Before one even requests a judge's application you must meet THREE criteria:
(1) Exhibited in conformation for TWELVE or more years in at least one breed
(2) Bred and raised FIVE or more litters of one breed on your premises
(3) Bred four or more champions in one breed
Those who suggest that it is unfair to raise the "kennel blindness issue" might wish to reconsider. Would anyone knowingly show his dogs for a dozen years or so, breed his bitches no less than five times, title at least four of his dogs, and believe that his dogs were NOT among the best? That his efforts were not to improve the breed by adhering as best he could to the Golden Retriever Breed Standard? Would that person not consider his "type" or his "style" of Golden among the best available? And would not his subjective view follow him into the ring-- in any small measure at all?
With age comes experience. But tenure in a breed is simply time spent-- if the idea of breeding to the ideal is not foremost in one's thinking. Rare indeed is the child protege Junior Handler whose mom and dad bankroll him sufficiently to establish his own breeding kennel at a tender age.
And even in a highly competitive breed such as the Golden, attaining four championship titles does not seem like much of a stretch-- especially for those folks who have the money to enter God-knows-how-many-shows and can pay a tidy sum to a professional handler.
You don't have to be born Jewish to understand the horrors of the Holocaust or born black to find slavery and segregation totally offensive. And you most certainly can teach children-- whether or not you have ever been a parent.
Why is it not possible for younger folks to judge a breed until or unless they have actually bred a dog? Or earned a championship. Perhaps we should leave this notion of "earning one's dues" to the 20th century. Check the calendar. We're in a new one.
If a Breed Standard is PROPERLY written why can't a non-breeder and/or non-exhibitor apply it to dogs in a conformation ring? The dog, in the first instance, is being judged against the breed standard, not the other dogs in the ring. Or so the theory goes. Comparisons between and among the dogs entered should be based upon how EACH relates to that breed standard. Not how they compare to each other.
What else is required for a judge?
--Six stewarding assignments
--Six judging assignments at matches and such
--Attendance at an AKC Basic Judges' Institute
--An open-book exam on canine anatomy and judging procedures
--A pre-application interview with AKC staff
Once you do this, then you must...
--Complete the application
--Participate in another interview with AKC staff
--Pass another open-book exam on the standard for the breed(s) applied for
--Be interviewed by and get green light from AKC staff and board of directors
--Participate in five provisional judging assignments where you are graded by an AKC field
representative
--Apply for regular judging status
(Did I leave out the Partridge in a Pear Tree or perhaps the kitchen sink?)
Obviously becoming a judge is not exactly a "walk in the park" (whether or not there's a four-legged critter by your side). It requires real time and real effort. Valerie Foss, editor of The Ultimate Golden Retriever, has some interesting thoughts on judging. The writer points out that the AKC is, "constantly changing their stipulated requirements, seeking to improve the selection of judges with the implied intent of improving the quality of new judges." She calls it "a learning process that never stops;" and says that, "History judges the judges, so do not be found failing. Not only must you know your Standard by heart, you must know what it means-- learning by discovery in depth."
She adds that, "To judge is a great responsibility, because judges can change a breed, for it is the dog who wins in the show ring that is used for future breeding programmes."
No comments:
Post a Comment