Skip to main content

Let me tell you a secret...

Some things just rub me the wrong way. Take for instance Terrierman's gleeful joy over the line of an article on dog shows, which had the never-before told observation regarding dog show participants as "fairly overweight, and eat too many funnel cakes, and dress in a way that would kill any chance of a social life were they actually in high school."

Correct me if I am wrong, but with the current obesity epidemic doesn’t that describe most of the population of the United States?

I find that there are many more submissions of obesity and questionable style on peopleofwalmart.com rather than the popular Facebook page Dog Show Fashion Police. Ann Rairigh, handler of this year’s Eukanuba winner, is known for her style and flair – and that is just one of the many I could name. I’ve rarely seen Wal-Mart style garb on any dog show competitor, but then again, maybe that is because I actually attend dog shows. Oh, I should say I attend AKC and UKC dog shows. I also attend JRTCA dog shows, err, “trials” in which it seems that big hair, tights pants and as much cleavage as possible are de rigueur for that group. But enough about Burns’ beloved registry, let’s move on, because while bashing dog shows is where he gets his kicks, somehow, his conclusion is this:

I think this piece has it exactly right: these are just people with limited talents trying to get good at something.

When the article said this:

A common trait of Americans — blue and red, gay and straight, X and Y, whatever — is that they largely want to be good at something, to be recognized for doing at least one thing well, and maybe that's at the expense of everything else. Poetry writing, bass fishing, cooking, competitive eating, you name it. So you spend months or even years in triathlon training. You juggle Family Feud and reality TV and dog show gigs. You learn about breeds and how to groom and how to rub your dog in just the right family unfriendly way to make its tail stand straight up for judging.


So “these” people that Burns refers to is “dog show people,” while the article clearly states that it is a trait of every American to want to be good at something. I suppose that it should be obvious that dog show people are folks of “limited talents” while bass fisherman are those limitless talent, if I am reading both in conjunction correctly in an attempt to correlate the conclusion to the article.

I was also in for a bit of a shock with this little logical gem:

And yes, in order to get good at this something, they are willing to give up quite a lot -- money, time, time with family... and even the health of dogs.


I don’t know of any instance of anything in this world when we want to get good at something, we have to give up certain things. In Outliers, Malcolm Gladwell makes an interesting hypothesis that in order to master anything, then we must put 10,000 hours into that endeavor. 10,000 hours is approximately 5 years if you are working 40 hours a week at it. I would venture to say that in order to get just “good at something” I would have to spend half that.

I am not talking about dog shows. I am talking about anything. Painting, horse training, dodgeball, piano, computer programming, blogging – you name it! In the end scheme of things, to get good at something you are going to have to give something else up. The article says as much.

So we come to the giving up the health of the dogs, which is really Burns’ point and always has been for a long time – that dog shows ruin dogs (his mantra is “from rosettes to ruin”) because kennel clubs don’t do enough to ensure that purebred dogs are healthy. While I will always agree with him on exaggerations leading to breakdowns of structure and use, it isn’t the dog show that is ruining the breed – it is the breeders who allow rosettes to create their sense of self-worth.

I also cracked up when I read this:

This is the dark little secret of dog shows: they are not about dogs. A dog will not cross a room for a rosette, much less drive 300 miles across two states and spend two nights in a bad hotel for the privilege.


Someone is most definitely an east-coaster when the believe that driving 300 miles will get you across two states – I can barely get out of Wyoming in 300 miles! But I digress…

A dark little secret is it? Do you REALLY think that the folks at home watching the dog show believe that the dog is gaiting and posing for the rosette when the handler is flinging around bait like a squirrel on PCP? No, they do it because they enjoy it and they want a cookie. Any handler will tell you that the worst dog to show is one who is beautiful but hates to show. I know because I have one of those in my backyard. So what happens? The dog doesn’t get shown – plain and simple. A dog that is less than stellar but enjoys showing off will always catch the judge’s eye – it is natural for someone to gravitate towards a dog whose personality shines.

He is right, though on one point - a dog will not cross a room for a rosette, but they will because they love their person and enjoy the experience. My dogs go nuts if I am packing up my hunting backpack or if I am packing up my dog show tote - either way, they want to go. I do believe that they enjoy themselves when we are out in the field or testing bait samples from a dog show vendor. The bit around the ring is just part of the whole experience of being at a dog show, rosette or not.

I will always react in a less than positive manner with I am generally grouped with a “they.” Yes, I am a dog show participant. Yes, I do enjoy winning and anyone who says that they don’t is a liar. But no, I will not allow a show ring fad to determine the direction of my breeding program. All breeds deserve better than that – just as German Shepherds deserve better than Jimmy Moses. If that makes me a “they” – then so be it.

Now, where’s my damn funnel cake?

Oh, and since I am disagreeing with the Terrierman, I am a Zombie. So there isn't a linkback and won't be unless it is requested.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

High Toes

Sometimes I get into discussions with people about dog structure and really, really, it makes me want to beat my head against a wall. However, those always make me publish those words and pictures that have been rattling around in my head for a while. Case in point – someone posted on a board that they thought that a high toe on a dog was a “cosmetic fault.” My opinion on this is fairly solid – NO! A high toe is a STRUCTUAL fault. Someone then posted that they wanted “proof.” Ah, here we go. The boondoggle of proof! Studies! Someone, somewhere, somehow agreeing or disagreeing with my point! The unfortunate thing is that it really isn’t to be found. Our Proof wanter found a website in which a couple had a Staffordshire Terrier with a high toe, and they readily admitted that the high toe caused issues with her gait, but then concluded that it was just a cosmetic issue. Hmm, really? The document can be found here , you can look at the pictures and read it for yourself. (Don't use the

All Positive - All BS

I, in my infinate inability to keep my mouth shut, offered someone training advice on a public forum for their resource guarding Rat Terrier. I told them that when he does the growling bit, calmly walk over, pick him up by the scruff of the neck, and put him in his kennel for a few hours. In my own experience with Ratties, this works pretty well because the dog learns that if you attempt to guard something, you will be corrected and then removed from your treasure and the rest of the pack. I didn't think that this was in any way controversial. Oh, how wrong I was! I found out that I might as well have told her to punt the dog like a football across the room, because that is what "scruffing" is to the "All Positive" fanatics. Of course, their suggestions would lead to reinforcement of the behavior or out and out terror. There were two camps - the first camp said to "redirect the dog's behavior by offering it a treat to give up it's treasure

Brindle and the Rat Terrier

It seems like every once in a while the topic of brindle comes up in the Rat Terrier world. Teeth are gnashed and garments are rendered because brindle is not an acceptable pattern in our breed, and the standard says that brindle is a disqualification. The standard probably won’t change any time soon, and I certainly hope that it will NEVER include brindle! Why? The UKC standard says, in the very beginning, that “These terriers probably included crosses between the Smooth Fox Terrier, the Manchester Terrier and the now extinct white English Terrier… Some of these dogs were crossed with Whippets or Italian Greyhounds (for speed) and Beagles (for hunting ability).” Let’s take a look at the ancestors of the Rat Terrier and how their standards treat brindle: Smooth Fox Terrier UKC : Serious Fault AKC: Objectionable Manchester Terrier: UKC: Disqualification AKC: Disqualification Whippet: UKC: Any color/pattern accepted. AKC: Any color/pattern accepted. Italian Greyhounds: UKC: Disqualif