Dog Shows

[bckrazy]

hm.. my opinion on dog shows is somewhere in the middle of Cali's and Lv4dog's. There are some breeds, like Border Collies (which is why I'm guessing Cali doesnt think ANY dog should be shown), who's main purpose is to be an impeccable working dog. They have not been bred for appearance, except for general size color and type, and they shouldn't be judged solely by appearance for their breedability. If all Border Collie breeders showed and championed their dogs before breeding them, the breed would literally be ruined. Many awesome working BC's that add a ton to their breed wouldn't even be looked at in the show ring ~ because ACK *does* favor BC's with unrealistic poofy coats, short muzzles, large height/weight, heavier bone, and more docile temperament than what is realistic for a working BC. They are basically show Aussies, with tails. I also HATE that ACK condones and even orders that some breeds have their ears cropped and tails docked. All for the sake of appearance.

On the other hand, not ALL dogs are bred to be working dogs with very little attention to appearance. Toy dogs, for example, are bred mostly for appearance (along with temperament + health). Soo, of course they're perfect for conformation shows. For me, seeing dogs running around the show ring (like Border Collies) who have NO place there, who have been bred for 100's of years to work, it is kinda messed up. However, if those dogs were also required to attain working titles before or during the show process, I'd have no problem with it. The general appearance of all breeds should be upheld, but for working dogs, its just stupid to judge their breedability based solely on physical traits ~ its like judging a doctor or dentists credibility by how many beauty pageants he's won. I do know a LOT of awesome breeders in the Cali BC Club who show their dogs often AND work them every day on stock... I have no problem with that, either. As long as the dog is doing what it was bred to do, getting bonus points from showing cant hurt.

I'm rambling on... but I have tons of examples of a breeds ruined by the ACK ~ Labradors, Golden Retrievers, German Shepherds (who have been bred by ACK breeders sooo severely for a sloping topline and angled hocks that there are TONS of puppies coming out of show stock that are literally walking on their hocks and are permenantly disabled!), Australian Shepherds, English Bulldogs.. just to name a few. Show-type Labs are especially different than working Labs. My sister's Dads family bred working Labs forever - and they're completely taken aback by show Labs. Not only are they often twice the weight of a working Lab, their chest is waaay too deep, and their stomaches almost drag on the ground because they've been bred to be so stumpy. This heavy-set type of breeding has definitely contributed to the horrible hips and elbows in the breed (also attributed to lots of BYB-breeding and being so popular). Show Labs simply cannot work, I dont see how they can even swim... they're just way too big and stumpy to be able to run all day, swim all day, etc. That exaggerated chest and fat might keep them warm, but seriously, how can they even swim being so stumpy?

Anyway, my general opinion of dog shows is ~ at least they're doing something with their dogs, and as long as they have their hearts in the right place and they are really trying to IMPROVE their breed rather than just go with trends, its fine with me. 99.9% of show dogs have life a LOT better than the millions of dogs in this country that sit in backyards their whole life. Show dogs HAVE to be well-trained and socialized and taken excellent care of, so that makes me happy . However, when the AKC puts unrealistic standards on breeds just for aesthetic purposes and not for their original purpose - to work- it is wrong in every way. Especially when it's the dogs who end up suffering from poor health (GSDs, Labs, Bulldogs, etc) and/or a complete loss of working/herding/sporting ability.