Under the new conflict policy, AKC is only "permitting" their “approved” judges (obedience judges, conformation judges, Beagle trial judges, etc.) to judge dog sports in other organizations where they deem it proper. 

 Effective 1/1/07, with the new AKC Conflict Policy,  these judges can not judge breeds they are AKC approved for in any other organizations .  

AKC says THEY spent all the money on judges' education; judges are spread thin for events; and generally the AKC is being ripped off of judges? That is outlandish, and needs further examination as to the true, underlying push for this (5/12/06) policy: http://www.akc.org/news/index.cfm?article_id=2885.  For starters, they could approve fewer AKC shows and trials as the first step if there is indeed a shortage of judges, until more judges are approved, if they can be found.

Julie Borst Reed / TheDogPress © August 2006 - Basically the new policy, as I read it, means any dog sport that started with grassroots in a registry other than AKC may be exempt. One can't ignore that EVENTS directory BOOK that arrives each month as part of the Gazette - AKC has now benefited greatly from all those other non-AKC dog sports - so have the dogs - so have the judges.
 
If a dog sport was already offered by AKC and is then offered by another organization (conformation, obedience, retriever trials, "beagling", etc.) then effective 1/1/07, AKC is NOT going to permit judges approved for that event to judge it at any venue other than AKC. That isn't only outrageous and not far-thinking, but most likely will get the AKC into court over unfair practices. The large, diverse quantity of (legal) activities offered in the wide world of the sport of dogs is all-encompassing, educational at every turn and that benefit is truly not limited to AKC events.
 
This new policy can not be deemed in the best interest of pure-bred dogs, can it? It best profits AKC show committees and the AKC corporation as a band-aid for now, but it’s not in the best interest overall for the sport. Certainly a grandfather clause also would have been more fair too, for the judges it will affect. There is no way this should fly.
 
Events held by the following organizations may still (under new policy set for 1/1/07) continue to hire AKC judges approved for that dog sport.

·  American Sighthound Field Association Coursing Events
·  American Working Terrier Association Earthdog Events
·  American Herding Breed Association Events
·  North American Versatility Dog Association Pointing Breed Hunting Tests
·  American Field Pointing Breed Field Trials
·  United Kennel Club Coonhound Events
·  Professional Kennel Club Coonhound Events
·  To any of the various organizations sponsoring Agility Trials

I would add future organizations or sports that are popular and may be exempt today or tomorrow:

·  UKC Rat Terrier Races
·  Weight Pulling
·  Water Rescue Trials
·  Carting
·  Dock Diving, etc.

Any of that could change at the stroke of a pen - just like this policy change is set to begin Jan 1, 2007 because of "STAFF recommendation."
 
Other Organizations' dog sports could be added as exempt by announcement from AKC - but many of us realize this slate of "Others" could be wiped out in a blink too. The fancy is being dictated to concerning the long standing ability of its judges to be available where they are most wanted and or where they most prefer to judge. That preference by judges could be in or out of the AKC domain on any weekend. Many judges have put in their time, money and study to be approved to judge at more than one organization's events. That effort of time, money and study by those people, produces a much more well-rounded judge from my experience.
 
How can these hard-working judges now be told it is one organization for a particular dog sport, only or you are out. I smell a law suit. . . . Additionally, this recent announcement from AKC will affect those that own or have great interest in a registry other than AKC. That is going to affect fewer people, but why in the world should AKC be able to dictate someone's interest in legal dog sports outside the AKC? These new policies are not only unfair; they have the potential to adversely affect the quality of judges in the long run. All exhibitors will be affected. It certainly can not be predicted to a tee what will occur in the future, but dictating a policy change mid-stream in someone's career as a judge is not going to be taken lightly and many good judges will not go without a fight.  AKC must have good insurance for law suits. It would only be under a big umbrella of protection that the AKC Board would try something like this against it's very own judges.
 
Sooo, from my view, if this policy is not revoked through suit, that means the other registries should tweak their events to make them somewhat different and call them something a lot different - My suggestion off the top of my head (and a long-standing dream), is that the new, other USED-TO-BE conformation shows call it something like Stock Proving or Lead Judging (those are instant name suggestions - better names certainly would prevail - think of a concept someone, quickly!)
 
The new game should require:

·  preliminary health clearances on exhibits over 1 year of age and complete health clearances on sire and dam of any puppy in competition (to be determined by each breed’s parent club, or by a basic set of clearances if no parent club exists see CHIC http://www.caninehealthinfo.org/)

·  require judges to give oral reasons for placements,

·  keep shows to a limited number that would further prove titlists worthy

·  scan dog’s microchips as armbands are checked when dogs enter ring.

·  Perhaps add that the dog must have a performance title to achieve the coveted recognition of that new sport if the breed had ANY basis in helping man - prove that breed specific ability.

THAT would certainly be a new dog sport and certainly be different from anything the AKC is entertaining for it's conformation shows in 2006 or 2007. That's a challenge to excellence for AKC! That would be a welcome policy change - AKC Board, why don't you race to capture that venue of dog sport, hurry, or how about inventing Total Dog Competitions? Uh oh, other people have already put in hard work to create that . . . Well, dreaming is free . . . .
 
Obedience enthusiasts will have to comment further to give an overview of what they reason about this policy; I haven't competed in obedience since the Seventies and would not realize the depth of impact this new policy may have on that sport, hopefully some aspect of this new policy is beneficial. To the obedience folks, looking at the long list of judges approved, I don't see why you should be short of judges; POPULAR judges, maybe. Popular judges that are in demand in many organizations are hard to book FOR A GOOD REASON. Usually they officiate in more organizations for that particular sport than just AKC and that is what has helped them to become so proficient. Well, perhaps it is time to start giving the other, less popular AKC judges AKC assignments so they may become better via experience and may also become better sought. That goes for all the dog sport.
 
One last set of questions, did the AKC member CLUBS, through their delegates, VOTE on this new policy? No, this is a staff recommendation. A field rep staff, reportedly made up mostly of retired professional handlers which in turn take care of professional handlers. I wonder if the staff field reps were replaced with retired judges if this judges restriction to begin 1/1/07 would have played out anywhere close to as it has to this point? This is still to be discussed at the next AKC board meeting.

Write letters if you care!

Handy links For Julie Borst Reed: ______________