Judging Approval Process Proposal

Home , Fault (breeding)

Judging Operations Department Spring 2015 8051 Arco Corporate Drive, Suite 100 Volume 16 Raleigh, NC 27617-3390 Number 64 (919) 816-3639 [email protected]

S fter several months of review and discussion by the Board, a revised E

G version of the Judging Approval Proposal authored by members

D ofA the Board of Directors was distributed via email to all conformation U J judges, delegates, club officers, exhibitors and members of the dog press on

N Thursday, April 30, 2015. The latest version resulted from comments and O I recommendations made by the fancy, staff and Board members related to T the original draft.

RM A The information distributed via email was also posted on the AKC website O and included the revised draft proposal, an overview of the modifications made, a sample matrix of educational criteria for additional breed applicants ON F

C and the special email address created to receive feedback. As with the original distribution last fall, the information and all related documents were posted OR

F for a 21 day period as directed by the Board to afford the fancy an opportunity

R to review and comment on it. That period expired on May 21st, with all E

T related information regarding the revised proposal then being removed from T

E the website. L S It is the intent of the Board to review the comments offered by the fancy W

E during the 21 day period prior to and at its June 2015 meeting. Based on the N feedback received it will determine if additional modifications should be made C

K to the proposal before considering for adoption at the June meeting. A

E If and when a revised Judging Approval Process has been adopted by the H

T Board, the effective date will be approximately three months after adoption. All information pertaining to the newly adopted policy will be disseminated by the Judging Operations Department to the judging community and posted on the AKC website. Until that should occur, all applications submitted must satisfy the requirements of the current Judging Approval Process. AKC National Owner-Handled FSS Open Shows: Series: The AKC Board of Directors has expanded All-Breed clubs offering NOHS at their the types of clubs that are eligible to host events on or after October 8, 2015 will now FSS Open Shows to include all-breed clubs award a Reserve Best Owner-Handled in effective July 1, 2015. AKC approved Show just as is done for regular competition. conformation judges (approved for at least As with the regular competition, the reserve one breed) and any individual who has is selected from the seven NOHS group applied for and received approval as an Open Show judge winners in competition for NOHS Best in are eligible to judge Show. Judges assigned to judge the NOHS FSS Open Shows and the 4-6 month Best in Show competition shall first award Puppy Competitions. NOHS Reserve Best in Show, followed by NOHS Best in Show.

Junior Showmanship: The AKC Board Approved the following • Section 13. Ribbons and Prizes. The revision to the Junior Showmanship color of ribbons or rosettes for Junior Regulations and Guidelines for Judging Showmanship Classes shall be: Juniors in Conformation with an effective – First Prize: Rose date of October 7, 2015. – Second Prize: Brown • Best Junior Handler. A club offering Junior Showmanship must offer Best – Third Prize: Light Green Junior Handler. If a prize is offered, – Fourth Prize: Gray it must be described in the premium – Participation Ribbon for Novice list in accordance with Rules Applying Class exhibitors that do not receive a to Dog Shows Chapter 5, Section 5. The placement at the option of the Club: Junior Handler placed first in each Light Blue. This ribbon is not required to of the regular Junior Showmanship have the club name and date. Classes, if undefeated in any other Junior – Best Junior: Rose and Green Showmanship Class at that show, shall automatically be eligible to compete for – Reserve Best Junior: Rose and Gray Best Junior Handler. It is important to recognize that the • Reserve Best Junior Handler. A club Reserve Best Junior is handled as a offering Junior Showmanship may offer “true reserve,” where after Best Junior is Reserve Best Junior Handler. If a prize awarded, 2nd place from the class from is offered, it must be described in the which it advanced is called back into the premium list in accordance with Rules ring to compete for Reserve Best Junior. Applying to Dog Shows Chapter 5, Section 5. AKC staff felt it was very important from After the judge has awarded the Best an educational standpoint that the reserve Junior Handler, the second place winner was handled as true reserve similar to the from the class that the Junior was awarded Winners and Reserve Winners Classes. Best Junior Handler is to return to the ring to compete for Reserve Best Junior Handler. Updates...Updates...Updates...Updates...Updates

2 The Standard 80%

Contents Ramp Updates ~In this issue~ The AKC Board of Directors at its October 2014 meeting instructed staff to write to the parent Judging Approval Process Proposal...... 1 clubs of breeds currently on the “ramp breeds list” and inquire if the parent club prefers that Updates ...... 2 the ramp remain optional at the discretion of the judge or does the parent club wish that the Ramp Updates...... 3 ramp be expected for their breed. Clubs were Natural Selections...... 4 given until March 15, 2015 to reply with an effective date of July 1, 2015 for any changes Norwich Terrier Club of America ...... 6 that were to result from this inquiry.

Golden Retriever Club of America...... 7 The AKC Judging Operations Department on March 27, 2015 notified all conformation The United States Australian Shepherd judges via email as per the request of their Association: Critical Breed Proportions ...... 8 parent clubs, effective July 1, 2015 Sussex Getting to Know the Spaniels and Chinese Shar-Pei must be judged Judging Operations Department ...... 9 on the ramp in all conformation competition associated with AKC conformation dog shows Recommendation Regarding or at which AKC conformation titles may be Conducting Oral Exams ...... 10 earned. This requirement applies to breed, group, BIS, Jr. Showmanship, 4-6 month puppy Sloughi and American Hairless Terrier...... 10 competition, and the AKC NOHS competition. 2015 Advanced Judging Institute...... 11 In addition, based upon its request, the Cirneco dell’Etna has been added to the list of Weigh/Measure Tutorial Guides...... 12 breeds eligible to be judged on the ramp at the Chihuahua Club of America ...... 12 discretion of the judge effective July 1, 2015. The Table-Ramp list has been updated and is English Springer Spaniel Field available on the AKC website. Trial Association...... 13

The Norfolk Terrier Club ...... 14

Emeritus Judges...... 15

Upcoming Seminars...... 16

The Standard 3 Natural Selection

atural selection is a phenomenon of nature. One of AKC’s recent initiatives to help draw and/ NBy definition, Natural selection is one of the or keep exhibitors in our sport is the creation and basic mechanisms of evolution and Darwin’s most subsequent promotion of the AKC National Owner- famous theory; stating that evolutionary change Handled Series. Unfortunately, as is often time comes through the production of variation in each our nature, this was received with skepticism and generation and differential survival of individuals ridicule from exhibitors, handlers, the dog press and with different combinations of these variable most unfortunately, many judges. A couple of years characters. In simple terms, evolve or die. later, I think I’ve heard it all as far as what is “wrong Darwin’s theory in essence also applies to with it,” but what is evident is what is “right with it” conformation dog shows. Our sport has evolved is that those exhibitors who are eligible and compete in many ways over the years; the addition of new enjoy it tremendously. If you are yet to come to the breeds, the growth of clusters, evening specialties, same conclusion, please take a look. concurrent specialties, televised events and the Without a doubt the program has been far from Grand Championship titles are just a few examples. flawless. There have been difficulties with getting With every change comes griping and grumbling the judges and the stewards on the same page and screams that we are “tearing at the fibers of the regarding how to designate the award. But, with sport!” But to date, we have evolved and survived. consistent effort on the part of AKC staff to educate, However, we face changes today unique to anytime it has improved. But no matter how many charts in the past. First and foremost societal changes are created, articles are written, videos are created have had a direct impact on the make-up of our and letters are sent; it will not make a difference constituents, what factors attract and draw new unless the judge (and steward) makes an effort people into our sport as well as the attention to understand the process and cares that he or span of those who do compete. We are an instant she does it correctly. The biggest shame of all is gratification and immediate result society. Like that some who have chosen not to make an effort it or not, times have changed. For years, the to understand then elect to display their distain greatest minds of our sport have pontificated through their demeanor toward the exhibitors who on how we can stop the decline of entries at our compete in the NOHS competition. conformation shows. While almost everyone has had an opinion, there is no quick fix or immediate solution. Embarrassingly enough the most obvious is sometimes the hardest to see… please allow me to explain.

4 The Standard Natural Selection Continued

Following is an excerpt from a letter recently received by Judging Operations:

Today I overheard something that really angered me. XXXX was our judge. I was standing near the table when the ring steward and she were discussing the fact that it was Owner Handler day. She said, “Oh, that’s today? I don’t know why anybody would want to be the best of the leftovers.” Imagine how much I felt like walking into her ring with any of my dogs after hearing that comment. If I had any presence of mind I would have asked if I could turn my numbers back in since she held owner handlers in such low regard, but I was so surprised, I showed my dogs anyway and only thought of that afterwards. AND BTW.... we had 11 Pug exhibitors who had checked off the box for NOHS. Yes, she did put up all handlers when she had the opportunity but that isn’t my complaint. With the exception of one, the dogs she put up were fine. Please know that I heard this first hand and this is not hearsay. I do feel that the AKC should be notified of this and I am happy to lodge a complaint because I won’t show to her again (in spite of the fact that she gave my 12-18 month dog a very nice class win) if she holds owner handlers in such low regard before we even walk into the ring. Who should I contact and/or how do I go about lodging a complaint? It’s frustrating because I try to convince people that owner handlers do have a fair shake if they have a good dog, well presented. However, when I hear something like that, it’s hard to defend that position when people complain about handlers, judges and politics.

Unfortunately, it is easy to forget that our breeders In the end, whether or not you personally love the and exhibitors are ultimately our priority. Every concept of the NOHS does not matter. If the NOHS exhibitor deserves respect and equal consideration. gives thousands of exhibitors a reason to come back It should be viewed as an honor that this individual tomorrow or next week or the week after, it is good has entered this event to receive your opinion of for our sport. I am not trying to sell the concept that their dog. The dots connect very easily; the more the NOHS is the panacea to cure all ills, but it sure exhibitors we chase away, the smaller the shows or does not hurt. the fewer number of shows we will have, smaller or fewer shows equals less judges needed. No matter what company you may work for, or club you belong to, you will never agree with As the guardians of our sport, we should all be every rule, policy, procedure or process it has. But making a concerted effort to draw and retain participants in our sport. In today’s world, the latter when you are part of the “team” you play by the is the most difficult part. Why would anyone want rules that are in place so that all are pulling in one to continue if they are being treated so poorly? direction. The NFL is different than it was in the This responsibility applies to everyone; judges, 70’s, baseball has interleague play, the NBA added experienced breeders/exhibitors, club officials, a 3 pt. line, etc… things change. AKC Conformation professional handlers and AKC Staff. shows have the NOHS… we must evolve to survive.

The Standard 5 Norwich Terrier Club of America

Dear AKC Judge,

The AKC recognized Norwich Terriers in 1936. The Norwich Terrier Club was formed in 1947 and a breed standard was approved to guide us as breeders and exhibitors. From the beginning, the breed standard has specified that the tail is medium docked. However, theAKC Norwich Terrier Standard is written in the positive; no traits are mentioned as “faults” and there are no disqualifications. The Standard states:“Tail medium docked. The terrier’s working origin requires that the tail be of sufficient length to grasp. Base level with topline; carried erect.” The tail should not be gay or lying on the back.

The Norwich Terrier Club of America has no immediate plans to change the breed standard as written above. We understand that according to AKC rules (Chapter 7, Section 15), full discretionary power is given to judges. Characteristics of an entry that are not as described within the approved breed standard are deviations from that standard. Accordingly, a judge may choose to excuse a Norwich Terrier with an undocked tail as being inconsistent with the standard, or award the dog. Because tail docking is prohibited in many other countries, judges are seeing more undocked Norwich in the show ring. We realize that because the undocked tail is inconsistent with the standard, judges may be uncertain when presented with these exhibits. For this reason, the Norwich Terrier Club has developed the following recommendation for judges:

Docked tails are preferred, however, when presented with an undocked dog we prefer that the judge evaluate the dog on his merits as described in the standard. Overall type, structure, movement, and temperament should be given primary consideration. The undocked tail should not be a reason to dismiss an exhibit or withhold ribbons and placements. However, the tail set and erect tail carriage are important and would apply to both the docked and undocked tail. Consideration should be given to the length of the docked tail.

6 The Standard The Golden Retriever Club of America, Inc.

April 2015 Letter to Conformation Judges concerning the Golden Retriever Height Disqualification The AKC breed standard for the Golden Retriever states the following: Males 23-24 inches in height at withers; females 21½-22½ inches. Dogs up to one inch above or below standard size should be proportionately penalized. Deviation in height of more than one inch from the standard shall disqualify. The Golden Retriever Club of America Judges’ Education Committee would like to call to the attention of all judges that there is NO exemption from the size requirements for puppies. Golden Retriever puppies mature at different rates, dependent on genetic, nutritional and environmental factors. Many young Goldens do not reach standard height until well after they reach six months of age and are eligible for the show ring. This is a normal rate of maturation for many bloodlines. We recommend that exhibitors do not enter their puppies in conformation shows until they meet the correct size required by the breed standard. Judges should always be aware of the size standard of the Golden Retriever and its importance to the breed function. The Golden Retriever is a moderately sized, athletic, hunting dog that may be required at times to work out of a small boat yet have the stamina to perform a full day in the field. The GRCA encourages judges to measure any Golden Retriever in competition whose size creates uncertainty, whether at the upper or lower limit of the allowed size range. Dogs that are outside of the desirable size range but within the disqualification limits are to be proportionately penalized. The GRCA has been contacted recently by a number of individuals and breeder-judges who are concerned about the apparent tolerance by judges of notably under-sized puppies in the ring and the lack of measuring to verify the exhibit is within the size allowed by the breed standard. These puppies are frequently in the 6 to 9 month puppy classes. While most Golden puppies will meet the standard’s requirements with time, each exhibit must be judged on the day, with no grace given as to future potential or growth. If a puppy of great quality is presented in the ring, it should be given due consideration for awards and judges are encouraged to measure and confirm the height of such an exhibit, rather than put it to the end of the line if uncertain. Anyone having additional questions about judging the Golden Retriever may contact the JEC, Ainslie Mills [email protected] or refer to the Golden Retriever Club of America web site under Judges’ Education, at www.grca.org. Jonathan C. Chase President Golden Retriever Club of America

The Standard 7 The United States Australian Shepherd Association: Critical Breed Proportions

t this time the USASA has no plans to alter our breed standard, but an issue has arisen A over the years that we need to acknowledge, address and hopefully eliminate. Our proportions are clearly stated in the breed standard, “He is well balanced, slightly longer than tall of medium size and bone, with coloring that offers variety and individuality.” Australian Shepherds which are more rectangular and short on leg, with the dog being “long and low when viewed from the side,” are not consistent with the desired proportions described within the approved breed standard. We ask that you consciously study the profile of each Australian Shepherd. The breed should be slightly longer than tall when measured from the breast bone to the ischium and then from the withers to the ground. While mathematically “slightly longer than tall” is a rectangle, the profile view should not be that of a long body lacking leg length. A crucial measurement that will assist you in identifying this fault is the withers-to-elbow/elbow-to-ground measures (see red arrows in illustration below) which should be equidistant. The long and low specimens are generally lacking one to two inches of leg length and the measurement above is not equal as it should be.

Example of measurements and CORRECT proportions

Example of measurements and INCORRECT proportions (long and low)

We thank you for taking the time to learn about, appreciate and enjoy our breed. We ask that the presence of this deviation of standard be weighed appropriately in the overall assessment of your entries and the determination of your awards. Sincerely, Terri Morgan, USASA President Flo McDaniel, USASA Judge’s Education Coordinator

8 The Standard Getting to Know the Judging Operations Department Over the next several issues of The Standard, we will feature a member of the Judging Operations staff. For those of you who have not visited the AKC Operations Center in Raleigh or possibly attended an Institute where they were in attendance, this will provide the opportunity for you to get to know a little more about those you communicate with over the phone or via email in the office. For this first edition, we are featuringInes Maldonado, Manager of Judging Operations. Ines recently celebrated her 30 year anniversary of employment with The American Kennel Club; quite the milestone for any employee and employer! We are fortunate and thankful to have Ines as an integral part of the Judging Operations team. Please make sure to check upcoming issues of The Standard for subsequent features on the Judging Operations staff so that you may place a face with the name.

Name: Ines Maldonado Title: Manager, Judging Operations

1. Give a brief personal autobiography: a. Where are you originally from? I am originally from Brooklyn, NY; both parents were born and raised in Puerto Rico. b. What brought you to the Raleigh, NC area, if not from here? In 1997, the AKC was relocating some of their departments, the Judging Operations Department was one of those departments, and I was given the option of moving. At the time my daughters were not quite school age, so my husband and I decided this was a perfect time to move and raise our daughters in NC. c. Single or married? Family? Married for 22 ½ years and I have two beautiful daughters, ages 18 and 21.

2. What is your position with AKC? How long have you worked for AKC? In 1985 I was hired as a Clerk. One of my duties at that time was filing all correspondence and the observation reports into 20+ filing cabinets; all reports and memos completed by the field representatives were typed by a stenographer. In a little over a year I was promoted to Data Entry Operator using the one computer that the department had. The fun part here was that we actually had to take turns using the one computer with other staff members. In 1994 I left Judging Operations for a short time and applied for the position of Secretary for Judging Education and Resources. In 1997 I was promoted to Supervisor and relocated to North Carolina and in August of 1999 was promoted by Darrell Hayes to Manager. I also had a name change, not sure how many judges remember, but I went from Maldonado to Perez then back to Maldonado.

3. Do you own any dogs? What breed? Names? Ages? I own one very spoiled Pit Bull, Zeus. He is 7 ½ years old and he likes to come to work with me. He makes an appearance anywhere from 2-3 days a week. I wish I had that schedule.

4. What hobbies or interests do you have outside of AKC? I like to jog and enjoy gardening. Last year I ran and finished a half-marathon in Raleigh, “The Rock and Roll” was on my bucket list, glad that is over and done with; I like to jog but that was a bit too much. I enjoy outdoor activities, so I love the spring, summer and fall.

5. One or two “fun facts” about yourself. My daughters say that I am “corny.” I beg to differ. I am soft spoken and shy (LOL).

Photo by William Gaither

The Standard 9 R ecommendation Regarding Conducting Oral Exams

Dear AKC Judge, As you may be aware, there has been a recent increase in reported cases of Canine Influenza. In consideration of this fact, and for the safety and welfare of our dogs, Judging Operations strongly advises that all judges should ask the exhibitor to show the bite/open the mouth when conducting oral exams. This recommendation is consistent with information included in The Rules, Policies and Guidelines for Conformation Dog Show Judges under Evaluating a Dog’s Mouth (page 13), “Many exhibitors prefer to open their dog’s mouth themselves for examination. However, you have the authority to personally open the dog’s mouth.” We do encourage judge’s as a general practice to ask exhibitors to open the mouth. In addition to sanitary reasons; the exhibitor is familiar with the dog resulting in a more efficient and pleasant experience. If necessary, as the judge you do have the authority to personally open the dog’s mouth. If it does become necessary or you elect to conduct the oral exam yourself, we do advise that you sanitize your hands after examining each dog. Please do not hesitate to contact Judging Operations or speak with the Executive Field Representative in attendance with any questions you may have. Thank you, Tim Thomas, Director, Dog Show Judges (919) 816-3639

Note from the Editor: The above recommendation does not apply to those breeds where the “thumb exam” is the proper manner to conduct the oral exam for that breed. The nature of the thumb exam requires that the judge conducts the exam themself. In these cases it is recommended to sanitize your hands after examining each dog, and you may want to consider doing the oral exam at the end of the individual examination for the sake of efficiency and timeliness.

Sloughi and American Hairless Terrier

The Sloughi will be accepted into the Hound Group and American Hairless Terrier into the Terrier Group, eligible for competition in regular breed classes on January 1, 2016. Notification was sent to all Hound and Terrier group judges to take the applicable exam to maintain group status in April 2015. Judges approved for all breeds within these groups and successfully completing the exam and processing fee will receive approval to judge the new breed(s) at shows held after January 1, 2016. Additional breed applications submitted for the balance of the Hound and Terrier Group received prior to January 1, 2016 will be required to be interviewed and a payment of $25 on this breed at the time of the scheduled interview by the office. Applicants who fail the interview by the Executive Field Representative will not be approved to judge the Sloughi and American Hairless Terrier and as a result, regardless of the Judges Review Committee’s decision on the balance of the group applied, will not be approved to judge the Hound and Terrier Group. AKC approved judges who can demonstrate significant background in the breed may apply to judge under the Adjunct System. Examples of “significant background” would be: • Experience in owning, breeding, exhibiting and/or handling the breed. • Background in judging multiple events with a significant number of entries. Individuals wishing to apply using the Adjunct Method must submit an application and a processing fee. Judging Operations will start accepting applications between June 1, 2015 and December 31, 2015. Those who miss the deadline must apply under the current system. Applications are available on the website or by contacting Judging Operations.

10 The Standard Advanced Judging Institute For the second may select from any of the breeds offered at a consecutive year, particular time. the AKC Judging Individuals could potentially attend up to 2015 Operations 12 breed seminars and workshops. Information Department co-hosted with the DJAA a double including a registration form will be posted on Advanced Institute, offering breed seminars and the AKC website as soon as finalized. Cost: $425 hands-on workshops for two complete AKC groups. which includes all materials as well as morning In 2014, the Hound and Herding breeds were and afternoon coffee breaks. Lunch will also be offered in-conjunction with the AKC/Eukanuba provided for attendees Tuesday - Friday. National Championship and the Orlando Cluster of Dog Shows. As with the year before, the response In addition to the breeds offered, individuals from the judging community displayed through the will have the option to attend a Judging Junior attendance as well as comments received at and Showmanship seminar. Also making its return following the event was phenomenal. this year will be our third installment of the JEC Symposium for Judges Education Coordinators We are once again proud to announce that the from Parent Clubs. AKC/DJAA Advanced Institute will be held in conjunction with the AKC/Eukanuba National For additional information, please contact Kathy Championship and the Orlando Cluster of Dog Caruana at [email protected] or 919-816-3862. Shows and will be offering breed education in Please be reminded, we will be limiting the number TWO GROUPS, providing seminars and hands-on of attendees for the individual seminars and workshops for the Sporting and Toy breeds. hands-on workshops. The AKC/DJAA Advanced Institute will be held December 8-11, 2015 at the Orange County Convention Center in Orlando, Florida. The schedule for 2015’s event will mirror that of the previous year with FOUR days of seminars and workshops (Tuesday – Friday). Up to five breeds, from a combination of Sporting and Toy breeds will be scheduled in each “time slot.” Attendees

The Final Word ❖ Whenever you step into the ring, judge as if you will never judge again ❖ Judge as if today’s is your last appointment and the one you want to be remembered for ❖ Once you have tasted “convenience judging,” you will NEVER do it right, no matter how much you tell yourself otherwise.

The Standard 11 Weigh/Measure Tutorial Guides To access the tutorial guides follow the steps below:

➊ Visit the AKC website www.akc.org and locate Events in the upper right corner of screen

➋ Hover the cursor and move to the first column; click on Conformation Dog Shows found under Learn About Events

➌ Scroll down the page and click on: Conformation Judging Resource Center

➍ Scroll and click on: Judge’s Education Standards, Study Guides, Mentors, Breed Exams

➎ Scroll to the bullet points: • Video on Weighing and Measuring Technique • Measuring and Weighing Dogs Study Guide

Message from the Chihuahua Club of America Education Committee

The members of the Chihuahua Club of American Education Committee have been informed that some judges may be practicing improper procedure when examining the Chihuahua Bite. The proper procedure for conducting the oral exam requires the lips to be opened. The finger over the bite (aka, thumb exam) similar to the examination for a pug or a Pekingese will tell the judge very little regarding the bite and whether it is correct for our breed. The approved breed standard for the Chihuahua is very specific regarding a correct bite and clearly states “Bite—Level or scissors. Overshot or undershot, or any distortion of the bite or jaw, should be penalized as a serious fault.” Please be sure when you judge the Chihuahua that you know the occlusion for each entry. We do not recommend disregarding an otherwise excellent example of the breed because it has a “serious fault”, as awards are to be based on the merits of the total dog. The entire dog has to be judged to determine the assimilation of the total attributes of the exhibit. The overall best example in your ring may have a faulty bite, but as the judge you cannot complete a thorough exam without seeing the teeth and knowing the occlusion of each entry. To properly determine if the entry has the desired scissors or level bite the lips of each entry must be opened. Article submitted on behalf of the Education Committee by Richard Miller, breeder since 1957 and judge of the breed since 1991. Mr. Miller serves as a member of the education committee and chaired the committee for several years.

12 The Standard Dear Judges and Judge Applicants, The English Springer Spaniel Field Trial Association‘s Board of Directors would like to take this opportunity to encourage adherence to our standard in judging these particular points: • Proportion and substance of this breed are critically important. “The length of the body (measured from point of shoulder to point of buttocks) is slightly greater than the height at the withers.” Proper proportions on an English Springer Spaniel directly correlate to the ability and stamina to perform the job for which he was bred. • Substance required to be successful in the field: “A 20 inch dog, well-proportioned and in good condition, will weigh approximately 50 pounds; a 19 inch bitch will weigh approximately 40 pounds.” Entries lacking in substance as defined within the approved breed standard would have difficulty adequately performing the tasks for which it was breed to complete. • Correct rear assembly of our breed: The croup “slopes gently to the set of the tail, and tail-set follows the natural line of the croup”. The tail “is carried horizontally or slightly elevated”…, and “…rear legs reach well under the body [and] provide driving power”. A frequent companion of the incorrect croup is very high tail sets. Tails can be carried too high by a dog with a correct croup as well as those without. Tails ideally should be carried between 2 and 3 o’clock. Flat croups and upright tails negatively affect the proper outline of the breed and may go hand-in-hand with structural faults. Please remember that this breed should always “suggest power, endurance and agility.” Sickle hocks are certainly not breed specific, but they are becoming common in English Springer Spaniels today. They dramatically decrease the strength and agility that this breed requires in order to do its job, as well as being weak and prone to injury. Please recognize this serious fault when judging our breed. As of January 1, 2015, the English Springer Spaniel became a “ramp-optional” breed. Judges may elect to examine their entry of English Springer Spaniels on the ground or the ramp. One of the primary reasons for adding the ramp as an option was to aid judges who may experience difficulty in evaluating each dog’s proportions and conducting breed specific exams with the breed on the floor. It is recommended to access the outline and proportion of your entry from a short distance rather than standing close to a stacked dog. We hope that for those who elect to use the ramp to judge our breed will find that it assists in effectively evaluating their entries. Our Illustrated Standard will be making an appearance on our ESSFTA.org website in the near future. We hope it will be an easy reference tool for you. Also, we would like to invite you to our Judges’ Education Program at our National Specialty. The seminar will be on Tuesday, September 22, 2015, at the Purina Event Center in Gray Summit, MO. There is no charge and we would love to have you! Anyone interested in continuing education can contact Laurin Howard at [email protected]. Thank you for your consideration!

The Standard 13 The Norfolk Terrier Club

Judging the Norfolk Terrier with a Natural Tail The Norfolk Terrier Club standard calls for a tail to be medium docked, of sufficient length to ensure a balanced outline. Straight set on high, the base level with the topline. Not a squirrel tail. (Official Standard approved October 13, 1981) The Norfolk Terrier Club has no immediate plans to change the Standard as written above, however, the Club does understand that in accordance with AKC rules (Chapter 7, Section 15), a judge may either choose to excuse a Norfolk Terrier with a natural tail as being inconsistent with the standard, or judge the dog, considering the tail to be a fault. Given this conflict, the Judges Education Committee with an eye towards alleviating the uncertainty that these exhibits will present, has come up with the following recommendations to judges: “When presented with an undocked dog, we would prefer that the judge evaluate the dog on its merits as outlined in the AKC standard. The presence of an undocked tail should not be a reason to dismiss an exhibit. We feel that the overall type, structure, movement and temperament of the dog should be the primary factors to consider when judging the exhibit. It should be noted, however, that the set of the tail and placement of the tail are important and should be considered. It should be noted that the tail should not curl over the back; it should be thick at the root tapering towards the top and carried as straight as possible.” It should be noted that the club has prepared this recommendation because members feel strongly that there is a need for breeders to import dogs from other countries to boost the genetic strength of our breed. We have a small gene pool and the club wishes to encourage the importation of, and exhibition of, dogs from abroad. The club understands that this means that judges will see more dogs being exhibited with a natural (undocked tail) and we hope that this recommendation helps to clarify our position. Thank you for considering our recommendation.

The Norfolk Terrier Club

Nancy Ann Wise Mary Sweaney President Corresponding Secretary

14 The Standard EMERITUS JUDGES

The Judging Operations Department of the American Kennel Club wants to acknowledge and “Thank” each of the Emeritus Judges for their contribution, dedication and devotion to the sport of purebred dogs. The role of these individuals as breeders, exhibitors, handlers, mentors and friends serves as a reminder for each of us their importance within the sport we all love and cherish. Please join us as we honor these Emeritus Judges that have given so freely of their time, knowledge and experience for so many years.

Mrs. Joan J Aaron Ms. Marion G Durholz Mrs. Cynthia P Jennings Miss Eula M Rhoads Mr. David Abraham Mrs. Irene Dutton Edwin S Johansen Ms. Bernice D Richardson Mrs. Mary Lou Adair Mrs. Christine L Dyker Mrs. Louise E Johnson Mrs. Lenora M Riddle Douglas R Adams Mr. James W Eberhardt Ms. Gretchen H Johnson Mrs. Barbara Ridgway Dr. Jim Alexander Joanne Eberle Mr. Warren H Johnson Mrs. Nancy P Riley Mrs. Joan G Alexander Mr. Clifford C Edstrom Mr. Forrest G Johnson Mrs. Jo Ann G Riley Mr. William B Allen Mrs. Janice E Edwards Mrs. Evelyn N Johnson Lonzie D Rinker Dr. George W Anderson Mrs. Joan L Elliott Mr. Edmund Jamison Kauffman Mr. Ralph S Roberts Mrs. M. Rosalie Anderson John E Ellis Mrs. Anna Mary Kauffman Dr. J. J Rodos Henry A Anderson Mr. Robert T Emerson Mr. Reed J Keffer Forrest D Rose Charles S Aronstam Ms. Virginia C Engstrom Mr. Edward E Kilby Paul E Ross Mr. Douglas J Arthur Mrs. Carol Esterkin Dr. John W King Mrs. Myrtle Weddle L Rothschild Ms. Virginia M Ashlock O’Connor Mrs. Elizabeth Evans Mrs. Gail M Knight Mrs. Midge Ruscak Clark S Baker Dr. Glenn T Fancy Mr. Thomas A Knott Mr. Jack D Russell Mr. Dennis M Barnes Mrs. Jean Fancy Wayne F Kompare Mrs. Betty E Sandberg Louis H Barnett Mrs. Patricia M Fendley Mrs. Marie K Koonts Mr. Harold E Sands Mr. James Neal Barrett Mr. Robert H Fine Mrs. Candace M Kramer Mr. Philip D Schneider Mr. Ronald Batacao Mrs. Eve O Fisher Mr. Robert D Krohn Mrs. Joan C Scholz Ralph W Beahringer Mrs. Marma J Fleck Dr. Dianne Lammers Mrs. Barbara P Schulenberg Mrs. Cassandra F Becker Miss Mary E Flounders Cecil O Lancaster Dorothy Schulman Mr. Perry B Bell Mrs. Ruth E Foster Bart Lapin Mr. Bernard Schwartz Mr. Bob D Bender Mrs. Jean Fournier Ms. Patricia M Lapinski Mrs. Glorvina R Schwartz Mrs. Cherie N Berger Mr. Alton “Jack” Fowler Ms. Charlotte R LeVecque Mr. Gerald Schwartz Mr. Gregory Alden Betor Jean Fowler Ms. Betsey A Leedy Mr. John G Seader Dr. Charles E Billings Gertrude Freedman Ms. Liesel Lefkowitz Mrs. Nancy H Shapland Mr. Philip S Bishop Mr. Fred Froehlich Mrs. Sandra J Lemmer Mrs. Helen Case Shelley Mrs. Connie M Bissonnette Richard H Frost Ms. Christine Lennon George L Sherrill Mr. Leonard E Blumberg Dr. Walter Frost Ms. Cheryl A Lent Mrs. Beverly J Simis Col. Robert E Booth Mrs. Edna K.(Katie) Gammill Mrs. Gloria Lewis Mrs. L.K. (Sami) Simons Mr. Robert L Boothe Ms. Hettie P Garwood Mrs. Barbara J Linden Mrs. Barbara L Snobel Mrs. Sara F Bowen Mrs. Helen (Betty) Gay Ms. Eva Lydick Mr. Leonard Stapen Mrs. Paula J Bradley Daniel Gayle Mr. Wally R Madison Albert H Stevens Ira S Breines Mr. William A Gebert Miss Dolores (Dee) H Maltz Mrs. Patricia P Storey Dr. Elizabeth A Brisell Charles E Gillespie Kurt Marti Mrs. Marilyn J Swearingen Mrs. Betty Mahaffy Brown Mr. Mickey W Gingrich Ms. Ruth T Martucci Richard Tang Mrs. Mildred K Bryant Mrs. Patie Glanz Mrs. Holly L Masters Mrs. Cynthia L Tanney Mrs. Gloria L Busselman Mr. Kennan C Glaser Mr. John R Masters Mrs. Barbra Tatkin-Walsh Mr. Robert R Caldwell Mr. David L Gleaves Miss Priscilla D. “Prissy” Maxwell Ms. Candy Teis Mrs. Neva M Calhoun Mrs. Mary Ellen Gorske Matthias H Mesdag Ms. Ruth Tessendorf Mr. Donald A Callahan Robert E Gregory Mrs. Ann J Mesdag Mrs. Robert C (Carolyn) Thomas Diana H Campbell Mrs. Betty Ann Griffin Mrs. Janet Meshon-Potts Ms. Dorothy (Dee) Thomson Mrs. Anne N Carpenter Mrs. Iris Grimes Mrs. Frances B Messinger Mrs. Sally D Throckmorton Dr. Robert E Carpenter Mrs. Dorothea J Gruenerwald Mr. Salvatore J Miceli Ms. Zoe A Tice Robert A Carsten Richard H Guthrie Howard A Mickelson Mrs. Elizabeth Ann Tidmore Mrs. Noreen C Cartwright Mrs. Judith A Hamilton Mrs. Hildegard Mikoleit Mr. William T Tolbert Mrs. Maryann Caruso Mrs. Kay Hardy Mr. Kenneth J Miller Mr. Joseph R Tomey Mrs. Frances G Cazier Mr. Eugene W Haupt Eugene M Mitchell Rose Tomlin Ms. Sue Chisholm-Jones Lorin R Hawkins Michael Mitchell Dr. Robert S Turton Mr. Robert L Christianson Mr. Keith R Haygood Elizabeth Bruce Mitchell Roger L Van Mrs. Connie K Christie Mrs. Barbara B Hedberg Mrs. Roberta Mocabee Mrs. Margaret J Veno Ms. Janet I Churchill Dr. Robert D Helferty Mrs. Grace Moran Mr. Charles F Visich Herbert W Clark Jr. Dr. Michael C Henson Ms. Patricia R Morehouse Mrs. Edna M Voyles Mrs. Edith E Colaneri Mrs. Patricia K Hirsch Mr. Kenneth W Nelson Mrs. Chris Walkowicz Mrs. Elizabeth Cooper Dr. Dorothy J Hodges Mr. C. Allan Nicks Mrs. A. Hickok Warner Richard Craven Mr. William H Holbrook Mrs. Marianne L Nixon Mrs. Marie L Warner Mrs. Patricia H Crawley Mr. Jerry L Holman Mrs. Carol M Noelle Mrs. Virginia B Watkins Ms. Jean Baird Crowley Mr. Francis J Holzer Harold E Ohlinger Ms. Jean A Webb Mrs. Gail M Cusack Dr. Bert G Homan Mrs. Doris A Oliphant Donna L Webster Ronald M Davis Mrs. Helen Susan Horn Betty J Omohundro Mrs. Dorothy Welsh Mr. Ralph N Del Deo Derek A Howarth Ms. Grace E Pappas Mrs. Gwena J Weymouth Mrs. Phyllis J Denton Mrs. Sylvia R Howison Mr. Paul L Paquin Mr. Bill Whaling Mr. Owen M Derryberry Mrs. Pauline B Hughes Mrs. Sandra J Parente Mrs. Lois Wolff White William P Devan Mr. Max E Hurd Mrs. Margretta Patterson-Kauffman Mrs. Mae E White Virginia A Devaney Ms. Juanita Huseby Ms. Millie Paul Ms. Jane F Wiedel Bud DiDonato Mrs. Frances W Ippensen Connie D Paulsen Mrs. Shirley M Willey Mrs. Mary E Diesem-Soto Ms. Carroll Ann Irwin Laura Perkinson Mrs. Carol A Williams Mrs. Nancy A Dinkfelt Robert M Jackson Mr. Theodore T Peterson James F Willis John J Dinnien Richard E Jackson Mr. John N Peterson Joseph A Wolak Mr. William J Dolan Mrs. Buck Jacobs John T Phillips Mrs. Dawn E Woods Mr. Charles (Chuck) E Doran Jr. Mr. Henry A Janicki Mr. Joseph M Poepping Mr. Ron P Zemke Mr. Bob R Drain Theodore W Jarmie Mr. Robert Pross Mrs. B.W. Ziessow Ms. Marilyn Drewes Mr. Richard C Jeffery Mrs. Eleanor Pugliese Mr. Howard A Dullnig Mrs. Margaret Carole Jeffery Mr. Frank L Reynolds

15 The AKC Institute for Aspiring and Newly Approved Judges (“Basic”) The Only Institute Approved by the American Kennel Club to Fulfill the Requirement for Judging Applicants Applying After January 1, 2009

Senior Editor PRE-REGISTRATION FOR SEMINAR ENCOURAGED Tim Thomas Ring Procedure • Evaluating Dogs • The Approval Process

Editor Puyallup, WA • Sat. June 6 Ines Maldonado In conjunction with the Puyallup Dog Fanciers Show Houston, TX • Sat. July 18 Contributors In conjunction with the Houston World Series of Dog Shows Mary Dukes Orlando, FL • Thurs. Dec. 10 Guy Fisher In conjunction with the AKC/Eukanuba National Championship Tim Thomas Sue Vroom AKC Advanced Judges Institutes Production Editor Susan Judge Orlando, FL • Tues. – Fri., December 8 -11, 2015 Details to be announced.

Designer Monica Tate Judging Junior Showmanship Seminars Published by Pomona, CA • Sat. May 23 The American Kennel Club for In conjunction with the Mission Circuit Dog Shows Approved Conformation and Fletcher, NC • Sat. May 23 Junior Showmanship Judges In conjunction with the Henderson Kennel Club Show Wheaton, IL • Sat. June 6 In conjunction with the Newtown Kennel Club Show Puyallup, WA • Sun. June 7 In conjunction with the Puyallup Dog Fanciers Show Houston, TX • Sun. July 19 In conjunction with the Houston World Series of Dog Shows Canfield, OH • Sat. Aug. 1 In conjunction with the Beaver County Kennel Club Show Kenner, LA • Sat. Aug. 1 In conjunction with the Metairie Kennel Club Show Reno, NV • Sat. Aug. 15 In conjunction with the Reno Kennel Club Show W. Springfield, MA • Sat. Aug. 22 In conjunction with the Newtown Kennel Club Show Grass Valley, CA • Sat. Aug. 29 In conjunction with the Gold Country Kennel Club Show Raleigh, NC • Sun. Sept. 6 In conjunction with the Raleigh Kennel Club Show Arcadia, FL • Sat. Oct. 10 In conjunction with the Greater Naples DFA Show

Orlando, FL • Fri. Dec. 11 In conjunction with the AKC/Eukanuba National Championship

For additional information including registration, contact Kathy Caruana at [email protected] or (919) 816-3862.