ADSJ Statement – Regarding the Judging Approval Process

by Dr. Gerard C. Penta

You know where the ADSJ stands regarding the current judging approval process. This virtual give-away program undermines the credibility of all those conscientious judges who have spent most of their adult lives preparing themselves to judge the breeds for which they are now approved. The current approval process is also an affront to the parent clubs as it flies in the face of their stated com- mitment to protect and preserve their breeds. Because of this, the silence of the parent clubs regarding the way judges are now approved to judge their breeds is puzzling. One wonders if they fully realize the probable impact of such low judging approval standards on their breeds. As to all-breed clubs, it may be understandable, yet nonetheless disturbing, that many all-breed clubs seem to welcome this open-door policy as it promises to provide more multiple group judges to cover their smaller shows, to say nothing of the downward pressure it will bring to bear on judging fees. Parent clubs, on the other hand, have different priorities having to do with the welfare and ad- vancement of a single breed. The current approval process clearly dismisses such concerns as it rushes to pursue quantity over quality.

We have been arguing against this approval process since it was a proposal and well before it was adopted by the AKC board. At issue is the lack of demonstrated breed knowledge and at least some ability to sort out the quality dogs from a class of average and poor specimens.

Now the AKC board has come up with the Canine College, which to my recollection, was an idea first suggested many years ago by the late all-breed judge, Denny Kodner. It could have been a great idea, but unfortunately in its present form it is not. Frankly, I am weary of having to criticize so much of what the AKC board comes up with regarding judges and judging. But if criticism is the first step toward improvement, at least I can hope my concerns will, one day, be seen as a contribution to a better end result. Criticism is necessary for the clarification of any problem.

The problem here is the granting of judging approvals by way of an educational format that lacks any requirement of hands-on experience, breed knowledge or judging compe- tency. Using the Canine College course and some other pas- sive, spectator-type experiences, a candidate can accumulate a sufficient number of CEUs to be approved to judge a breed without ever having laid a hand on a representative of the breed. In breed seminars all around the country seminars are required to have a couple of live examples of the breed for atten- dees to examine. Better still is the pairing of seminar learning with a hands-on workshop on the breed where a number of dogs are examined, moved, critiqued and ranked. This greatly rein- forces the classroom learning and is a far cry from sitting in your armchair watching a two-dimensional presentation on a breed.

Short URL: http://caninechronicle.com/?p=128688

Posted by Alex on Jul 19 2017. Filed under Current Articles, Featured. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.