There is a wealth of information to be found at the GRCA website. My particular interest was in finding out more about the CREAM-coated Golden Retriever. I discovered that there are numerous references to this birth color, mostty stated in negative terms. One article links them with Goldendoodles and puppies being raffled off at auctions or such. It cautions buyers against being duped into believing that there are rare "white" Goldens and that they are worth a hefty price.
But I was more concerned with the Breed Standard and efforts made by the Club to clarify the meaning of terms and phrases included in that document. So I looked elsewhere on the site.
First, what does the Breed Standard say about coat color? It should be rich, lustrous gold. But what does that mean? Further, Predominant body color which is either extremely pale or extremely dark is undesirable. Then there is some nonsense about puppy ear color indicating adult coat color. Basically, that's all it says. But nowhere are the terms lustrous gold or extremely pale ever DEFINED. And if the extremes-- whatever they may be are UNDESIRABLE, WHY is that so? Are there structural issues; perhaps temperament concerns; or even, and most especially, health factors which fanciers should know about?
The Standard itself is SILENT. Offers NO answers. So I must look elsewhere. There's a section on the website called--The Golden Retriever: An Illustrated Study Guide. That looks like fun.
There are fourteen different subheadings. That's where you find the AKC Breed Standard, but ALSO TWO articles which raise the subject of color.
One is identified simply by the word COLOR. It says, Dogs whose body color is predominantly cream or off-white, or dark setter-red, are not truly "golden" and should be judged accordingly.
But what does judged accordingly mean? It doesn't say. Are we to guess what possible punishment awaits the unsuspecting and NOT TRULY "GOLDEN" cream Golden Retriever? Again, NO answer.
So let's move on. Perhaps the answers lie elsewhere on the website.
There's a third section called JUDGING THE GOLDEN RETRIEVER.There are FIVE Articles and Letters to Judges found here. Under the heading Golden Retrievers: Prioritizing Faults EIGHT categories are identified by the writer. There are Disqualifications, Excusal from the ring issues, SERIOUS faults, Very undesirable factors, things To be faulted, aspects To be penalized proportionately according to the amount of deviation from ideal, and one item which appears out of place-- Permitted but not preferred.
And then there's Undesirable. Bingo! This must be it.
Predominant body color that is either extremely pale or extremely dark. That's it? If a fault, HOW should it be faulted? And what's the difference between VERY UNDESIRABLE and merely UNDESIRABLE? This is written supposedly for the benefit of the judges.
Moving on, there is an article entitled, Judging the Golden Retriever by Jeffrey G. Pepper. This is NOT an OFFICIAL statement issued by the GRCA, but rather one which appeared elsewhere and since has found its way to the Club website. The author opines that...
Basically a coat that is so light that it appears to be cream-colored (what I tend to call a "vanilla retriever") or so dark that it approaches an Irish Setter red should be faulted. After all the breed is called Golden Retriever....
I am not sure why one man's personal OPINION ended up on this website-- unless a GRCA committee deemed it worthy of inclusion. But once again, there are no FACTS to support his view.
In August of 2012 I found the following on the GRCA website.
Coat and Color: Color is probably one of the most common variants seen in the breed. The standard specifies "lustrous golden of various shades" ranging from cream to a coppery gold, with allowable lighter feathering. This variation in color is one of the breed's attractions. Extremes of light and dark of the predominant body color are considered undesirable.
According to this document issued by the GRCA Judges' Education Committee and posted for all to see, as you can see, CREAM was no longer UNDESIRABLE.
But barely two weeks later, the same document was edited and the word CREAM expunged and replaced with PALE GOLD. And COPPERY GOLD became DEEP COPPERY RED.
A breed authority has written that all Golden color is to be found in the yellow extension series. This can produce color ranging from a VERY PALE CREAM that appears almost white, to the deepest red. This concept of all Golden Retriever birth colors being found on this YELLOW construct seems to have been converted to the idea that YELLOW and GOLD are synonymous terms. Ergo, ALL Goldens are born some SHADE or intensity of GOLD. Following this reasoning, CREAM is NOT REALLY PALE GOLD, though they often appear identical to the observer. Cream is beyond the pale-- pale gold, that is. It is simply too far to the left on this color spectrum. But why? Personal preference? Opinion? FACTS, please.
In any case, just like magic, a GRCA committee of five ( the SAME chairman and the SAME members) had REDEFINED the COLOR SPECTRUM allowed under the Standard. No need to mess with amending that Standard through a long, laborious process (subject to approval by vote of the Club membership as a whole) when five people on a committee-- or three in the majority --have the power and claim the right to dictate the DESIRABLE color range for our breed. And the leadership (that would be the Board) claims it is merely intended to explain the Standard but in no way is it going to change that document in any way. Stay tuned; perhaps in the future this same GRCA committee will pontificate that the Standard consists of a patriotic red, white and blue color range. Wait a sec. That will NEVER DO-- can't have WHITE Goldens or RED Goldens. Sadly, that would leave them all blue.
Prior to being elevated to the U.S. Supreme Court, Governor Charles Evans Hughes remarked, "We are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the judges say it is...."
Do we have a Breed Standard which says what the GRCA Judges' Education Committee says it is?
You're a better man than I am Gunga Din!...if you can make any sense out of the mixed and confusing messages which emanate from the Club leaders. Whether committees or the Board itself. The GRCA President admonishes us to follow the dictates of our Breed Guardians-- the Old Guard and their wealth of experience, knowledge and years in the Golden Retriever community. But often they have old ideas and viewpoints firmly entrenched in the last century. There is a book about our breed, titled The New Golden Retriever. Must reading if you care about our breed. But it was published in 1996. Nearly two decades have passed since then. And with this passage of time, new issues have arisen which require our attention.
But the question of coat color still divides us. And it affects the size of the gene pool in America. at a critical time. Not to mention the fact that the American Type and the English Type continue to move in opposite directions. And a discussion of these two will only find an audience in the United States or Canada. In Europe or among the Aussies and Kiwis there is no need for such discussion, since there are virtually no imports of the American Type to speak of. The world market for American Goldens is for all intents and purposess non-existent. That should give one pause; but it does not. Place blame wherever you wish. The fact remains that the question of COLOR was SETTLED BY THE BRITISH in 1936. Under FCI leadership, national breed standards throughout the world exhibit near total uniformity. Only ONE nation stands apart as an outlier. It defies simple logic.
There is a problem with false consistency. With unexamined tradition.
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines." --Ralph Waldo Emerson
And if that doesn't work for you, how about brushing up on your Shakespeare?
"The fault,...is not in our stars, But in ourselves, that we are underlings."
Is the general membership of the GRCA listening? Does it care? I'm not suggesting an "Et tu, Brutus" moment; but shouldn't all of us care enough about our delightful Goldens to speak out and speak up on behalf of the concept of ONE Breed/ ONE Standard?
I rest my case.
No comments:
Post a Comment