| GROUP REALIGNMENT - AN OVERVIEW
By Marieann Gladstone
AKC Realignment Committee, Secretary
(As Published in Perspectives, the Delegates Newsletter, Sept 2008)
Dog shows had their early beginnings in England in the mid 1850's. Fanciers
were hunters and primarily exhibited Pointers and Setters. County fairs
held competitions for Foxhounds. Toy and terrier breeds competed at the
local pubs and taverns. Eventually, classifications of Sporting and
Non-Sporting were decided. Often a dog was entered in Sporting in one show,
and then Non-Sporting at a different show.
Time brought on other changes. In the early 1900's in the US, divisions
were made into: Large Dogs, Medium-Size Dogs, Small-Size Dogs, and Cage
Dogs. This system was certainly helpful for the bench-show system. By
1925, five groups were organized: Sporting, Working, Terrier, Toy, and
Non-Sporting Group. In December 1930, the Sporting Group was divided into
Sporting Group and Sporting Group (Hounds). Hounds basically hunted
non-feathered prey. In 1937, the Sporting Group (Hounds) became the Hound
Group.
In October 1982, the Board of Directors appointed a study
committee to review and make recommendations regarding the alignment of
breeds into the Group. That committee (consisting of delegates and
non-delegate judges, and a Board member) made various recommendations to the
then seated Board; one of which was the splitting of the Working Group and
in 1983, a seventh group, the Herding Group was official.
Since that time, more breeds have continually been added to AKC registry and
gradually accepted into one of the seven groups. New breeds are still being
added and it is projected that, in a few years, the size of our current
Groups will be unmanageable. As of this writing, about two dozen FSS breeds
are actively involved with the process of recognition for either a Group or
Miscellaneous group status, with more constantly starting the process. This
has caused the topic of realignment to be of gradually heightening concern
for the past half dozen years.
Recently, a "special attraction" competition of the Northern Breeds Group
held in the Pacific Northwest met with great success and positive feedback.
This is indicative of how, managed correctly, change in Group makeup can be
both helpful and accepted.
The AKC Board of Directors, at its October 2007 meeting, appointed an
exploratory Group Realignment Committee "To evaluate the current alignment
of breeds within the seven variety groups to determine if a different
alignment would better serve the Sport now and in the future as new breeds
become registrable."
This committee consists of: Tom Davies, Chairman; Marieann
Gladstone, Secretary; Karen Burgess, Robert Fisher, Tim James, Dr. Alvin
Krause, Dr. William Newman, John Nielson, Dr. Robert Smith, Robin Stansell,
and R. William Taylor.
If you look at the make-up of this committee, you should
notice that the membership of 11 is made up of not only 6 AKC Delegates and
two Board members, but also a Canadian breeder/exhibitor/judge, two AKC
Staff, all-round judges and a Superintendent. Committee members have
backgrounds in judging, professional handling, and show chairing. Obviously
all have been involved in the process of breeding and exhibiting for many,
many years. Its members live in the East, West, North, and South and across
the border and collectively they represent centuries of sport involvement.
The fancy was well represented on this committee, such that they can be
reasonably assured that valid and helpful conclusions will be achieved about
the realignment of our Groups. There is a great deal of misinformation being discussed among
the fancy as to just what the Realignment Committee is doing and what its
powers are. We (like the 1983 Realignment Committee) are an AKC Board
appointed committee and as such, are mandated to report our conclusions to
the Board.
We have suggested an increase in the number of Groups from
seven to ten. We will not mandate the division of breeds within the Groups.
We have made several recommendations thus far, and have queried the Parent
clubs of those breeds that may be affected. We will be relying on those
Parent Clubs to give us their input on our initial recommendations. Our
final recommendation will, for the most part, consider that input.
Groups are generally organized by similar function, size or
structure. We have suggested the formation of a "Northern" Group which will
consist primarily of the Spitz type dogs, along with a few closely related
breeds. This Group is not entirely based on function (some pull - Siberian &
Samoyed and others hunt - Elkhound & Finnish Spitz, for example), but
perhaps a bit more on form.
One of our other suggestions will be the split of two groups,
one of which is the Hound Group. The logical split will be into sight and
scent hounds. The second is the Sporting group. Again, a logical split is
into Pointers & Setters, and the other being the Retrievers & Spaniels. In
each case, which breed goes where is obvious in most cases, not so obvious
in others.
Additionally, we have dropped the Non-Sporting group
designation, and replaced it with a Companion Group. It will consist of
primarily medium sized breeds whose principle function is as a companion.
Remember, in the beginning, "Non-Sporting" referred to a dog that was not a
gun (or hunting) dog. Today, it carries an entirely different connotation.
What about judges? The committee will address
recommendations to the Judges Department, including judges being tested to
be approved for breeds in a newly formed Group. This is already done with
adjunct breeds. Hound Group Judges now will suddenly be approved for two
Groups, as would Sporting Group judges!
Certain breeds have already shared their questions and
concerns with the committee. The opinions of these parent clubs and club
members are very welcomed. Among the questions the committee discussed
are:
Italian Greyhound: It is a true sighthound? Does it belong in that Group?
Should they be standing with the Greyhound, Whippet, etc?
Basenji: Is it a sighthound? Does it belong in another group? Which one?
Bulldog: Some have suggested that it belongs in the Working Group.
Dalmatian: Some have suggested that it belongs in the Working
Group. Stand the Dalmatian, the Rhodesian Ridgeback and the Pointer in a
row - do they belong together?
Rhodesian Ridgeback: Is it a hound? Does it belong in the Working Group?
Or even the Sporting Group next to the Pointer?
Pembroke Welsh Corgi: It is from Spitz background, so Northern Group or
Herding?
Cavalier King Charles Spaniel: Companion or Toy?
Miniature Schnauzer: Does it belong with the other two
Schnauzers? They are distinctly different breeds, yet are similar in
appearance and phenotype.
Shih Tzu: Companion or Toy?
Poodle: Does the Standard belong in the Sporting Group?
And WHAT DO WE DO WITH VARIETIES???
In the early years of dog show competition, some breeds were divided into
varieties for competition. Today, AKC does not permit breed separation into
varieties. There were so many Cocker Spaniels being exhibited that they
were divided into varieties based on color. Should so many Cocker Spaniels
compete in the same Group against other Sporting Dogs, based merely on their
color?
The 1983 Realignment Committee suggested that the various Varieties compete
amongst themselves to select a single Best of Breed and that dog would go to
its particular group. For example, if the 3 Poodle Variety winners were
judged to select one Best of Breed, only that one BOB Poodle would go to the
Group. The Fox Terriers went the route of becoming separate breeds - a
Wire Fox Terrier and a Smooth Fox Terrier are both represented in the
Terrier Group. We have the two Collie varieties, the Manchesters, the
Dachshunds, etc etc. All this is for consideration, but each as a separate
issue.
These are all questions that this Committee is asking you to
consider and give input! We hope that you will share your questions and
ideas with us while the committee's work is still ongoing.
One additional point to mention: When the Herding Group was
formed, the record indicates that certain breeds that may have been slighted
in the larger, and very competitive Working Group finally gained recognition
with awards in their new Group. The Belgian breeds, the Cardigan Welsh
Corgi, Australian Cattle Dog, and other Herding breeds now earned quality
recognition. This will happen again with the Realignment of the Groups.
More of the lesser-known breeds will gain their rightful recognition.
With ten Group winners competing, there will be more ribbons
and rewards and more people happy at the end of the day. Why give out only
7 Group Winner when 10 Group Winners can result as well? If 10 Groups are
competing for Best in Show, should we also reward a Reserve Best in Show?
The Committee has and will continue to welcome input from
those most affected breeds and indeed from the entire fancy before our final
recommendation is brought to the Board of Directors and any final report
will be brought to the Delegate body for a vote. We all survived the
formation of the Herding Group rather well and we will survive another
realignment, which should also freshen and revitalize the sport.
It is evident that our history that our sport is
ever-changing, and keeps up with the time. Will you be part of it? Will
you cast your vote to improve the sport we love and to which we devote so
much of our time?
The committee welcomes your input, which can be directed to
Jim Crowley jax@akc.org or to any of the members of the committee.
Marieann Gladstone, Sec'y
mzg@cwcorgi.com
|