With KAthi BroWn, Bill devillenueve, KAthleen J. FerriS, Gene hAinS, dArle hecK, cArolyn herBel, KAri hill, MAreth Kipp, richArd Miller, thoMAS pArrotti, Fred StephenS & Merle tAylor
at you, like pistons. The standard states, “With the stifles well bent and the legs straight from hock to heel. Hocks should be well let down and parallel to each other.” The back feet should not be resting under the vertical line of the tail. They should be out behind and the well bent stifle creates a ledge. Unfortunately, the more I discuss this issue, I find that many breeders do not know what “sickle hocked” means. Additionally, you can stack a dog on a table with its rear pulled out, but what the breeders are missing is how the dog stands naturally on a loose lead. MK: I would like to see improvement in lowering their bodies. Some are getting up on leg and that is not what the standard calls for. I also think heads can use some help. I am seeing shorter muzzles and wide back skulls. RM: Coat texture, topline and depth of body as mention above are two items needing improvement. TP: Breed for pedigree, not political advancement. FS: Fronts need to be improved. MT: First of all, we certainly want to consider all health issues as important. And, focus on the little details that make a Scotty, a Scotty—deep-set, dark, almond-shaped eyes; small ears; strong, full muzzles; well laid-back shoulders and forechests that fit the standard as well as a dog that is low to the ground; a powerhouse body with as much in front of as there is behind the tail. 4. What are the currents strengths of the breed? BD: I think that the Scotties of today are mostly a nice size, close to the breed standard, not too over-sized or under-sized. Breeders have generally done a good job with toplines, length of back and overall shape. Obvi- ously, there are still some overly long backs and sagging toplines, but I think that there is an obvious effort to correct by breeders. KF: Their outline and attitude. They make a striking picture in the ring when presented in condition. Bitches still dominate the ring and have done so for many years. DH: This is a strong, powerful breed (for the size of the dog) and we are seeing more dogs with good bone and substance, deep chests with the brisket below the elbow, high tailsets and good strong temperaments. CH: Mature coats are usually of hard, wiry, texture that would give the dog the protection he needs when working. KH: Temperament. For the most part, we have bred out aggression. MK: I think presentation has improved greatly and it is nice to see so many owner handlers in the ring. TP: Good temperament on most. Deep chests most with descent ear set and lovely eye.
FS: Some decent heads and some good coats. MT: There are some good examples of the breed throughout the country—different clans developing a look of their own while staying within the guidelines of the standard. I think correct size (height), body depth and girth are seen rather consistently. I believe the die-hard Scottie people have perfected the presentation of the breed to the nth degree. 5. Do you think the dogs you see in this breed are better now than they were when you first started judging? Why or why not? KB: It is hard to compare especially since fewer are being bred and shown. I tend to remember the great dogs of the past and do not believe there are as many standouts recently. This is a breed that takes understanding and time to present properly. I believe many newer owners and exhibitors are not willing to invest the time neces- sary for breeds such as the Scottish Terrier and other broken-coated Terriers. Many new owners have others do the intensive grooming. Grooming these breeds helps to create a deeper understanding of proper struc- ture and assists breeders in developing a breeder’s vision for improvement. BD: There were good and great dogs when I first started judging, just as there have been many good and great dogs in recent years. In my early years of judging that desired Scottie expression was more common; today it is a little more elusive. I think that in general, size is a little more correct and pleasing today. There were many larger dogs back in my early showing and judging years. Even some of the dogs that I showed and finished in my early years were larger than I would bring in the ring today. KF: I think when I judge a specialty there is depth of quality. On the average, at a normal show, I don’t think so but I think that goes back to before I started judging. With too many shows, breeders don’t have to compete at the same level they did in the 80s and 90s. Lack of keen competi- tion means it is easier to finish dogs that might not have gone through back then. GH: Not necessarily better or worse dogs certainly more handlers. Breeder handlers, to me, are the strength behind any breed, especially Scotties. DH: I wouldn’t say they are better, there are some individu- als that stand out now and as there were some that stood out in the past. When I started judging, the breed was more popular with significantly larger entries. There were more good dogs in the ring at the time but propor- tionally, I think it would be similar. CH: They seem to be about the same, with the same varia- tions in strengths and weaknesses. My opinion is that when this breed has the correct feisty temperament it
4 )08 4 *()5 . "(";*/& " 6(645 t
Powered by FlippingBook