World's First Digital Dog News

 

THE PROOF IS IN THE PUDDING

When AKC judges are applying for new breeds they are required to have participated in various “enriching” activities.  But, what are the qualifications of AKC Reps who judge the judges or those who determine who is qualified to judge dogs?

June 2006

Mr. Edward Martin, AKC Judge, Guest Columnist

No one at AKC takes an applicant’s word for anything. Not only do they have to produce validated paper work signed by others such as mentors, judges, and other dog officials but also they must submit pictures of dogs that have won at shows to prove the claims of ownership. This has happened to me, probably to others but we never know what will be required since the “rules” change on an individual basis. You must send Registration papers for dogs, numbers of litters produced in each breed, names of dogs that were champions that you have bred or handled and other paper work that can be validated by AKC’s master computer.

Claims to have been in attendance at seminars, Judges Breed Study Groups or at National Specialties are not accepted just on the Judges sworn testimony.  Certificates must be submitted to receive credit. Applicants must sign those papers which become legal documents and can be used to discipline said judge should an error be detected.

Anyone who thinks this is an exaggeration should talk to some of the individuals who have run afoul of the governing agency. We have been reading a great deal of information about a growing number of judges who have been suspended or fined for just saying the wrong thing.

This makes one wonder how the fancy is to check on the qualifications of those who hold the power and privilege of adjudicating over the judges?  Very little facts are stated when new people are hired or promoted to positions of authority in the judging department.  Articles written in some magazines congratulate new reps and appointees but only state generalities of their qualifications to observe judges as they make selections in the dog show rings.

We are told that they are very qualified and are breed specialists who have many years of experience as handlers or breeders.  We are led to believe most have bred many champions and finished many champions that also produced many champions.  It would be very interesting to know in which of the over 150 breeds these folks actually have had those many years of “hands on” experience.  What all-breed, parent or specialty clubs have they served and in what capacity?

It is a simple matter to report that one has been a breeder for many years.  Most successful breeders are proud of the bloodline that they worked so hard for many years to develop and to produce winners.  This is one’s heritage.

Professional handlers are proud of the dogs that they have shown to national fame with many BIS and group wins.  Top dogs are well remembered by the fancy and so are their owners and handlers.  This would be the most convincing proof of all!!!

Anyone can say how much they have accomplished but the proof is in the pudding. Shouldn’t it be pudding out there for all to read and admire?  For a breeder judge applicant this is all required information – unless I’m wrong and it may not be required of all applicants.

We have many fine AKC reps who give their all weekend after weekend and keep the shows running effectively and efficiently.  Many of them help exhibitors and judges with advice and constructive criticism.  Then there are a few others.

Let’s just leave it at that.  Enuff said.

TheDogPress.com EST 2002 © 0606

Greenlight to free, no-strings, no-forms, privacy-protected subscription

just enter your email address and it's done! We never share or sell email addresses.