WHO MAKES A DOG SHOW WORK?
Addamo asks in Part two, AKC Field Rep duties, AKC does the stud book, Parent Club purpose, etc.
June 2006
Gini Addamo, Dog Show Reporter
MThis column is a continuation of my last
article regarding who makes a dog show work. I start here with Field
Representatives (FRs) and what their job description is and ask if they are
doing their job. In addition, they now have the power to take breeds away from
judges that receive three unsatisfactory evaluations from more than one FR. What
follows is the job description for the AKC Field Rep. that I obtained from the
AKC.
“The Conformation Field Representative
serves as the “eyes and ears” of the office staff and Board of Directors by
providing factual, first-hand information regarding conduct of dog shows, rule
and policy compliance by dog clubs, and observations of judges' abilities."
"The Rep provides show committees,
exhibitors, breeders, judges, and novices with information regarding rules,
regulations, policies and procedures; and assists in judges’ education and the
judges’ approval process."
"As you might expect, the position requires extensive knowledge of AKC rules and
programs, typically acquired through extensive experience (as a dog show judge,
exhibitor, and/or handler) with all-breed and specialty clubs, including service
as show chairperson."
"Customer service skills are crucial as
is the ability to travel extensively."
"Basically the FR is a resource and
conduit to the whole sport: from top to bottom and from bottom to top. The FR
disseminates information and policies and assists in implementing on an as
needed basis."
"An important part of the FR
responsibilities is observing judges. Judges are critiqued and mentored with
respect to proper and timely procedure and with respect to how well their
selections conform to the standard for breeds evaluated. FR observations and
evaluations would include all aspects of breed specific characteristics and
unique grooming requirements.”
This is a cushy job and very coveted
because it comes with many perks. As noted above, part of the job of the FR is
to observe judges’ abilities. Why isn’t the judge that puts up an OES, for
example, that has its coat teased, written up by the FR? The breed standard for
the OES states that, “Neither the natural outline nor the natural texture of the
coat may be changed by any artificial means except that the feet and rear may be
trimmed for cleanliness.” Is teasing natural? Or how about the Golden Retriever
standard that states, “Untrimmed natural rough;…” Further it states, “Feet may
be trimmed and stray hairs neatened, but the natural appearance of coat or
outline should not be altered by cutting or clipping.” Do you think if the FRs
started writing judges up for putting up dogs that are over groomed that the
judges would get the idea and then ultimately the exhibitor? It’s just a
thought.
After the FR., we have the AKC, created
to be the breed registry. The responsibility of the AKC was to protect and
maintain the studbook. I say “was” because based on the documented and rampant
studbook fraud that the AKC has allowed to stand, there is no integrity. The AKC
has made itself useless. Why do we continue to feed the monster? The AKC has the
audacity to create a “Code of Sportsmanship” and suggest that exhibitors and
breeders abide by it while they sit back and collect our money and still allow
stud book fraud to stand even in the face of scientific evidence. Seriously, who
needs the AKC? They have not done their job; they have let ALL of us down.
Last, the most hurtful and the hardest to
understand is the parent club who abandons its sole purpose of protecting its
breed against people who bring harm to it. For example, The Samoyed Club of
America received charges against a member in August of 2005. The charges were
breeding a dysplastic bitch (clearly a violation of the Code of Ethics), filing
a false litter registration, defrauding the public and lying to an AKC Rep. The
Constitution states that the Board is to “first” consider the charges and if
proven, would the charges be considered prejudicial to the breed or the club. If
the answer was yes they were to set a date for a hearing to hear the evidence.
The Samoyed Club of America refused to
simply consider the charges for seven months (March 2006). I do not think it was
coincidence that the club member who faced charges allowed her membership to
lapse therefore giving the Board the excuse not to consider the charges due to
lack of jurisdiction. How convenient for the snake that was allowed to slither
away.
There are parent clubs who are
deliberately undermining their own breed standards (another violation of club
constitutions) at breed seminars by deliberately teaching what is contrary to
the breed standard. I heard that one board member from a club stated, that since
no one had never bred it, it does not exist. In this case the “it” is proper
shoulder angulation. If parent clubs are not willing to protect our breeds, is
there any hope?
What happened to loving our dogs, but more importantly honoring and respecting
the history and traditions of our breeds? If the AKC and the Parent Clubs are
not protecting our breeds, who is?
Perhaps we should eliminate the AKC all
together. Who needs them? They should be fired for derelict of duty anyway. The
theory that wanting to eliminate the AKC means that you must not believe in the
sport of dogs could not be further from the truth. To the contrary, believing in
purebred dogs is precisely the reason to eliminate the AKC. (The AKC doesn’t
have to be the only game in town and nor is it.) The AKC’s behavior explicitly
demonstrates their lack of belief in the sport of purebred dogs. Actions speak
louder than words. The breeders that truly care about their breeds did not
corrupt the studbook or worse allow the fraud to stand when faced with
irrefutable evidence!
Since
we really don’t know if pedigree fraud has affected us directly, who needs
pedigrees? Why don’t we just breed “show dogs” (forget the concept of exhibiting
breeding stock) and with no holds barred as far as what you can do to the “show
dog.” Superintendents could be hired to do the paperwork and the clubs will
still get their money to hold more shows. Second thought, maybe there could be
a “breeding stock” class for the serious breeder. Who should maintain that
registry? This could be a huge opportunity for another registry. It’s just a
thought…
Related Article:
In Case You Missed Part One of Who Makes A Dog Show
TheDogPress.com EST 2002 © 06061611
https://www.thedogpress.com/Columns/Who-MakesDogShow2_Addamo-0606.asp
SSI
Become An Insider Today!
Your $29 INSIDER Subscription gives you access to peer-reviewed information on Canine Health, Pet Food, Dog Training, Dog Shows and Clubs.
Paid Insider Access also helps us protect YOUR rights from "Animal Rights" legislation, local politics and so much more... Click to become an Insider
|
~
AKC Invites High Volume Breeders, re; Robinson,
Director Inspections. |
Detailed corruption, evidence provided by judges and breeders. |
Hunte Corp and Petland Pet Shops get "PRIME" for point of sale registrations!
|
SSI
Brought to you by NetPlaces Network:
TheDogPlace.org, world’s 1st public website,
1st online dog news, TheDogPress.com, and
TheJudgesPlace.com, 1st AKC judges site
Advertising ~ Mission Statement ~ Privacy Policy
ii NetPlaces Network ~ Disclaimer