May 2008

Visitors to the Kennel Club, or to its various public events such as Crufts, often ask me as Chairman, “What's your biggest current concern for the world  of dogs?” My answer is simple. “The trend towards over-exaggeration in some of our breeds – a trend which we have been trying to reduce for several years.”

 You may well ask what brings me to make that comment? Again the answer is simple. As I sit at the group ringside at Crufts in the presence of our many dog-loving guests – all of whom have a great interest in dogs but not all of whom show dogs - I can’t help looking at some of the breeds brought into the ring and wondering just where they are heading in terms of exaggeration? Most breeds are fine, but there are a few where excess has taken over. Whether this exaggeration is of presentation, of coat volume, of obesity masquerading as body substance, of over-angulation, of shortness of muzzle, eye formation or excess skin - it all shows that we have allowed some breeds to stray a very long way from their original purpose.

Although we have been dealing with this issue for some years now, the Kennel Club itself, and those of us who are enthusiastic about ‘normal’ breeds, must do more to persuade all judges, breeders and exhibitors to tackle these issues and much more to eliminate the worst excesses. If we don’t, I am sure that there will be people other than us who will come along and do it for us. Outsiders will take action to force a change of ways.

Some breeds, a minority of course, possess so much coat that it is simply impossible for them to be living the normal life that a dog should expect to live. Can that be right and can it be justified? I think not. In many cases this excessive coat development prevents the dog from taking adequate exercise.

Other breeds in the show ring, again only the minority, are being allowed to become more and more obese with the excuse that the breed standard asks for them to have ‘substance’ or be ‘thick set’, ‘strongly built’ or ‘barrel ribbed’. Equally the requirement for ‘a certain amount of loose skin’ is being construed in certain breeds as a reason for encouraging masses of loose skin. This, in the end, can create discomfort for the dog at best and serious skin problems at worst.  Eye formation and shortness of muzzle are other very obvious and major areas of concern which need to be tackled seriously by both judges and breeders. Again this applies only to a few breeds – not by any means to the majority of purebred dogs. And finally the original working aspects of some breeds have been seriously impaired by over-angulation of hindquarters. They are now seldom used by the agencies which at one time depended on them so much as working dogs.   

Certainly some breeders and some clubs are working hard to alter things but there is still a long way to go. There are still too many dyed-in-the-wool enthusiasts who simply cannot bring themselves to see that ‘more’ of a certain trait is not always ‘better’ when it comes to breeding dogs. How can we get breeders and judges in this minority of breeds to see that they are potentially heading for disaster? How can we persuade them that in so doing they are running the risk of jeopardising the whole future of the hobby that so many of us enjoy – breeding and showing dogs?

Perhaps the recognition that almost all breeds were originally developed with a purpose in mind, would help judges and breeders to get their priorities sorted out. The need for dogs to be fit for the function they were originally intended to perform, ought to be uppermost in everyone’s mind. All dogs should be fit for purpose. Even if that purpose is solely to be a pet, all should be able to breathe and walk freely. Insignificant ‘fripperies’ which simply ‘look good’, or arise as a result of fashion, should be given less importance than the real requirements of a breed.  Only one breed has in its standard faults clause the requirement that those faults, as well as being assessed in relation to their degree and effect on the dog’s health and welfare, must also be assessed in relation to the effect of such faults on the dog’s ‘ability to work’.  Maybe more breed standards should contain those words and maybe more breeders and judges should start asking themselves whether they are paying enough attention to fitness for original function. Some of the worst excesses we currently see in the show world might then be curbed.

The next time you sit down to watch certain groups being judged, just ask yourself what you would make of what you see in the ring, if you were an ordinary member of the public at large. Would you understand it? Would you think it made sense? A fellow countryman of mine once wrote

“Oh wad some Pow’r the giftie gie us
To see oursels as others see us!
It wad frae mony a blunder free us,
And foolish notion.”

How true! That sentiment should, in my view, be uppermost in the minds of all of us involved in judging, breeding and exhibiting pedigree dogs.

Ronnie Irving
Kennel Club Chairman
March 25, 2008.

Date:

Categories:

 

This article has been read 327 times.