RetrieverTraining.Net - the RTF banner

1 - 20 of 66 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,252 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Anyone else as bothered as I am about a (decidedly animal rights agenda driven) veterinarian disqualified three Best of Breed winners at Crufts? As a response to a documentary slamming breeders, this year selected breeds' BOB winners at Crufts had to submit to a veterinary examination by the show's official vet before being allowed to continue on to groups. Three BOB dogs were disqualified--a Pekinese, bulldog, and Clumber spaniel.

Click HERE for a (biased) blog report of it and HERE for the NAIA take.

While personally I'm not fond of the smashed-face breeds and would never own one mainly because of their health issues, the Clumber spaniel looked pretty normal to me, even like a dog that might be able to hunt. And even though I may not personally care for the brachycephalic look, it makes me squeamish to think a vet, likely one schooled in AR-think and not as familiar with the breed standard, could overrule a breed judge. Why not leave this to the breed club? Now granted, the UK Kennel Club sets the breed standards, not like here where the individual AKC member breed clubs do, but it is still a scary trend.

Animal rights extremists have a lot more sway in Europe in general than over here (witness foxhunting bans, ecollar bans and more), but we'd be foolish to think it couldn't happen here. And not just at conformation events...can you imagine some earnest young vet that studied more animal rights than canine anatomy at a field trial disqualifying winning or placing dogs? "Sorry, that one is too much of a risk-taker, too dangerous for this to be rewarded, we don't want to promote dogs that might hurt themselves." But the Seattle blog I posted a link to shows that many people think that would be a dandy idea.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,461 Posts
I think Wisconsin's own Marty Greer summed it up best in her article..... poor timing on pulling an award. If there was a "problem" they should not have been allowed to set a paw in the show ring to begin with...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
533 Posts
Clumber spaniel looked normal?

I agree with JusticeDog, they should have done this BEFORE they went in the ring. But something has to be done go save these breeds from self mutilation by the show breeders.

Only 15 breeds were examined, and the competitors knew they'd be examined. 15 breeds that are in danger due to extreme health issues.

I'm not an activist by any means, but the owners of these breeds knew before they entered the ring. A bit extreme, maybe, but how else can they get judges to put up better examples?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,153 Posts
Just one picture of the Clumber in question:

http://www.dogsunit.com/images/stor.../chervoods_snow_sun/chervoods_snow_sun_16.jpg

From this website:

http://www.dogsunit.com/index.php?o...id=740:r5-clumber-spaniel-females&Itemid=1937




I'm not a vet, so beats the hell out of me. However, I find it unattractive and impractical to the point of shameful.

But I can't talk. I own a flat-coat, which are marvelously beautiful, healthy and (physically) practical dogs! Until they die, almost half the time in the prime of life. I own a Lab that carries a gene associated with spontaneous collapse! And 40 percent of us do!

Where's the line on any trait? Glad I don't have to answer that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,821 Posts
Julie I'm not quiet sure this is wrong. I have gone to dog shows and walked in the grooming area and saw all kinds of crapp being done to dogs. Coloring their coat with powder, shoe polish, grooming away defects and alot of other crap.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
640 Posts
Anyone else as bothered as I am about a (decidedly animal rights agenda driven) veterinarian disqualified three Best of Breed winners at Crufts? As a response to a documentary slamming breeders, this year selected breeds' BOB winners at Crufts had to submit to a veterinary examination by the show's official vet before being allowed to continue on to groups. Three BOB dogs were disqualified--a Pekinese, bulldog, and Clumber spaniel.

While personally I'm not fond of the smashed-face breeds and would never own one mainly because of their health issues, the Clumber spaniel looked pretty normal to me, even like a dog that might be able to hunt. And even though I may not personally care for the brachycephalic look, it makes me squeamish to think a vet, likely one schooled in AR-think and not as familiar with the breed standard, could overrule a breed judge. Why not leave this to the breed club? Now granted, the UK Kennel Club sets the breed standards, not like here where the individual AKC member breed clubs do, but it is still a scary trend.


I think this is a good step in the right direction. Dog shows select future breeding stock so it hardly seems that requiring the so-called "Best in Breed" winner to meet some minimum health standard is out of line.

What I find telling is that the judges put up these unhealthy dogs in the the first place. The Clumber Spaniel failed due to bilateral ectropion - the turning out of the eyelid so the inner surface is exposed. This is a visible, genetic defect associated with damage to the eye and pain to the dog.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,045 Posts
The only reason to do this type of exam disqualification after awards are given is to make the front page news, either for the AR groups, as a 2x4 to the head type of warning to the breeders, or for the Kennel Clubs new stance on improving the breeds.

If the exam had taken place before the Groups classes were shown, we would have never heard about it, or if so- only in passing conversation and we would most likely all have embraced the idea.

By adding "controversy" to the exam, it is being talked about ad nauseam I'm sure among breed clubs and their forums. I wonder how many people/breeders/judges are going to start "toeing the line" that they are now pushing, or if they are going to just get their hackles up and either fight with or boycott Crufts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,153 Posts
The only reason to do this type of exam disqualification after awards are given is to make the front page news, either for the AR groups, as a 2x4 to the head type of warning to the breeders, or for the Kennel Clubs new stance on improving the breeds.

If the exam had taken place before the Groups classes were shown, we would have never heard about it, or if so- only in passing conversation and we would most likely all have embraced the idea.

By adding "controversy" to the exam, it is being talked about ad nauseam I'm sure among breed clubs and their forums. I wonder how many people/breeders/judges are going to start "toeing the line" that they are now pushing, or if they are going to just get their hackles up and either fight with or boycott Crufts?
Could it be a 2x4 to the heads of judges?

It can't be an easy job to judge--I wonder if it just got harder? Or a little easier?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,821 Posts
It's big business. Prof handlers making in the 6 figures. Befriending the judges. Handlers working deals between them so they get ribbons. You fold this time I fold next time. Taking advantage of newcomers by folding those dogs etc. It should be breeding stock but it is not when they tell you your dog needs more weight and judges have no idea what the dog was breed for. If all the dogs in the ring look alike that is the breed standard. One dog may look different and really meet the breed standard it's out. I should stop I'm already in trouble.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,427 Posts
I agree with Dr. Greer, too. Ideally, it should have been done prior to the show.

But I do think it's a step in a good direction.

The only good thing about the timing is that it makes a pretty tough statement, and is a warning to others to clean up their breed. It says, in effect: "Breeders, the judges may reward this stuff, but that doesn't mean it's right".

Judges could make a difference...but it's rare that they do. They reward the extremes, which perpetuates the problems. Show breeders tend to breed to win ribbons, which doesn't always translate to what is in the best interest of the dogs.

Unfortunately, since show breeds tend to go toward an extreme that wins ribbons, and seem to feel that the issues that go with those extremes are just part of the breed and are acceptable risks (?!?!?)...and they won't police themselves toward positive, healthy change...somebody has to advocate for the dogs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,058 Posts
The only reason to do this type of exam disqualification after awards are given is to make the front page news, either for the AR groups, as a 2x4 to the head type of warning to the breeders, or for the Kennel Clubs new stance on improving the breeds.

If the exam had taken place before the Groups classes were shown, we would have never heard about it, or if so- only in passing conversation and we would most likely all have embraced the idea.

By adding "controversy" to the exam, it is being talked about ad nauseam I'm sure among breed clubs and their forums. I wonder how many people/breeders/judges are going to start "toeing the line" that they are now pushing, or if they are going to just get their hackles up and either fight with or boycott Crufts?
Howdy Raina!
Really great avatar photo!

Now more on this particular topic: can or should the judges face some kind of sanction if dogs they place are DQ by the vet for some obvious defect as was apparently the case with the Clumber?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,657 Posts
Howdy Raina!
Really great avatar photo!

Now more on this particular topic: can or should the judges face some kind of sanction if dogs they place are DQ by the vet for some obvious defect as was apparently the case with the Clumber?
They aren't vets, why should they be required to judge like one. What's obvious to a vet may not be to a breed judge.

What was wrong with the clumber? He looked like a klutzy dog to me but not reason to throw him out of a beauty pageant. If that's your idea of beauty.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
946 Posts
Perhaps the next dog will be disqualified if it has non OFA hips, or perhaps the next dog will be disqualified if it has a genetic disease or carries a genetic disease like EIC or CNM. Once a door is opened sometimes it is hard to close it. I would really hate to see AKC have a policy like that because you know eventually it would affect all those events. Dogs can already be disqualified for medical reasons in field trials and hunt tests, would hate to see them start having a vet go over dogs at performance events.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,821 Posts
breeding stock.Judges in conformation get paid good money they should be sanctioned. They set the standard and they have done a tune on the lab. If a dog is not OFA maybe it should not be shown or if it is at risk for EIC. Breedoing stock.

Judge had hands on and checked it's teeth what he can't see its eyes. Plus I find it hard to believe the owner did not know.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,636 Posts
They aren't vets, why should they be required to judge like one. What's obvious to a vet may not be to a breed judge.

What was wrong with the clumber? He looked like a klutzy dog to me but not reason to throw him out of a beauty pageant. If that's your idea of beauty.
I watched a video where they interviewed the owner. She said the dog was hot and that is why her eye was red. Dogs with those saggy eye lids do tend to show that when they are hot and tired.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
640 Posts
They aren't vets, why should they be required to judge like one. What's obvious to a vet may not be to a breed judge.

What was wrong with the clumber? He looked like a klutzy dog to me but not reason to throw him out of a beauty pageant. If that's your idea of beauty.
Look at these eyes.

http://www.astraean.com/borderwars/2012/03/ectropion-and-the-failed-crufts-dogs.html

Now, I'm not a vet but I can certainly imagine how much debris could accumulate in there after a very short hunt. There seems to be a sentiment that the judgement of the judges shouldn't be questioned, but given that they rewarded this particular specimen as the"best of breed", I'd say they should be ashamed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
875 Posts
If the dogs were going to be examined by the super-vet, it should have been before going in the ring, not after. What bothers me most is that animal rights is at the root of all this. It can happen here if we let the AR folks win the battle. Then we can say goodbye to hunting, field trials, hunt tests, etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
533 Posts
You beat me to posting that link Dave.

Hope you're staying dry.

The vets weren't allowed to use instruments, but only disqualified dogs for obvious phenotypic flaws. Ectropic eyes fit this bill. It is genetic and most certainly a flaw.

Should breeding a phenotypic flaw that causes obvious distress to the dog (bradycephalics who can't breath and ectropics who suffer life long eye issues) be ok? Shouldn't these be disqualifying faults such as a dog that breaks in an Open at a field trial? Just like breaking, these issues sometimes happen, but should they win?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,058 Posts
They aren't vets, why should they be required to judge like one. What's obvious to a vet may not be to a breed judge.

What was wrong with the clumber? He looked like a klutzy dog to me but not reason to throw him out of a beauty pageant. If that's your idea of beauty.
Go back and re-read the posts. One of them clearly states why the Clumber was disqualified and it was due to a visible problem with the lower eye-lid that should have been clearly obvious.
 
1 - 20 of 66 Posts
Top