says Are you happy with AKC’s decision To repeal the 80% group policy?* Why or why not?
As an exhibitor, yes I’m glad they repealed the 80% rule. However, as a judge hopeful, it’s harder. I’m sure it will be much more expensive and it’s already almost prohibitive. —Anonymous It was a very smart move for the 80% plan to be removed. Just because you can Judge 80% of a group does not give you the knowledge of dogs that you have never gone over or tak- en the time for Judges Education to learn the Standard. It’s like standing outside of the ring and thinking was this really best dog that was sent to the group. How do you really know? —Kathleen Kolbert If I know 80% of how to be an electrician can I become a licensed electrician? Of course not. Merely because a judge understands short-coated Toy breeds does not qualify them to judge drop-coated Toys. —Katherine Kasten NO! Not at all. I’ve been showing and breeding for 25 years and I see a decline in judging my breed. Half these judges are clueless as to what good movement is, what a good head is and breed type. The result is a lot of incorrect dogs are win- ning and new and inexperienced breeders are then breeding to that type. I fear for the future of my breed. —Anonymous Not really. I didn’t think that program was all that dam- aging. I do, however, think getting 26 breeds in six months hurts the sport a lot. Especially when the applicant is new to judging. So limiting each application to ten is a good decision. —Anonymous I think that the aging population in the judging ranks cou- pled with the growing number of events is going to make it necessary to make the approval process faster and more effi- cient and this is a step in the wrong direction. —Anonymous I disagree with the repeal of that ruling. If a Judge is approved to judge 80% of the breeds in a group, they are cer- tainly qualified to judge the entire group. This makes it more difficult for the already struggling All-breed clubs to hire judges. AKC just keeps running clubs into the ground. They struggle and work hard and AKC kicks them when they are down. —Sandra L. Garlinger-Torres No! Some of the low entry breeds we will never get our hands on unless it is in a group. Most of the low entry breeds do not have sweeps where a prospective judge can gain expe- rience in the breed. I do believe they should limit doing the group on the 80% if all you have left is low entry breeds. —Patricia Healy
existing power cliques and make qualifications more chal- lenging for newer judges. —Gloria Rice
No! The 80% was made for a reason. It is hard enough and costs too much already to become a judge. We are a dying sport at this time to begin with. —Laurie Borghes What I believe is even more unfortunate is the AKC Board has reduced the number of additional breed applications to a limit of ten now, effective immediately. Many of us have spent years acquiring the credits for multiple breeds only now to be told that our other additional breeds will have to wait—just ten additional breeds will be considered. Longtime owner/ breeder handlers who also happen to be aspiring judges and are the backbone of this sport are intensely annoyed with the mistakes and mishandling that appear to be part and parcel of this organization. We are told they are going to review the judging approval process, yet again, after all the energy and interest invested to date. This is maddening. —Anonymous Not really, as I feel that at that point one should be given the opportunity to judge the group. Perhaps a stipulation such as the remainder of breeds have to be finished within a specific time period would make this seem fair. I guess give a little to get a little? —MB Walsh We need more judges! They should be mentored at the very least in breeds they are lacking or figure out testing for knowledge before approving remainder 20%. So many of our judges are aging out, what are they thinking? Limiting panels to current group judges just adds to a dearth of diversity expe- rienced Clubs may be able to attract a better entry with differ- ent new judges; and, ergo, saving on judges’ travel expenses. —Mary Beth McManus When I qualified for the 80% Group Policy, AKC sent out a form letter inquiring if I was interested in applying to judge the Non-Sporting Group. I reviewed the letter with an AKC Representative before deciding to apply. I have since success- fully judged several Non-Sporting Groups. This opportunity has been a positive experience for clubs, exhibits and myself. My only question, “Was my experience an exception or the norm?” —Diana L Skibinski I think it is foolish to repeal the 80% group policy as we are constantly in need of more judges and once they can do 80% of a Group, they should be able to do a creditable job. —Helga Kane The new AKC ruling, yet again, moves “The cheese” for judges. You will have a mixed bag of judges who did things as they did before, now along side some confused new judges. If they want better judges, stop changing the rules! —Anonymous
No, I believe that the majority of judges take assignments seriously and responsibly. This decision will maintain the
132 • S how S ight M agazine , S eptember 2017
Powered by FlippingBook