Becoming BY JACQUELYN FOGEL It all Begins and Ends With The Standard
I am working with several foreign puppy buyers right now. As I explain my breeds to these buyers, I always refer to the AKC stan- dards, and the FCI standards written for my breeds. Then I go into details about where my dogs consistently meet the standards, and where my breeding program is a little weak on some parts of the standard. In bedlingtons, I have to go into great detail about the dif- ferent words used to describe movement in the two standards because the FCI standard refers to a gait that is “rather mincing… and slight roll at full stride,” while the AKC standard describes a “unique lightness… springy in the slower paces.”
Talking about a breed standard with somebody who wants to breed a purebred dog should not be boring or irrelevant. In fact, I believe it should be the opener in every conversation we have with people who are buying a dog for a breeding program, or for showing. That’s why I was astounded when a young Chinese buyer I am work- ing with told me that everyone she had approached about buying a puppy wanted to tell her about all of their awards and honors, but not one person before me had mentioned the Bedlington terrier standard. What!? How is that possible? How can any conversation about the merits of a purebred dog start without mentioning the standard? Why are awards and wins more important than conforma- tion to a standard? Am I living in an altered reality? We call them “conformation” shows because we expect each entry to “conform” to its breed standard. They aren’t cute doggie or grooming competitions, they are conformation competitions. They begin and end with each breed’s stan- dard. Period. Lately there has been a lot of talk among exhibitors and breeders about a judge who dismissed several entries because the dogs’ tails were not docked. I read the AKC Silky Terrier standard – it says, “tail is docked.” It doesn’t say it should be docked. It doesn’t say it may be docked. It gives no indication that an undocked tail might be acceptable. It says the tail IS docked. In case any of this is new to anyone, each registry has its own standards for their recognized breeds. You may show an undocked Silky Terrier in UKC or FCI shows without penalty. And you may breed a dog with an undocked tail any time you choose. But if you are planning to show in an AKC show, then you should be very familiar with the AKC standard and expect to be penalized for a tail that isn’t docked. You may not like the severity of the penalty a judge chooses. Should the dogs be excused, or should the undocked tails be one of many examples of how that par- ticular specimen deviates from the standard describing a perfect dog? That is up to each individual judge and can- not be argued by the exhibitor. My personal opinion is that if your Silky does not have a docked tail, then don’t show it in an AKC show without expecting a penalty. All judges prioritize differently what they want to see in each breed, and all will reward or penalize based upon their understanding of the standard, and how important each deviation is. Judges should never be held to some imaginary standard that claims if one breed’s tail is impor-
In my American interpreta- tion of these phrases, they are describing two very dif- ferent gaits. Americans would never use “rolling
and mincing” to describe the gait of a structurally sound dog with good shoulder layback and well let-down stifles – at any pace. Dogs like the Old English Sheepdog may amble or pace at slower paces, but they don’t mince or roll. Mincing denotes short-stepping, and rolling is what usually happens when shoulders are steep, and the topline dips behind the withers. Both of these words are pejorative in American discussions of gait, and not what a breeder would aspire to produce. However, in my dis- cussions with European Bedlington breeders, they refuse to admit that their standard calls for short-stepping or rolling. They focus on the lightness of movement at slow- er paces, and proper shoulder construction. When I sug- gest that our two standards describe essentially different breeds, they insist that I am just misinterpreting their standard, which was revised in 2011. They correctly note that the two standards both describe flat, sloping shoul- der blades and well-angulated stifles. We agree the prop- er Bedlington head should be emphasized at least as much, if not more than gait. We agree about the body shape and V-front, but the movement description remains open to debate. As the previous paragraph illustrates, I can go into great depth describing the smallest details in the stan- dards for my breeds. I can literally bore people to tears with my detailed description of correct shoulders, and I am never considered the life of the party in most casual, fun gatherings. The stuff that excites and animates me is considered irrelevant by at least 98% of the general pop- ulation. I don’t care about cute Fluffy stories, and I really don’t want to discuss the wonders of a Goldendoodle. I am a self-admitted canine, purebred, standard-quoting snob. If you want to talk about correct movement for a breed, what constitutes a wry or undershot bite, why an Irish terrier coat turns light if it is scissored, or where the rise on a topline should be, I am your person. I love the details embedded in each breed standard, and I love hear- ing from long-time breeders about the quirks in their par- ticular breed. I love a judge who can go into great detail about what is wrong with a brindled Saluki. I am a stan- dard wonk.
60 • S how S ight M agazine , A pril 2018
Powered by FlippingBook