Maybe if the judges were all on the same page, breed standards would conform to the ideal.


----------



## Kare (Mar 9, 2010)

SpiritSerpents said:


> There are certain breeds that I feel should be banned from being shown.
> 
> Sharpeis, neopolitan mastiffs, pugs, bulldogs, german shepherds, and basset hounds are just a few./QUOTE]
> 
> ...


----------



## feorag (Jul 31, 2007)

Breed standards to confirm to the ideal, but they can all be read differently by a judge. Then there are the judges who 'prefer' a certain type and put that animal up, whether it adheres to the standard or not.

In the Cat Fancy Persians were becoming so extreme that their nose leathers were between their eyes! So the breed standard was changed, voted on and put into practice that the top of the nose leather should not be above the bottom of the eye line - yet still persians were being put up who had nose leathers above the bottom of the eye line. 

I've no doubt whatsoever that the same thing happens in dog shows and I firmly believe that breed societies should be looking at these judges and taking them off their judging list, so they can't judge those animals.


----------



## selina20 (May 28, 2008)

feorag said:


> Breed standards to confirm to the ideal, but they can all be read differently by a judge. Then there are the judges who 'prefer' a certain type and put that animal up, whether it adheres to the standard or not.
> 
> In the Cat Fancy Persians were becoming so extreme that their nose leathers were between their eyes! So the breed standard was changed, voted on and put into practice that the top of the nose leather should not be above the bottom of the eye line - yet still persians were being put up who had nose leathers above the bottom of the eye line.
> 
> I've no doubt whatsoever that the same thing happens in dog shows and I firmly believe that breed societies should be looking at these judges and taking them off their judging list, so they can't judge those animals.


I agree with this completely. When we showed our English Setters it depended completely on which judge it was whether we went through or not. The bloodline we used is still doing well at Crufts but still its dependent on which judge whether they go through or not.


----------



## em_40 (Sep 29, 2010)

Kare said:


> SpiritSerpents said:
> 
> 
> > There are certain breeds that I feel should be banned from being shown.
> ...


----------



## Kat91 (Sep 19, 2008)

JPP said:


> some breed standards are unhealthy
> breed standards are whatever they want them to be thats the problem.


Like the German Shepherd breed standard...for showing, they are required to look like this:



















see how the back legs/hips drop down? that is NOT healthy and causes a lot of hip/spine problems for dogs with this 'drop', later on in life. Any purebred shepherd that doesn't showcase this 'drop' will not qualify in the showing ring. Utter shite and just wrong...


----------



## SpiritSerpents (Mar 20, 2011)

Kare said:


> Mentioning German Shepherds does smack of watching that famous programme.



Actually, no. As a vet tech who has seen the hind leg ataxia in action, "that documentary" was no surprise to me when they got to the germans. I've SEEN the puppies that are pretty much walking along the entire plantar surface of the foot. I've seen the wobble and the extreme slope and it disgusts me.

What I like are not even the police K9s, but your average "backyard" shepherd. Utterly straight backed. I think the slope is ugly and serves no purpose.


----------



## cloggers (Mar 13, 2010)

I've not read all of this as I haven't got time.
Personally, I believe that dog shows should not be banned, but they need to be drastically improved and soon.


----------



## Rackie (Jan 30, 2011)

Personally I think that it's the breed standards that should be changed to something more healthy (in cases like the German Shepherd), though not all standards need changing.
Banning dog shows wouldn't help...


----------



## Kare (Mar 9, 2010)

SpiritSerpents said:


> Actually, no. As a vet tech who has seen the hind leg ataxia in action, "that documentary" was no surprise to me when they got to the germans. I've SEEN the puppies that are pretty much walking along the entire plantar surface of the foot. I've seen the wobble and the extreme slope and it disgusts me.
> 
> What I like are not even the police K9s, but your average "backyard" shepherd. Utterly straight backed. I think the slope is ugly and serves no purpose.


There are GSDs where those that do not show went to working homes, including the police. There happened to be a period where the judges picked those with the very high exaggeration of the slope, basically looking like they are in a show stance whilst walking (or as I always call it looking like they are mid poop stance whilst walking) and those with less exaggeration were not picked and so those owners just stopped turn up under those judges.

I am not saying those frogged legged dogs are suitable to show or be bred, but I do disagree with you saying German shepherds should not be shown. They are not like the other breeds in your list where there are arguably no "show quality" examples where the huge exaggeration does not exist. With GSDs it just took them to say No More over exaggeration and a wealth of far less roached backed shepherds could start winning.

If you are a vet tech you should be aware from experience less than maybe 1 in 20, hopefully far less have those disgusting frogged legs. I would honestly say in a year I have seen maybe 2.


----------



## Tedster (Nov 24, 2010)

No as its the only time my mother-in-law is allowed out :devil:


----------



## iiisecondcreep (Oct 29, 2007)

I agree with most of whats been said on this, while there are a lot of breeds that do suffer as a result of particular breed standards/interpretation of breed standards/desirable looks, there are plenty that don't.

I also agree that there is favouritism at dog shows.
We used to show our Standard Schnauzer, we usually went with friends who showed their Bull Mastiffs. 

There was one Bull Mastiff that used to win regularly, but he was a terrible example. His jaw was hugely undershot, his tail was too short, he was croupe high (not sure what the doggy term for this is- his bum was higher than his shoulders), his breathing was noisey and laboured and he ended up dying at 4yrs old. Yet he won regularly, and was a popular stud dog. That dog should never have placed, never mind come first and bred from!!! But he did, purely because of who his breeder/handler was. It is examples like this that spoil it for responsible breeders who really do want to do the best for the breed.


----------



## Kare (Mar 9, 2010)

Kat91 said:


> Like the German Shepherd breed standard...for showing, they are required to look like this:
> 
> image
> 
> ...


What you are showing is not the huge exaggeration that did exist, if i stood my Golden Retriever in a German shepherd show stance I can produce a sloped back, try it with any longer backed large breed and you too can produce the same.

The issue came with those trying to make them look that sloped when stood normally or walking, which used to win and would not do so now the eyes of the world are on the judges who previously would have chosen that deformity.


----------



## hogmum (Oct 2, 2011)

No.

Dog shows provide great mental stimulation for the dog and handler. 
Dogs also have to be of standard and have a solid temperament to let the judge go over them.

My dogs never happier than when he's at a show, he even enjoys the car journey. 

The issue is with those who mis-interpret the breed standard, no were in the breed standard does it say sharpei's should be super wrinkly. 

I know many breed clubs are working as hard as possible to breed out bad health however there will always be "those" types of breeders who dont give a damn about health but about money. 

Dog showing is an activity just like working trials, agility, heel work and obedience.

Its stressful stuff getting up at 3am to start grooming, loading the car, the long journey, arriving in the rain and mud, running back and forth between wet weather tent and ring side incase they hold it outside in the rain, in hot weather being chased by wasps, grooming your dog on site, letting your dog meet all the other dogs just to have to groom again and finally go in the ring. 

However the dogs love it. When I first got into showing I went to my local champ show (few years back) it was a lovely hot weekend and I took along my camera, I was surprised to see how much the dogs enjoyed it. 

I dont think anyone can say that dog showing should be banned unless they have shown their dog extensively.


----------



## Kat91 (Sep 19, 2008)

Zoo-Man said:


> Why? Surely it's better to only breed from animals that are the healthiest & are shown to not carry certain diseases or deformities?


But with other breeds unfortunately, they're only bred for looks irregardless of what health problems come along with it 


Kare said:


> What you are showing is not the huge exaggeration that did exist, if i stood my Golden Retriever in a German shepherd show stance I can produce a sloped back, try it with any longer backed large breed and you too can produce the same.
> 
> The issue came with those trying to make them look that sloped when stood normally or walking, which used to win and would not do so now the eyes of the world are on the judges who previously would have chosen that deformity.


I was trying to illustrate how some German sheherds are bred to look, not when they pose for stance but all the time (walking etc) which is so wrong. 

Your second paragraph is what I was talking about : victory:


----------



## NickBenger (Nov 18, 2010)

Dog showing doesn't need to be banned, the KC just need to get their act together.


----------



## Kare (Mar 9, 2010)

Okies This is my considered option.
There are basic requirements of survival as a mammal. 

Breathing 
Sustenance (Food/water)
Reproduction
Excretion
Sleep/rest 
Homeostatis

There are breeds that can't breath, and in the same way cannot thermoregulate.
Those that have their eating and drinking affected by similar issues to those causing the above
Those that cannot reproduce without help (not a one off in a normally fine breed, whole breeds where caesarean is the norm)
Those who cannot sleep or rest properly due to airway obstruction when asleep (like sleep apnoea in humans) 
Have a airway to short or distorted to allow their brain to be cooled to prevent fitting

I do think that Vet has a point, there is no way a judge can stand almost these breeds and say "this here is a healthy example" and whilst I think there could be an argument that continuing to show them will allow progress towards improvement to be witnessed and a driving force towards such changes. I not not think they should be considered as winners or allowed to compete for best of group or best of show type titles. Even a Best or Breed would still be subjective, and a severely disabled creature for many generations worth of improvements yet.


----------



## NickBenger (Nov 18, 2010)

My family has previously been involved in a lot of dog showing over the years of Akita and Doberman. I think a lot of people soon realise it's who you know, not the health of the dog.


----------



## SpiritSerpents (Mar 20, 2011)

My adding them to the list was because they are on their *way* to getting as horrible as those other breeds. I love german shepherds, though I know that I am not the proper owner for one. I don't want to see them end up ruined. The other breeds are *already* ruined and the german's seem next in line for it.


----------



## feorag (Jul 31, 2007)

em_40 said:


> It sems from reading people's views that it is not the standard that is the problem but the judges, you would think they are all on the same page but it appears they aren't. That needs to be stricter I suppose.


Part of the problem is that the written word is open to every person's interpretation of that. What is short, what is medium and what is long for instance?? Every judge will have their opinion of that, but if they were asked to give a measurement rather than a description I bet they wouldn't all say "so many inches"!

Also as a judge has to have bred (if that still applies of course) a litter, then their perception will be that what they are breeding is the best example of their breed, but it might not be.

It is much harder to be a cat judge than a dog judge. There's a long and detailed 'apprenticeship' to serve to get to be a cat judge and when you reach the point of being a "probationer judge" you have to provide a written account of every cat you judge which is examined by the BAC (Breed Advisory Council) of that breed and if they think the judge is misinterpreting the standard, then they are told they are wrong.

Unless the dog show world has changed considerably, no dog show judge has gone through this amount of rigorous scrutiny of their judging before they are allowed to hand out a Certificate.



Kat91 said:


> Like the German Shepherd breed standard...for showing, they are required to look like this:
> 
> image
> 
> ...





Kare said:


> There are GSDs where those that do not show went to working homes, including the police. There happened to be a period where the judges picked those with the very high exaggeration of the slope, basically looking like they are in a show stance whilst walking (or as I always call it looking like they are mid poop stance whilst walking) and those with less exaggeration were not picked and so those owners just stopped turn up under those judges..


Part of the problem here is the show stance of the German Shepherd. They are not set up "four square" like other breeds so when you take the hind legs out and and separate them, the back will naturally drop. I can make my GSD look like that if I stand him in show stance, but when he walks away his back is as level as any other dog.

I agree there are some who maintain that roach back and slope when they walk out of the ring and I'm not happy to see that, but not every GSD standing in a show ring will look like that out of it.


----------



## Jamiioo (May 8, 2010)

I don't really have an opinion on Dog showing or if it should be banned so i have decided not to vote. I think its more to do with the standards/criteria that breeds are required to meet in order to enter being too strict or not in the best interests of the breed itself. 

One thing that does annoy me in any form of showing though are how some people can get really picky or stressed over something that might not be quite right in order to meet the criteria or whatever, even though in my opinion that is what makes the dog what it is i.e. Tail not being quite long enough, or being a little too long for breed standards etc

Just little things like that people fret over, bug me. :lol2:


----------



## miss_ferret (Feb 4, 2010)

TheDogMan said:


> My family has previously been involved in a lot of dog showing over the years of Akita and Doberman. I think a lot of people soon realise it's who you know, not the health of the dog.


in all honestly this is the case with the majority of serious animal showing not just dogs. even based on what iv read on this thread, the dog showing world is still a walk in the park compared to the horse showing world.

its the fact that showing your animal seems to be seen as 'progression' that i hate. for example, the number of people who assume i know jack about horses because i dont show is unbelieveable, even got told once 'ah you must not be that good a rider then' :whip: my aunty gets similar with her dogs, number of rosettes seems to equate more dog knowledge.

i think its important to stress the difference between pet and working dog showing. in a sheep dog trial for example, it dosent matter who you are, who your dogs parents are, what your dog looks like, if it dosent get those sheep moved in the fastest time it isnt going to win.


----------



## NickBenger (Nov 18, 2010)

miss_ferret said:


> i think its important to stress the difference between pet and working dog showing. in a sheep dog trial for example, it dosent matter who you are, who your dogs parents are, what your dog looks like, if it dosent get those sheep moved in the fastest time it isnt going to win.


 This is why watching flyball/agility etc. is so much more entertaining that conformation, it's virtually impossible to cheat it and it encourages healthy dogs.


----------



## hogmum (Oct 2, 2011)

Although I dont find the roach back GSD to my taste it doesnt mean its unhealthy, I have a straight back GSD rescue and she has hip dysplasia yet I know loads of roach back GSD's that have no hip problems and perfect hip scores.

I think it comes down to health testing, when breeders can be arsed to health tests breeds will become much much more healthy. I am breeding my bitch (not a GSD) yet I have spent £500 health testing her and the stud dog is fully health tested. So I can ensure the pups wont end up with those nasty genetic illnesses.


----------



## SpiritSerpents (Mar 20, 2011)

The roached dogs I've seen have had most of their issues with the hock and "wobbling" in their ankles. While the stance places extra stress on the joint, it's not a result of hip dysplasia.


----------



## CE1985F (Jan 22, 2009)

feorag said:


> Breed standards to confirm to the ideal, but they can all be read differently by a judge. Then there are the judges who 'prefer' a certain type and put that animal up, whether it adheres to the standard or not.





TheDogMan said:


> My family has previously been involved in a lot of dog showing over the years of Akita and Doberman. I think a lot of people soon realise it's who you know, not the health of the dog.


New KC rules state that anybody wanting to become a judge of any breed must have kept and shown the breed for a min of x amount of year(Normally set by the breed club), they must pass several KC approved Seminar's run by a KC approved trainer (these include confirmation and movement, Hands on, Responsibilites of a judge, Stewarding aswell as the breed seminars).



feorag said:


> Part of the problem is that the written word is open to every person's interpretation of that. What is short, what is medium and what is long for instance?? Every judge will have their opinion of that, but if they were asked to give a measurement rather than a description I bet they wouldn't all say "so many inches"!
> 
> *Also as a judge has to have bred (if that still applies of course) a litter, then their perception will be that what they are breeding is the best example of their breed, but it might not be.*
> 
> *Unless the dog show world has changed considerably, no dog show judge has gone through this amount of rigorous scrutiny of their judging before they are allowed to hand out a Certificate*.


To be able to give tickets at a champ show in any breed then you have to of done all the above plus Owned, bred, and shown the breed for 7 years, got at least 3 dogs in the stud book, judged at x amount of show's and classes, stewarded a min of 12 times at all levels, approved by the KC (for each appointment and have a report written) and also the breed clubs will be consulted.


If a judge hasn't judged a breed for 2 years(i think! could more or less) then they must attend certain seminar's again before they are allowed to judge them again!


----------



## feorag (Jul 31, 2007)

CE1985F said:


> To be able to give tickets at a champ show in any breed then you have to of done all the above plus Owned, bred, and shown the breed for 7 years, got at least 3 dogs in the stud book, judged at x amount of show's and classes, stewarded a min of 12 times at all levels, approved by the KC (for each appointment and have a report written) and also the breed clubs will be consulted.
> 
> 
> If a judge hasn't judged a breed for 2 years(i think! could more or less) then they must attend certain seminar's again before they are allowed to judge them again!


Thanks for clarifying that Clark, I just know that to be invited to judge at an exemption/open dog show (which we don't have in the cat fancy) you basically just had to have bred a litter and be invited to judge to get your feet on the rung of the stepladder to dog judging, certainly way back in the early 70's when I was showing dogs.


----------



## CE1985F (Jan 22, 2009)

feorag said:


> Thanks for clarifying that Clark, I just know that to be invited to judge at an exemption/open dog show (which we don't have in the cat fancy) you basically just had to have bred a litter and be invited to judge to get your feet on the rung of the stepladder to dog judging, certainly way back in the early 70's when I was showing dogs.


 
Your welcome! The KC realised a few years ago that judges needed training and that is when the training program started!

We are currently starting the process and have done four of the required seminar's so far and it will be at least another 2 years or so before will be qualified as a judge at a open show level.


----------



## feorag (Jul 31, 2007)

I thought they would realise that just because you've bred a litter of pups doesn't make you an expert - to be totally honest I don't think breeding a few litters makes you an expert either, but that's just my opinion.


----------



## bladeblaster (Sep 30, 2008)

Zoo-Man said:


> Why? Surely it's better to only breed from animals that are the healthiest & are shown to not carry certain diseases or deformities?


 
In an ideal world, that is what makes a 'perfect' specimen. However when health issues come second to the straightest tail, or the nicest pattern, then its a pretty poor show.

Fact is a LOT of pure breed dogs could be made a lot healthier simply by outcrossing and making Mutts. Doesn;t happen because then their value drops.


----------



## hogmum (Oct 2, 2011)

bladeblaster said:


> Fact is a LOT of pure breed dogs could be made a lot healthier simply by outcrossing and making Mutts. Doesn;t happen because then their value drops.


There is a puppy farmer I am currently trying to help close down who focuses mainly on cross breeds now his are true mutts in the sense that they are crosses that should not be done. On his website alone he has admitted to 3 different genetic illnesses in pups he has bred. 

I honestly believe the key to bettering the health of a breed is cut out the bad breeders who breed for money because true standard wont apply. Take sharpei's for example... they key would be to breed out the excessive wrinkles however I know of plenty of back yard breeders who are happy to breed their super wrinkly ones and even use it as a sales ploy while true club members are trying to breed out the excessive wrinkles. 

I also believe that health should come first, a dog/bitch should be fully health TESTED (not checked) and prove to excel in health over looks. I would sooner breed a slightly oversized bitch than one with 60+ hip scores.

Breeds that need to be taller to hold their body weight should breed oversized since the new mini phase is to breed everything smaller. Hell even resort to importing better health in lines. (though in my own breed they have 4 times the health problems than they do in the UK)

Cross breeding is not the only answer. Tbh there is already enough being bred by back yard breeders. (no I am not anti cross) fixing some issues will take a long time but done right it can benefit the breed drastically.


----------



## corny girl (Aug 30, 2009)

I have a breed that has 2 types being shown. The first is the show type & the second the working type (Greyhounds). I have ex racers & one of which i KC registered & have shown & qualified for Crufts with. She will never ever win over the show type which is wrong as she is probably more capable of doing the job she was bred for as the show types are much heavier stockier dogs who i'm sure would struggle to make the turns when coursing a hare :whistling2:.


----------



## Postcard (Aug 29, 2010)

Such a good thread, really enjoyed reading the discussion so far and it's always impressive to see the level of dog knowledge on here. 

I think competitive activities will always bring out the worst in some types of people, and the difficulty is that short term solutions to breed a winning pup can lead to long term problems for a breed as a whole... 

Having said that, I think the KC does an amazing amount of work and has responded to "that" documentary in a hugely applaudable - the 'mate select' facility and the fact that they provide you with the inbreeding coefficients, recommended health testing for breeds, health surveys for those breeds for FREE is astounding. (Sorry I'm running out of positive adjectives!)

I personally would be in favour of a working test element for _all_ breeds except perhaps toys, and a move towards recommending dual champion lines so there is some working ability for that dog breed.

I have to say, I would personally favour a show breeder because you're more likely to get a dog with the correct temperament to cope with being prodded by strangers in the ring, which is pretty impressive. 



Kare said:


> Okies This is my considered option.
> There are basic requirements of survival as a mammal.
> 
> Breathing
> ...


This is SUCH a good post, has really helped me pinpoint what I'm comfortable with in terms of dog breeds, too. Really well considered.

I think there's a risk that if certain breeds were banned from the show ring, there would be a shed load of BYBs that jumped upon them and sold untested, exaggerated examples for the 'Rare!' commodity value in free ads... Hopefully there will be a strong move in the show ring by breeders to bring their dogs back towards health and repair the damage done to the breed's reputation.



feorag said:


> It is much harder to be a cat judge than a dog judge. There's a long and detailed 'apprenticeship' to serve to get to be a cat judge and when you reach the point of being a "probationer judge" you have to provide a written account of every cat you judge which is examined by the BAC (Breed Advisory Council) of that breed and if they think the judge is misinterpreting the standard, then they are told they are wrong.


One of my friends has a ragdoll kitten who's doing well showing (she's a vonvarda) and I never realised how comprehensive the showing write ups at cat shows are, really really useful for pinpointing faults and areas of improvement. Everything was covered from temperament to eye shape to coat quality - I've never heard of a horse or dog judge giving that kind of detailed / considered feedback as a matter of routine. Also means that you can see what you should be aiming towards if you were to breed, also really brilliant to read competitor's write ups too and see why they placed where they did. Great system.



CE1985F said:


> New KC rules state that anybody wanting to become a judge of any breed must have kept and shown the breed for a min of x amount of year(Normally set by the breed club), they must pass several KC approved Seminar's run by a KC approved trainer (these include confirmation and movement, Hands on, Responsibilites of a judge, Stewarding aswell as the breed seminars).
> 
> To be able to give tickets at a champ show in any breed then you have to of done all the above plus Owned, bred, and shown the breed for 7 years, got at least 3 dogs in the stud book, judged at x amount of show's and classes, stewarded a min of 12 times at all levels, approved by the KC (for each appointment and have a report written) and also the breed clubs will be consulted.
> 
> If a judge hasn't judged a breed for 2 years(i think! could more or less) then they must attend certain seminar's again before they are allowed to judge them again!


Fantastic post, thank you for explaining. Also, so often I hear people who haven't actually done any research saying things like 'Oh judges don't care about the dogs' - no sane person would put in so much time and effort, and so many years as an owner, and 'not care'. 

I'm so sorry this has ended up so long!! :blush:


----------



## em_40 (Sep 29, 2010)

miss_ferret said:


> i think its important to stress the difference between pet and working dog showing. in a sheep dog trial for example, it dosent matter who you are, who your dogs parents are, what your dog looks like, if it dosent get those sheep moved in the fastest time it isnt going to win.


I MUCH prefer that kind of 'show' I prefer to see a dog that can work for his reosette and where you can see the dog and owner both working together. That for me is winning dog, not one that looks the best, or as it seems, not the one who's owner knows the judge :whistling2:


----------



## NickBenger (Nov 18, 2010)

bladeblaster said:


> In an ideal world, that is what makes a 'perfect' specimen. However when health issues come second to the straightest tail, or the nicest pattern, then its a pretty poor show.
> 
> Fact is a LOT of pure breed dogs could be made a lot healthier simply by outcrossing and making Mutts. Doesn;t happen because then their value drops.


I completely agree with this. The problem is once they're outcrossed there is no way of that lineage attaining kennel club registration again, so it's just one big loop of inbreeding that decreases the health of living animals for generations.


----------



## Postcard (Aug 29, 2010)

TheDogMan said:


> I completely agree with this. The problem is once they're outcrossed there is no way of that lineage attaining kennel club registration again, so it's just one big loop of inbreeding that decreases the health of living animals for generations.


They do sometimes open the studbook - e.g. (american) manchester toy terriers have been introduced to english toy terrier, slightly different breed.

Also, don't forget that responsible breeders will go to good lengths to get genetic diversity e.g. by importing, there's a global genepool of breeds.

I hope that the KC will be more flexible about opening the studbook in future, a bit like the way that some horse studbooks will allow certain approved other breed stallions to be entered for the general improvement of the breed.


----------



## feorag (Jul 31, 2007)

annabel said:


> One of my friends has a ragdoll kitten who's doing well showing (she's a vonvarda) and I never realised how comprehensive the showing write ups at cat shows are, really really useful for pinpointing faults and areas of improvement. Everything was covered from temperament to eye shape to coat quality - I've never heard of a horse or dog judge giving that kind of detailed / considered feedback as a matter of routine. Also means that you can see what you should be aiming towards if you were to breed, also really brilliant to read competitor's write ups too and see why they placed where they did. Great system.


And every probationer judge has to present a detailed write-up like that for every cat of the breed that theyjudge at every show to the breed council who then read it and decide if the judge is looking for the right things or whether they're not interpreting the standard right. It's a very long drawn out process to be a cat judge, although the GCCF is presently looking at that system, to discuss ways of making it slightly easier or shorter.


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

CE1985F said:


> New KC rules state that anybody wanting to become a judge of any breed must have kept and shown the breed for a min of x amount of year(Normally set by the breed club), they must pass several KC approved Seminar's run by a KC approved trainer (these include confirmation and movement, Hands on, Responsibilites of a judge, Stewarding aswell as the breed seminars).
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yep, the KC is trying to get judges to be much more responsible. There is even debate whether dogs, & in particular, puppies, who are showing nervousness or who do not walk or stand on the table due to nerves, should be placed at all. This shows the KC is not only aiming to promote the standard, health & functionability of dogs, but also the temperament.


----------



## 955i (Aug 17, 2007)

So what about the mass breeding of bulldogs for years despite that all had to be born by ceasarian and the culling of ridgebacks that do not show a ridge despite this being caused by a spinal malformation?

Kennel club have been a law unto themselves for years and are now backpeddaling due to public disgust at their practices.


----------



## Kare (Mar 9, 2010)

955i said:


> Kennel club have been a law unto themselves for years and are now backpeddaling due to public disgust at their practices.


Yes it is due to the spotlight thrown on them, but the fact is there is progress being made (enough or fast enough is up for debate of course) so surely it is a positive that they are changing rather than negative "back peddling"

It is good that people in the public eye do keep returning the public's view to the situation, keep the ball moving rather than allow the first big push to become a token effort and the only big push.

I don't think that breeds should be allowed to disappear, from the point of view of the average person on the street with any intelligence I would hope a step on the road of them getting a dog would be some research, looking up breeds on the internet or a book. 

Knowing the average Beagle is fairly wilful, the average collie high energy, the show cocker very different in activity needs to the working cocker...these are all important things to know when getting a dog that will suit your lifestyle and hopefully helping ensure dogs can stay forever in homes suitable for their needs.

Even first cross crossbreeds, their personality can be anywhere on the spectrum of entirely like one parent breed to being entirely like the other and your individual pup can be anywhere in between.


----------



## FelixFelicis (Jun 4, 2010)

Interesting topic to read, it's nice to see so many dog-knowledgable people on here.

I don't believe dog shows should be banned, I believe they are invaluable for evaluating potential breeding "stock". Yes there is room for improvement, but improvements are slowly being implemented by the KC.

I show, and my breed is a rather moderate one with little exaggeration. He has done reasonably well, and the written critiques are usually accurate in describing the good and bad points of my dog. When he is beaten it is usually by a better dog. Although I realise there is an element of "face judging" in certain breeds. 
My dog has had breed-specific health tests carried out (x-rays and DNA tests, not simple vet checks!) and has been used at stud on a tested bitch - the pups are now 6 months old and so far all healthy!

I do believe health and temperament should come before breed type (looks) when making breeding decisions, but often health and type go hand in hand (good structure = fewer health problems) but I suppose that is quite breed specific. 

When getting a dog I would always go to a breeder who either shows or does SOMETHING with their dogs (preferably several things! I have a very versatile breed) to at least prove the dog is worth breeding from. This is an animal that is going to be a very big part of my life for 12+ years so I want to make sure I get one with the temperament I want and the health to last those 12+ years!
Saying that, I have nothing against crossbreeding if done with sufficient knowledge and a goal in mind. Bobtail Boxers come to mind (a corgi was bred in to introduce the bobtail gene) as well as the current project in Scandinavia to increase the gene pool of the Clumber Spaniel by introducing Cockers. Health testing is still a must!


----------



## corny girl (Aug 30, 2009)

955i said:


> So what about the mass breeding of bulldogs for years despite that all had to be born by ceasarian and the culling of ridgebacks that do not show a ridge despite this being caused by a spinal malformation?
> 
> Kennel club have been a law unto themselves for years and are now backpeddaling due to public disgust at their practices.



Actually the Ridgebacks that don't show the ridge are in fact healthy dogs, the ones with the ridge aren't (the ridge is in fact caused by a form of Spina Bifida :gasp.


----------



## corny girl (Aug 30, 2009)

FelixFelicis said:


> Saying that, I have nothing against crossbreeding if done with sufficient knowledge and a goal in mind. Bobtail Boxers come to mind (a corgi was bred in to introduce the bobtail gene) as well as the current project in Scandinavia to increase the gene pool of the Clumber Spaniel by introducing Cockers. Health testing is still a must!


 Would of had to of been a Corgi from a natural Bobtail line (there are only a few lines with this in). Normally Pem's were docked (unless from a Bobtail line). One of my Corgi's was a Bobtail as his sire threw them.


----------



## Junior13reptilez (Oct 17, 2010)

corny girl said:


> Actually the Ridgebacks that don't show the ridge are in fact healthy dogs, the ones with the ridge aren't (the ridge is in fact caused by a form of Spina Bifida :gasp.


 I'm sure that's what s/he said? Also in my opinion it shouldn't be stopped but as said regulated and certain conformities that need to be met are pretty disgraceful.


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

FelixFelicis said:


> Interesting topic to read, it's nice to see so many dog-knowledgable people on here.
> 
> I don't believe dog shows should be banned, I believe they are invaluable for evaluating potential breeding "stock". Yes there is room for improvement, but improvements are slowly being implemented by the KC.
> 
> ...


A very good post! :2thumb:

What breed do you show? We show Smooth Coat Chihuahuas.


----------



## Hammyhogbun (May 19, 2011)

I dont think it should be banned, just sorted out.

In the subject of showing in general.

Sometimes its the case of who is stewarding, handling the animal. some judges will put up the person rather than the animal. have seen it happen many times. so why breed properly if you know you will win.

Some people try hard and do things right but some people will spoil it for others


----------



## Kezza85 (Sep 6, 2011)

I show and have been around the show ring all my life. However like anything where there is money to be made people will take advantage !! Most show breeders will do extensive research and have all health tests done before even considering breeding they also make very little money if any most will do it to better and make the breed stronger. I have noticed in some breeds (most) it can be very facey ragardless to wether you have the perfect breed specimin if your face doesnt fit you dont stand a chance it doesnt seem to matter whats at the end of the lead... The KC does need to crack down but it does seem these documentry people only pull up one side and then all get tarred with the same brush :rant2:


----------



## Demonique (May 5, 2007)

darren81 said:


> Whats wrong with purebred dogs...
> 
> And thought dog shows have healthy dogs that meet the breed standard.


Meeting the breed standard =/= healthy, just look at bulldogs, they can't give birth naturally and have to have c-sections and they have breathing problems as well

German Shepards can suffer from hip dysplasia, as can Rottweilers

King Charles Spaniels - swollen brains


----------



## feorag (Jul 31, 2007)

Demonique said:


> German Shepards can suffer from hip dysplasia, as can Rottweilers


These certainly aren't the only breeds which suffer from hip dysplasia, but it's the committed breeders who are hip scoring and trying to eradicate this problem.

It's the BYB's who breed willy nilly and never test who are really perpetuating this problem.


----------



## Kare (Mar 9, 2010)

feorag said:


> These certainly aren't the only breeds which suffer from hip dysplasia, but it's the committed breeders who are hip scoring and trying to eradicate this problem.
> 
> It's the BYB's who breed willy nilly and never test who are really perpetuating this problem.


I agree, there are very very few larger breed dogs who do not suffer hip dysplasia. As I said earlier although there is a certain type of shepherd where the roaching was stupid and beyond disabling they make only a tiny proportion of the shepherds out there, one that to be honest could not be shown now anyway. 

The average German shepherd has no more physical issues than the average breed of their weight/height and in fact far less than many. My German shepherd is flat backed and has hip issues, but then she is a 8 year old rescue German shepherd, so I had no choice on going to good parents, she existed and needed a home and is the singly greatest dog alive IMO. If she was a 8 year old Lab from a similar background she would be just as likely to have hip issues AND quite possibly shoulder issues to boot. 

Every breed should be aiming to reduce their breed median hip scores, every bitch and dog should be tested AND score well before the deed is done to make puppies. However thinking that they are unique with hip problems or their hip problems are worse than other breeds is very misleading and can lead to people making poor choices. 

Most large breeds score in the teens, including the GSD, Labs, Golden retrievers, rotties, the doberman scores under 10. The heavy breeds and mastiffs often score above 20. The Afghan, smooth Collie, Flat coated retriever, Irish wolfhound, saluki, Husky and the rough coated Pointer are the only larger breeds I could find that have hipscore averages that score under 10 (many were not listed, for example not sure many Greyhounds are tested, but sure they would also likely be lower end) and there are some breeds that score over 20 that are unexpected Corgis (25) Beagles (23) Bulldogs (45!!!) Clumber spaniel (37) Otterhound (43!!) Pug (21) Russian Black Terriers and sussex spaniels (38.)


----------



## FelixFelicis (Jun 4, 2010)

Zoo-Man said:


> A very good post! :2thumb:
> 
> What breed do you show? We show Smooth Coat Chihuahuas.


Thank you 
I show a Nova Scotia Duck Tolling Retriever, just the one at the moment


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

FelixFelicis said:


> Thank you
> I show a Nova Scotia Duck Tolling Retriever, just the one at the moment


Ooo nice! : victory:


----------



## feorag (Jul 31, 2007)

FelixFelicis said:


> Thank you
> I show a Nova Scotia Duck Tolling Retriever, just the one at the moment


Very nice! I'm embarrassed to admit that I'd never heard of them until I was buying pewter engravings of pedigree dogs to make jewellery and the guy I was buying them from in America had one on his list! :blush:


----------



## Kezza85 (Sep 6, 2011)

They are lovely dogs !! I have a samoyed he is a little :censor: lol x


----------



## budgetbus (Oct 11, 2011)

Anything that brings breeders/owners in contact with a governing body and care officials is good IMO.

Dog shows are a bit of a big hitting red herring, when it comes dog welfare there are far more things to get worried about.


----------



## Kare (Mar 9, 2010)

FelixFelicis said:


> Thank you
> I show a Nova Scotia Duck Tolling Retriever, just the one at the moment


I nearly owned one of those, unfortunately would have been off the breeder recently jailed!!

Even went as far as spending aged on a toller forum (blue user, not red) in the end though most we met were a good size as we were getting a bitch my husband didn't wish to take the risk on the one we got remaining as small as a couple we saw.


----------



## FelixFelicis (Jun 4, 2010)

> I nearly owned one of those, unfortunately would have been off the breeder recently jailed!!
> 
> Even went as far as spending aged on a toller forum (blue user, not red) in the end though most we met were a good size as we were getting a bitch my husband didn't wish to take the risk on the one we got remaining as small as a couple we saw.


Unfortunately not jailed, she still has her dogs and is waiting on the appeal!

I run the red forum  although it is a bit dead at the moment and likely to be shutting down soon.

I see you're in Torbay - my dog sired a litter earlier this year to a bitch in Torbay  the pups are 6 months old and one of them was in his first show on Wednesday (I was there too - 3rd out of 3!).


----------



## Kare (Mar 9, 2010)

My dog went to agility with a bitch called Gem, it wasnt her litter was it?


----------



## FelixFelicis (Jun 4, 2010)

Kare said:


> My dog went to agility with a bitch called Gem, it wasnt her litter was it?


Yes it was! Small world!


----------



## 955i (Aug 17, 2007)

corny girl said:


> Actually the Ridgebacks that don't show the ridge are in fact healthy dogs, the ones with the ridge aren't (the ridge is in fact caused by a form of Spina Bifida :gasp.


That is what I said :2thumb:


----------



## Ksolo (Mar 11, 2009)

I am unsure as I don't like the number of dogs re homed as they don't make the grade for showing to me this is a reason to over breed.


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

Ksolo said:


> I am unsure as I don't like the number of dogs re homed as they don't make the grade for showing to me this is a reason to over breed.


Puppies that are bred for the show ring are graded by their breeder, & pups who aren't quite show quality are just sold to pet homes. The better show quality pups are often kept by the breeder. These puppies aren't 'rehomed' by the breeder.


----------



## Kare (Mar 9, 2010)

Zoo-Man said:


> Puppies that are bred for the show ring are graded by their breeder, & pups who aren't quite show quality are just sold to pet homes. The better show quality pups are often kept by the breeder. These puppies aren't 'rehomed' by the breeder.


That is not really true is it?
There are a number of breeders that keep only what they can breed from or show. 
If their looks when older do not make the grade, the dogs are out. 
If their health scores do not make what is needed for people to pay top amounts for their stud services or pups, they are out.

Just in everything, there are people with different standards on what is right. There are Breeders and show people that love the dog and then showing/breeding in that order, then there are those that love showing and/or breeding to the detriment of their dogs 

I would hope the majority love their dogs and keep them no matter what, but those that do not make the grade for many people out there do not retire in the home their were brought up in, they are left in kennels at the bottom of the garden, sold on or simply handed to a breed rescue if only because at least in the case of the larger breeds there simply is not the room to spare to keep dogs that as far as the breeder sees is not good enough to earn its keep.


----------



## Zoo-Man (Apr 12, 2008)

Kare said:


> That is not really true is it?
> There are a number of breeders that keep only what they can breed from or show.
> If their looks when older do not make the grade, the dogs are out.
> If their health scores do not make what is needed for people to pay top amounts for their stud services or pups, they are out.
> ...


Yes, there are some breeders who will sell older puppies who have not developed as they thought they would. This is quite common. These older puppies are often bought by other people in the breed, or by people who want a young dog that is already house-trained etc. I do not know of many breeders who would see their pups go to a rescue centre, & any that do should be severely disgusted with themselves! Responsible breeders are happy to be responsible for their pups at any point in their life! I am not keen on breeders set-ups that consist of kennel blocks personally.


----------

