From The Publisher

Click here to read the complete article

10 – September, 2014

By Tom Grabe

The hot topic around the rings these days seems to be, as usual, the quality of judging. Big surprise, huh? Unfortunately, this subject has been beaten to death for longer than I have been alive and it seems to be a problem that just won’t go away. However, the lack of quality judging seems to have become a bigger problem as of late. I have written before about some of the problems facing judges, the judges department and, most importantly, exhibitors. I am hesitant to tackle the subject again at the risk of just repeating my and others’ ideas, but here I go again. As I see it, there are several problems that mightily contribute to poor adjudication in the ring. No, it’s not the heavy promotion of dogs; it’s not handlers and dogs chasing judges around the country; and it’s not the lack of quality stock supplied by exhibitors. Those are all factors that can be controlled by the judge in the ring. They don’t have to point at the heavily-promoted dog; they don’t have to put up a dog or handler that chases them from show to show; and they can easily withhold ribbons from sub-par specimens. The problems faced by today’s judges are myriad. First, for some judging has become an occupation and important source of primary or secondary income. This has led to a number of judges acquiring breeds at lightning speed in the hopes of becoming a multiple group or all-round judge. Unfortunately, the acquisition of these breeds is motivated by the desire to judge more dog shows, not to become proficient in said breeds or to protect the breeds according to their standard. Consequently, many people are passing judgement on breeds they know little about and they have little interest in knowing about them. This is a cause of major concern. Another problem is the proliferation of dog shows. Frankly, there are too many shows. This has led to a decline in entries at most shows across the country. The shortage of entries has forced many kennel clubs to hire multiple group judges for their shows. These judges are able to handle a diverse group of breeds and groups while keeping travel costs (a large part of the cost of judging) at a minimum. Unfortunately, this has resulted in many judges who have several breeds or a single group being wholly ignored by show chairmen trying to break even or make a profit. The result of this dilemma is that the same judges are judging most shows across the country. Consequently, we get the same opinions week-in and week-out. If this continues over the next century, you will see the gene pools of many breeds begin to weaken as a few dominant lines fill the pedigrees of most breeds. There are many other problems facing AKC shows and those who adjudicate them. Those mentioned are only the tip of the iceberg, but page space does not allow in-depth discussion of any or all. The bottom line is that judging has become, in some cases, a means of income as well as a social respite for those involved. For every person that enters the ring to truly look at breeding stock with the intent of being a guardian of the standard, there is one who comes to the show to get a check and see their friends. Judging is hard work, there is no doubt. However, judges are the keepers of our sport; they are responsible for keeping breeders and exhibitors on the right track. It’s not up to the handlers, it’s not up to the breeders, it’s not up to the magazines, it’s up to you, the judges. Editor’s Note: The article about Ed Sayres on page 274 of the August issue had misspellings of Mr. Sayres name. The proper spelling is Sayres, not Sayers. Our apologlies for this error.

Short URL: http://caninechronicle.com/?p=58521

Posted by ralbee on Sep 17 2014. Filed under Current Articles, Editorial. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.