Watching the Westminster dog show last night was yet another chance to push myself deeper into despair. I admit I find it hard to care very much that the Toy group has allowed it's breeds morphology to approach the absurd; they always were and are. A group that was, to put it kindly, bred to 'amuse' and functionally attract fleas from aristocracy.
But the Sporting group? I've already commented on the drivel announcers make regarding the various breeds to give them a unique character (why else would they be a 'breed'); a spiel taken directly from a book "breed standards". Last night was a particularly low point to me-only ONE of the entire Sporting group was commented as having any title other than "CH", and that was a single JH (junior hunter)-the entry point in hunt test criteria.*
With some sincerity I ask-should there be a class action suit against the AKC to force them to guarantee that a breed not only PHYSICALLY conforms to a stated standard, but FUNCTIONALLY as well? If function simply doesn't matter, have the announcer say:
*further research leads me to note:
Irish R/W setter- JH (but not noted in the commentary)
American Water Spaniel - JH (ditto)
Vizla - JH (ditto)
AND
Wirehair Pointing Griffon MH - (ditto-but are you kidding me?!?!? This dog has been judged to perform at the highest level, and no comment on that? If you want to make use of the judging for hunt tests and have them matter for the judging of conformation-add points for each level of hunt test and make JH a minimum for entry)
I'll get off my soapbox...for now. It takes only seeing a few dachshunds in wheelchairs because someone decided the breed should have legs too short and backs too long before you get sick of it.
But the Sporting group? I've already commented on the drivel announcers make regarding the various breeds to give them a unique character (why else would they be a 'breed'); a spiel taken directly from a book "breed standards". Last night was a particularly low point to me-only ONE of the entire Sporting group was commented as having any title other than "CH", and that was a single JH (junior hunter)-the entry point in hunt test criteria.*
With some sincerity I ask-should there be a class action suit against the AKC to force them to guarantee that a breed not only PHYSICALLY conforms to a stated standard, but FUNCTIONALLY as well? If function simply doesn't matter, have the announcer say:
Ideal height at the shoulder for dogs is 20 inches; for bitches, it is 19 inches. Those more than one inch under or over the breed ideal are to be faulted. A 20 inch dog, well-proportioned and in good condition, will weigh approximately 50 pounds; a 19 inch bitch will weigh approximately 40 pounds. The length of the body (measured from point of shoulder to point of buttocks) is slightly greater than the height at the withers. The dog too long in body, especially when long in the loin, tires easily and lacks the compact outline characteristic of the breed. A dog too short in body for the length of his legs, a condition which destroys balance and restricts gait, is equally undesirable. A Springer with correct substance appears well-knit and sturdy with good bone, however, he is never coarse or ponderous.
*further research leads me to note:
Irish R/W setter- JH (but not noted in the commentary)
American Water Spaniel - JH (ditto)
Vizla - JH (ditto)
AND
Wirehair Pointing Griffon MH - (ditto-but are you kidding me?!?!? This dog has been judged to perform at the highest level, and no comment on that? If you want to make use of the judging for hunt tests and have them matter for the judging of conformation-add points for each level of hunt test and make JH a minimum for entry)
I'll get off my soapbox...for now. It takes only seeing a few dachshunds in wheelchairs because someone decided the breed should have legs too short and backs too long before you get sick of it.
Comments
Post a Comment