Kansas City Here We
Come!
It took a century, but the ABC
National has finally arrived in the center of the country. Kudos to the ABC officers and
board members who implemented the wishes of the membership so quickly and with so little
bloodshed. :-)
Down with
Amendment "B Minus"!
With the recent dismissal of
another pointed, natural-eared boxer from the ring by a judge who appears to believe that
cropped ears are the litmus test of breed type, and whose decision was fully supported by
the AKC, it should now be obvious to everyone that the sole purpose of Amendment B was to
1) make natural ears an unspoken fault; and 2) to tie up the Boxer Standard so that no new
natural ear amendment could be introduced for five (5) long years.
Even so, I cannot believe that
the proponents of "B" envisioned the current state of affairs. Surely they are
as embarassed as the rest of us by seeing a boxer excused for a "deviation" from
the standard -- a deviation that in NO way defines breed type or has any impact on the
dog’s value as a breeding animal -- while the rest of the class, each presumably
imperfect in one more important way or another, remain to be judged. At this point,
there can be no doubt that Amendment B detracts from, rather than adds to, a non-breeder
judge’s ability to interpret the Boxer Standard. Even the AKC, in a response to a
complaint from the breeder of the excused dog, appeared to suggest that it is our
standard, and not the judge, that is at fault in this instance.
In fact, I’d be willing
to bet that the AKC is so frustrated by the complaints generated by the "unintended
consequences" of Amendment B, that they would embrace a request by the
American Boxer Club to allow the ABC membership to vote on this issue again before the end
of the 5-year moratorium on changes to the standard.
So, American Boxer Club
leadership, how's the Standards Committee coming with
"Amendment A+" -- the compromise amendment that will add clarity to the
standard, instead of detracting from it? (Suggested wording: "EARS - Cropped
or uncropped, cropped preferred. If cropped, the ears should look like
this:____________. If uncropped, the ears should look like that:__________.")
Is everyone going to be happy with that kind of compromise? No, they will
not. Will the judges who are currently excusing natural eared boxers start
putting them up, instead? No, I can't imagine that they will. But at least
those judges will no longer have a rationale for making cosmetic surgery the
sole determiner of type and quality; and novice exhibitors will no longer be
subjected to public humiliation as a result of entering unknowingly under the
"wrong" judge. |
