Westminster 2011- I'm of two minds

[furtech]

I managed to tune in just in time to catch the herding group! Neat to see some new breeds: the
Icelandic Sheepdog is pretty cute.

I'm becoming a big fan of
Beaucerons : these dogs are spectacular. If someone forced me to own a black-and-tan dog, this would easily be the breed I'd pick. I've liked them ever since seeing a pair at the Pet Expo a few years ago.

Border collie: I'm of two minds on this. There are really two different breeds-- the working dogs and the show dogs ("Barbie-collies"). The dog in the Westminster show was adorable. Very cute. But he didn't have the intensity that I associate with the breed. I saw this especially in his eyes-- the border's eyes were so soft they made R0ndo's eyes look practically steely! Also, the way the dog moved made me think that this squat, short-legged dog couldn't herd a couple of ducks-- let alone Suffolk on a rocky hillside. He looked more like a long-tailed Aussie.

Here's a site advertising working border collie stud dogs. Compare that with a site featuring AKC champion dogs. There are so many differences-- from the short-muzzle look preferred in ACK competitions to the body language of the dogs. The working dogs are tense and alert, head-low and eyes intense. The show dogs are walking nonchalantly upright, almost strolling. Their eyes are soft and sweet, not alert and intense. The show dogs look more like Australian Shepherds, with thick bodies, short legs and short, wide faces. Not surprisingly, the AKC standard was written by someone who neither bred border collies nor participated in herding: the breed -standard- was written by them based how they thought--logically--the dog should look and move to run around chasing sheep. Wow.

Some of the problems are obvious: here is video of the border collie group judging. Look at how the dogs are allowed to move. Now compare this to the movements of a good working border collie. How in the -world- can you judge the health and ability of a working dog merely by watching them prance around a ring!? That would be like giving grades to students by feeling their head and watching them read a book.

I grabbed some pics off the web to illustrate this:


And this is where I end up all over the field on this: I like watching dog shows. AKC-type dogs are -much- better for the average person than real working dogs. And yet I'm frustrated-- probably because the breeds I like (mostly working/sporting breeds) are (IMO) judged unfairly. If the AKC just called their competitions "Beauty Shows" I would have no problem (because that's what they are). Cutest dog wins. Or some such. But to judge working breeds against toy and companion breeds in a situation and under criteria that clearly favors the non-working dogs is unfair--both to the dogs in the show and to the breed in general. This is especially aggravating when the AKC touts their "preserving the breeds" agenda.

I have the same mixed feeling when it comes to the Siberian Husky: I love the show dogs and the working dogs. I think the show dog are adorable, and fine for us city-folk. But the AKC and the way it's run is -not- preserving the breed. Quite the opposite. (Note: this isn't limited to these two breeds-- this criticism is talked about amongst many of the working/sporting breeders and fanciers.)

Comments

[brerandalopex.livejournal.com]

[Brer] The AKC itself actually has limited input into much of what you are talking about here. The standards are largely set by the breed parent club, with the AKC moderating and ratifying them to a certain extent.

Ultimately even the breed standard is hopelessly broad when it comes down to selecting winners and losers. Judges base decisions on ephemera to narrow it down to an individual, and such things are prone to fads. If a few judges start picking out stockier collies rather than rangy ones, other judges notice and start doing the same. Breeders notice THAT and start breeding for that. The breed shifts a little. Then they are ALL stocky and judges find something else to focus on. It shifts again...

Ultimately, the power lies with the parent clubs to try and broaden the spectrum. I think in the last 10 years more and more of the clubs behind active, purpose-bred breeds are paying closer attention to encouraging well-rounded individuals. It's not going to undo so many years of damage overnight, but a lot of them have the right idea.

[furtech.livejournal.com]

Right-- but in the case of the border collie, the herding clubs resisted assimilation (see above, "The Dog Wars"). So the AKC had one of their own create the standard. This person neither bred nor trialed border collies (hence the standard that has turned them into long-tailed Australian Shepherds). The judges have their directives and can be advised on certain traits (or they stop being asked to judged and few will risk the loss of that prestigious and powerful job).

My beef is specifically with the working breeds (including the herders and sporting and hunting breeds). Based on what is winning, there is an argument that looks are winning out over function.

And there is still the blind-eye wrt health and genetic problems.

[brerandalopex.livejournal.com]

[Brer] Yeah all of the above is one of the reasons I lost interest in conformation showing. The other being that unless you invest MASSIVE amounts of time in studying what specific individual judges are looking for and how to adapt your presentation to their eye, you'll never win reliably in a breed like huskies... I don't have time for a fourth or fifth career.

Looks are definitely winning out over function though, that I will agree. Huskies have been less polluted than some breeds, thanks mostly to a parent club that never suffered the schism that border collies did. Oh there is still great variation in AKC registered husky lines that fall between "pulling" and "show" styles -- but for the most part pullers can still show and showers can still pull.

You won't win sledding races with a team of all pure Siberian husky stock anyway. It's more about assembling a bunch of individual dogs of varied strengths to make a team that is the most adaptable over the long haul.

[furtech.livejournal.com]

The extreme lengths that some will go to win is at the heart of a lot of problems in any competition these days. As you've discovered, the biggest winners in the dog world have owners who are willing to spend $$$ and time to achieve this-- to a eye-popping extreme. I know of some owners who literally spend their whole lives traveling to show after show, driving all over the US to get their dog finished (or just to accumulate wins). This isn't limited to conformation, too: agility, obedience and any of the competitions that one can "win" have similar fanatics. It's hard for the average fancier to compete. Still, at the individual club level, at least, it can be a lot of fun (if you don't take it TOO seriously).

I don't know about other clubs, but the two Siberian clubs I'm familiar with seem to have more fun than other breed clubs: sled pulling and carting, snow trips, etc. The Bay Area Siberian Husky Club (BASH) even used to run a fun-match that was run exactly like a real show-- but with the open friendliness of a fun-match. (Unfortunately, it was -so- well run that some people started taking it too seriously and a rift formed in the club, essentially ending the event from what I've heard. So it goes.)

Mushing: the same problem of extremism-to-win applies. That intensity has led to some unfortunate and unpleasant things occurring in the sport. And as with the above: despite the downsides and negatives, I still love watching them!