When the WWW took off in 1998
TheDogPlace, our affiliate, became the world's largest,
and most
comprehensive dog site. It also set an internet standard for writer
credentials & I.D.
Today it is even more important to know who you are reading
so please,
Meet The
The internet is power
to
the people.
The strength of
The Dog Press
is involved readers so flex your muscles and let us hear from
you! Send
Us Your News & Views
If published you win a
$50.00
certificate good on any NetPlaces
site and
qualify for
$100.00 CASH
and
The Dog Press Journalists
Award
TBA
in November
the INSIDE story
$19 per YEAR
gets
you to the rest of the news, Archives, Research tools and straight talk you simply can't
get anywhere else, Click the NewsDog NOW!
TheDogPlace is
the OLDEST and the LARGEST dog site in the world.
Check it out now
Columns
Section -
No Margins. No Limits. No Kidding.
Ethics
- AKC teaching Judges How To Judge
Not disciplining a GREAT Judge, Fred
Lanting
AKC bangs yet
another nail into the board that keeps me from wanting to go
into judging dog breeds for them; and I would be a natural,
sorry, that's true, as conceited as that may read. I grew up in
AKC shows, I work with dogs daily (I have all my life) and the
AKC NEVER gave me a lesson about pure-bred dogs that I didn't
pay for myself in so many, many ways. To think the AKC staff has
the audacity to state that the AKC spends too much money in
educating judges to PERMIT them to judge the same event or
breeds other places is absurd from my experience. The earnest
judges actually putting more time and money to educate
themselves than the AKC probably spend to educate ten judges.
Perhaps the AKC staff's opinion formed, may very well have been
from observing the most non-talented, non-motivated judges? I
don't even know those people personally.
I have since really enjoyed studying Fred Lanting's intelligent
interpretations of many dog world issues and see that with this
recently reported action by the AKC "staff" concerning an IN THE
OPEN note posted, that it seems that he has been unfairly
singled out. Fred Lanting is well-rounded, a world-studied dog
man. This note placed on a table for possible contact to set-up
an interested party can not for a moment compare to some type of
inappropriate action that AKC deems against the best interest of
pure-bred dogs. In an instant after reading that information
tonight, I thought of how much junk I have had to witness that
the AKC Reps decide is no big deal while it occurs behind the
scenes or even in the open - directly to THE DOGS - AT THE
SHOWS!!! . . . . I can only plead that it is time to focus on
the real problem please.
AKC should send me in as a spy for just a month and I could blow
a huge hole in the entire "what is permitted to go on and what
is really not a problem" problem. Professional handlers should
become a thing of the past if the dog show world is to thrive
again and retired professional handlers as AKC representatives
should NEVER ever be hired in the future by AKC to be "STAFF".
That is one of the biggest problems AKC is creating for itself.
And who am I to know any of this? I'm not about sour grapes or
about how much money things cost. I have never been a
professional handler, to do that job properly takes 2 x more
energy than I have at my personal disposal. I have hired and
worked with top handlers. I have seen too much perhaps because I
am a very aware person. I have bred some great winners/producers
and then dove far away because it was worse achieving a
childhood goal in AKC with what I witnessed than I ever could
have been imagined – especially what I witnessed done for and to
the dogs so they would have a better chance at winning under
judges that should have excused dogs after what they witnessed
exactly what was obviously done to them.
Only once (oh, that I witnessed) was something done like this to
a beautifully-trained, lovely moving bitch I owned. In the Open
Bitch class she zig-zagged while gaiting as though she was drunk
and she was with a top handler. When I turned it into the
National's show committee, the word came back that the handler
traveled with so many dogs, he had no choice but to "medicate"
many of them for safety reasons! That was the official word.
Nothing was done because the handler just stood with arms on
hips and said to me, "Prove it."
That was a dream wrecker. It was the outlandish things I saw
done to the dogs, not the fact that I couldn't hire good judges
because they had assignments in other registries, that is why
intelligent people want something else. You want to really focus
on the problem of people jumping ship - start with the rules
already in place and enforce them.
I currently am someone staying an arm-lengths away because the
entire thing is stinking so badly... I know the game needs the
best foundation of good breeders, but why at my sacrifice and
with the recent decrees from the AKC STAFF to limit judging and
then this with Fred Lanting. I am shaking my head. I try to play
AKC now and again; after 2 decades on and then another off...
and with the Dog Show Rules not enforced, it just doesn't
promote good sportsmanship in my breed (Poodles). Rules, I ask,
what rules? So, because I like a fair playing field, it is
refreshing to read Lanting's accounts in his many articles of
other countries' and those registries thoroughness in judging;
all round dogs promoted, those with good structure of good
bone/ligaments, good teeth and good temperament celebrated.
These features listed would be held important to me if I were a
dog!
My husband and I WANT our efforts in dog breeding judged by the
highest level. Yes, we have thought of moving to another country
for this very reason. We consider a cap on the inbreeding
percentage and mandatory health screenings passed to be an
excellent set of criteria not just as a goal but as a
prerequisite for parent clubs to achieve someday in leading
their breeders to produce the best dogs for the future. To us,
it is short-sighted not to consider some of these
"OUT-OF-THE-BOX" ideas.
Fred Lanting just helps people look and continue to think
out-of-the-box and it seems that the AKC wants everyone to stay
in their solid-sided box. "I think, therefore I am" is what I
think about when I think of Fred Lanting. You can't expect
anyone that has met Fred Lanting as a fellow breeder to believe
that he has done anything against pure-bred dogs. Quite the
opposite. Those of us speaking out about the need for the
precious new blood for breeds or for the need to breed
well-constructed, proven dogs are a very good goal for the dogs.
I will be happy to support Fred Lanting for all that he has done
for pure-bred dogs and because he is one of the true gentlemen I
have met in over 30 years of showing dogs very competitively.
AKC
Ethics
teaches Judges How To Judge but loses Judges. Julie Borst Reed asks Where's the logic?
Crime and Punishment
Some heard it on the chats. Insiders
heard one side or the other from AKC or Fred. But when "Addamo
Asks" she always gives you the straight story. A judge gets a
lifetime sentence. Was it fair or was it punishment?
The Purloined Poodle,
the WKC Group winner, some would say it
also reflects a
judge "trafficking in dogs" but AKC did nothing to the
judge.