SUMMER SHOW for the Goldens You love

These are some samples, suggestions, whatever. See anything you like? If there's enough interest, designs can be printed on Tee shirts for your enjoyment. You'll also be a walking advertisement for the upcoming show. A great way to celebrate the introduction of SUMMER 2015. Bring along your Goldens to have them assessed by an expert in the breed. Meet folks who love Golden Retrievers as much as you do.

It's Never Too Early To Plan Ahead-- See You In June 2015

   It's never too soon to make plans. This looks to be a great opportunity to join with Golden Retriever fanciers/breeders/owners-- whether you favor the American Type or English Type. All coat colors are welcome to participate and will be judged without bias.
   We look forward to a large number of entries. It is not unreasonable to think the total could reach one hundred or more. Spread the word. And be sure to mention the event to your Canadian friends north of the border.
   Sue Brown has a long and illustrious connection to the breed and her "Teddy"  (Shardanell Talk O' The Town at Ipcress) was the top producing stud dog on three occasions in Great Britain. A stellar achievement in the breed.
    While at the show venue, it is hoped that she will conduct an educational seminar on the Golden Retriever as well.
   So mark those calendars; and think warm-weather thoughts.

And Then There Was ONE

   Once upon a time (not so long ago, actually) Sarah and Tom Rutland journeyed to Tomich, Scotland and discovered Dileas-- a pale-coated Golden Retriever --walking along a quiet road. Apparently, he is the sole survivor of that breed in the quaint town most identified with the origin of our wonderful breed. Lord Tweedmouth is long gone. The great manor house a mere shell of its former glory. Yes, there is a bronze statue to be found at road's edge; but that is a monument to a breed and its beginnings.
   The article entitled The Day We Met Dileas can be found on the GRCA website. It's fun reading.
   What surprises me most about this entry is that it represents perhaps the ONLY reference to Golden Retrievers in Scotland, Great Britain, the world as a whole-- other than the United States. Even if Dileas (pronounced JEE-less) is the only Golden in town, I think the GRCA might be willing to admit that there are at least one or two living beyond the confines of the United States in the 21st century.
   The GRCA version of breed history reads something like this. Goldens originated in Scotland; a few ventured across The Pond to Canada and then filtered down to the United States. There the essential breed history began. 
   It is as if the English or European Golden Retrievers went the way of the dinosaurs.
   True, there are some references to be found in the archives. But, can you identify even a single POSITIVE article on the website or in the magazine that deals with European or Australian representatives of our breed as they exist today?  After all, our signature publication is called the Golden Retriever NEWS--NOT the AMERICAN Golden Retriever NEWS. Does any part of the readership have even a passing interest in what is happening in the Golden Retriever world beyond our shores? Do GRCA members who own/breed/fancy the English Type Golden have no interest in the subject at all? There are hundreds of Americans breeding to the British Standard today; thousands of Americans own English-Type Golden Retrievers.
   But references to them-- if they exist at all --are confined to attacks on breeders who charge great amounts of money for misnamed "WHITE" Golden Retrievers, and the unfounded health claims made about them. Would-be puppy buyers are told that coat color should be the LAST thing one should consider in purchasing a Golden Retriever. This fits with the mistaken belief that ALL non-American Golden Retrievers are very pale or cream in color. But WHY shouldn't color preference matter? In dogs of more than a single color, the markings matter don't they? And when the so-called BLONDE Golden Retrievers were all the rage, didn't breeders promise buyers that their pups would be pale-coated adults? Been there, done that-- on the receiving end.
   My wish would be that Tom and Sarah return to Merrie Olde England and stumble upon a dog show in progress-- maybe the Crufts Show. Perhaps they could tell us about the great number of Goldens to be found there, and the broad spectrum of coat color to be found in the breed.
  

A GOLDEN is a GOLDEN is a GOLDEN is a...

   Here we are at the GRCA National Specialty 2014 with Reserve Winners Bitch-- Sunkyst's VW.
   Winning bitch was a cream coat bred in the show's home state of North Carolina, the product of two English Type Goldens.
   Selections were made by the judge according to the AKC Golden Retriever Breed Standard. A standard which NEVER references the word "cream" despite the best and unceasing efforts made by GRCA leaders to convince the world otherwise. In articles found on the GRCA website you can find multiple references to cream as "undesirable" and assertions that the standard clearly says so. Judges are "educated" to accept this "fact." The show catalog includes the Golden Retriever breed standard, perhaps to remind us (and the judges?) that, "Predominant body color which is extremely pale or extremely dark is undesirable...."
   But all the blurbs found on the GRCA website-- advice or instructions to judges, comments on proper coat color, dismissive comments regarding the "vanilla retriever"  --none of which is included in the breed standard itself --alter that standard or its meaning. These articles state that pale gold is included in the acceptable color spectrum for coat color. But cream is not. Apparently cream is too "extreme" and too "pale" to suit their personal taste.
   There are THREE FICTIONS repeatedly asserted by the GRCA in their publications and public pronouncements.
     (1) All Golden Retrievers are born some SHADE of GOLD.
     (2) The British Standard considers cream to be merely a SHADE of gold, not a stand-alone coat color.
     (3)The AKC Breed Standard identifies cream as UNDESIRABLE.
   The American judge apparently was not swayed by these assertions when she chose her winning bitch. Nor was the British judge who followed up Sophie's win by proclaiming her Best of Winners. Neither judge was required to do so. When does pale gold become extremely pale? Too pale? And compared to what? The other Goldens in the ring, perhaps?
   When I asked the Board members (at the Annual Meeting) if the fact that Best of Winners possessed a born-cream coat  had caused them to reconsider their objections to cream, ALL sat in stone silence. They all-- each and every one -- should be applauded for their openness and candor. It's always instructive and informative to hear what our Club leaders think. Perhaps they could not hear the question over the shouting of the Club president(?)  Perhaps their silence was due to their desire to get the party started-- the Halloween event which immediately followed. The audience seemed to have little interest in the question either. The alleged "quorum" deserves kudos as well.
   The bottom line: the judges followed the breed standard. Other judges will as well.
   Jeffrey Pepper believes that, "....(B)reed standards are not written for novices, but rather for those intimately familiar with the breed being described....Because we are dealing with living things, breed standards must always allow room for interpretation...."  He, as virtually every spokesperson for our breed associated with the GRCA, has said that coat color should be a minor if not the last consideration in the conformation ring. On November 30, 2014 in North Carolina two well-respected judges did exactly that. What more can you ask? We should expect no less from professionals.

How NOT to Amend the Golden Retriever Breed Standard--Are You Listening, GRCA?

   GRCA BYLAWS-- Article IX AMENDMENTS
     Section 1    Amendments to ...the Standard for the breed may be proposed , at any time, by any member of the Board of Directors or by written petition addressed to the Secretary signed by ten percent of the members in good standing eligible to vote on the question...(Blah, blah, blah, etcetera)
   It goes on to say that the Board may create a special committee to prepare the amendment for a vote. It also says that the Board can either accept OR reject the committee's recommendations as they see fit. But in either case, the proposal can move forward and be put to a vote of the Club membership.
   The process is further explained. The amendment, once approved by vote of the membership, must receive approval of the AKC This appears to be merely a formality, since the American Kennel Club has ceded nearly all decision-making authority to parent breed clubs.
   Please notice: THERE IS NO DISCUSSION OF ANY RIGHT OF A SUB-COMMITTEE OF THE GRCA TO REWRITE, CLARIFY, OR EXPAND THE BREED STANDARD IN ANY WAY.
   However, the GRCA claims that RIGHT for the Judges' Education Sub-committee of FIVE members.This provides an END RUN around the specific steps required by the BYLAWS.
   At one point, the committee in question declared that the ACCEPTABLE  color parameters for the breed INCLUDED the COLOR CREAM. This document was drawn up by the committee. It was THEN APPROVED by the Board of Directors. Once done, it was sent to the AKC. This last step is NOT REQUIRED under the GRCA Bylaws or by the AKC since it is NOT an AMENDMENT or official change to the breed standard. An AKC official told me that they only approved changes in the standard itself-- not any other document a breed club circulates in public. But is this merely a CLARIFICATION?  So says the Board of Directors. But it is extra-legal; simply the opinion of a sub-committee.
   When I questioned the document which had been issued by this sub-committee I was told by the Board of Directors that an ERROR had been made. The BLAME for it (including cream as an acceptable color) was placed squarely upon the sub-committee chair. She is a Canadian who MISTAKENLY included cream in the document because it is regarded as acceptable under the Canadian breed standard (she chairs the Standards Committee/ Judges' Education Committee of the Canadian Golden Retriever Club). In effect, Ainslie Mills was "thrown under the bus" by her fellow Club leadership. She was ENTIRELY to blame for the error. No one else was responsible in any way.
   Within weeks, the document itself was altered and the word CREAM expunged. It was then REISSUED to judges by the GRCA-- or so I have been told. No one, however, would tell me how long the original document had been in place. Why did committee members put cream in the document to begin with?  Did members such as Marcia Schlehr and Barbara Pepper agree to include it? Their objection to cream-coated Goldens is well documented. No objections on their part? Or did they even participate in the writing of said document? They were responsible for it. That was their job. As members of that committee could they simply absent themselves?  And what of the Board of Directors? Did they READ the document BEFORE approving it for publication and use in judging venues? Did NOT EVEN ONE Board member OBJECT to declaring cream acceptable? When it was USED at judicial seminars did anyone object or even make reference to it? Did THOSE WHO conducted the seminars see a problem? Did any JUDGE question the inclusion of cream in the acceptable color range?
   The LARGER ISSUE, of course, is whether this sub-committee OR ANY committee or sub-committee can PROPERLY declare what the breed standard SAYS OR MEANS. The Board of Directors told me (in an e-mail) that IT CAN. And apparently it can change it's mind and declare something else to be true. How do they defend this? They don't. They simply remain silent and refuse to explain themselves-- to me or anyone else. At the Annual Meeting of the National Specialty in North Carolina I asked the Board to explain and justify their actions. I was shouted down by the Club president while the entire Board sat in silence. That is the state of the current GRCA leadership. Our breed deserves far better. So do the Club members.
   CONFORMATION IS CONFIRMATION. The success of a cream-coated bitch bred to the British Standard is proof of that. "Sophie" took Winners Bitch under an American judge, and then Best of Winners under a British judge at this year's National Specialty. Winning in the CONFORMATION ring that day CONFIRMED her outstanding quality. If either judge felt compelled to penalize her due to "unacceptable" coat color (if the breed standard was  in fact augmented by the judges' education document and was of equal status to the standard itself in its color parameters) then she must have been deemed TRULY outstanding to overcome her pale presence. More likely, NEITHER judge considered the sub-committee document SERIOUSLY, IF AT ALL. Had either even seen it before entering the ring? Sophie was judged against the breed standard, NOT by some "clarifying" document. The latter, most likely was IRRELEVANT to both assessors in the show ring.
   So three cheers for Ventess Sophia of Goldensglen, her owner Angel Martin, and breeder Jane Stevens. Though your win may not have moved mountains on Thursday, it most certainly shook the ground under the arena. Will it "move" the GRCA to adjust its thinking about coat color-- to comply with the acceptance of born-cream Goldens everywhere else in the world? Most likely not under the present Club leadership. For now, they will not be moved. But the breed will move on, with or without the current powers that be. And that is what matters most.
  
  
  
  

Thanks For Your Participation--NOT

   I want to thank all who attended Joanne Cava's "English Tea" at the GRCA National Specialty for taking a few minutes to fill out the questionnaire pictured above. I was told she expected 25 or so to attend the session. Sorry I was unable to make it. None the less your interest and cooperation was appreciated.
   Oh, sorry. Joanne informed me that NO ONE in attendance had any interest in answering any of the questions. So I received a ZERO response. I'd love to hear from ANYONE who attended the event. Why did you refuse to fill out the survey? Were the questions too controversial? Too difficult? Of no interest to you? Please feel free to e-mail me at curtisaurgwyn@hotmail.com. What exactly was your problem?

An Annual Meeting Fitting For Halloween--This is Leadership?

   Too bad no one bothered to videotape the Annual Meeting. The boorish behavior of the Club president as he shouted down a member-in-good standing (that would be me) for daring to ask questions of the Board, to ask that group to explain its votes and/or actions, surely captured the mood and spirit of Halloween. At one point, our leader asked if I would like him to poll the Board members. When I stated that that was my wish, he simply assumed the role of a Governor Chris Christie caricature and shouted me down. Not a single Board member rose to defend my right to speak. All sat  in silent assent and apparent approval of the Club leader. The assembled crowd-- no doubt anxious to get the Halloween party started-- voiced their disapproval at the questioner.
    For purposes of decorum, propriety or whatever, a Board member had earlier arisen to announce that there was a quorum present; so official business or what passes for that could take place. She based her decision on nothing other than perhaps a head count of those in the room-- many there to attend the party which was to follow. She did not even bother to ask for a show of hands to see how many of those in attendance were actually Club members. Some had wandered over from the dog show hearing about the party to follow; others were there to help decorate the room. The parliamentarian who had been brought to the event said "hi" and then reverted to the status of a mute button-- no doubt her costume for the day.
   It seems obvious that the Board feels no obligation whatever to ANSWER questions posed to them. Or even to HAVE questions addressed to them. Except for self-congratulation, what is the purpose of an Annual Meeting? The treasury is full, entries at the show exceeded expectations, the website is doing a fine job-- according to our leader. What more do we need to know? Let's get the party started.

In Honor of Veterans Day 2014

Absolutely love this photo of Ruth Thompson and her boy, Chaleur Valentino, as they are declared winners of the Veteran Class way Down Under.
   And, lest we forget, Cortney Corral's delightful Goodtime's Johnny Bee Good was first awarded Best Veteran before occupying center stage as Best In Show.
   Let's hear it for these two special vets as we honor all veterans who have served with honor.

GRCA National Specialty-- Old Dogs'n New Tricks

   History was made at the 2014 GRCA National Specialty when a cream-coated, bred-in-America, English Type (bred to the British Standard) Golden Retriever won a five-point major as Winners Bitch and Best of Winners. A great win for breeder Jane Stevens. 
   Overall winner-- Best In Show and Best Veteran --was a nearly ten-year old dog, Goodtimes Johnny Bee Good of Redhill kennel in Tennessee (pictured above Sophie). He showed the "youngsters" how it's done-- despite a snow delay. Yep, you heard me right. How's that for a Halloween "trick?"
   Winners Dog was Sandpiper Rush Hill's Die Hard, and Magnolia Captivate Not Tonight Honey was awarded the title of Best Opposite Sex. Select Dog was Gemini's House of The Rising Sun and Select Bitch honors went to Shadowland's Paws For Applause at Tristar.
   All and all a colorful and interesting group of winners at a show which included 1305 entries.