The Truth About the Number of Dog Shows: There Aren’t Too Many Shows, There Are Too Few Breeders

The Truth About the Number of Dog Shows: There Aren’t Too Many Shows, There Are Too Few Breeders

I’ve been doing some thinking lately and realize that I’ve become bored with the topic: “Are there too many dog shows?” My frank response to this question would be: “No!” And here’s the dilemma. The diatribe that there are too many shows is wrong. What’s not often mentioned when we talk about the number of shows today is that there are too few breeders to support these shows, so the number of shows doesn’t matter. What matters is there are not enough dogs to attend them.

The fact that there are so many shows is really to everyone’s advantage. It’s financially easier to get to a dog show these days because there are so many options closer to home that provide a venue for competition and critique, and a place for breeders to celebrate what they’re working on with their breed. So, the fact that there are many shows is really a benefit to the breeder. But the detriment is that we do not have the workforce or breeding force to support the number of shows, which dilutes the entry, not just in one breed but the whole entry: one of this breed, two of that breed, etc. The negative here is that there are no breeders in certain areas to make up entries. Having fewer shows does not change this reality. We need more dogs produced, registered, and shown to make use of the system of showing. We need competition as breeders to keep our kennels strong, and we need Group competition to measure the level of success we are achieving. If we had more prolific breeders, dog showing would be sustainable and the entry numbers would be up.

I just did a National Specialty for a breed that at one time was the most popular breed in the country. Today, there are just a few breeders, and as a result there is really genetic mayhem in a breed that was once thriving. With so few breeders left with 20 to 40 years of experience, the breed has fallen apart. And that is a common, reoccurring theme among a lot of breeds today: Chow Chows, Lhasa Apsos, (American) Cocker Spaniels. These are three examples of breeds that have lost popularity, lost breeders, and sadly, isolated top quality to very few remaining animals. The decline of the breeds is obvious. We know the Labrador and Golden Retrievers are still very popular breeds; however, their consistency of quality is still very sporadic. It’s a big fall from where they once were. But I will say that I see and I admire the progress being made to bring back the true balance and type in the Golden Retriever today.

There are, thankfully, examples of breeds that have been on an upward trajectory for some time now. For example, I remember when handlers were just getting started showing Affenpinschers in the 1990s, which was a precursor to what was to come for the breed. We saw two excellent examples of a little-known and rarely seen purebred enter the dog show rankings and bring attention to the breed. From then till now, we have seen the breed take on a hardy and competitive position in the show ring as a result of breeder dedication and also an increased production of quality puppies. And there are several other breeds that have experienced increased entries thanks to an expanded core of serious breeders who are breeding more of them than has ever been produced. So again, there is the advantage of having multiple breeders breeding multiple litters. It’s not just one person breeding one litter. It’s one person breeding five litters and four other people having five litters. It is my opinion that breeders have an obligation to breed litters (more frequently) to ensure their breed will continue to thrive.

I think Sussex Spaniels are a breed that is rebounding. There are now 10 breeders around the country instead of three!!! That’s an advantage. We’re seeing breeds like the Sussex and Affenpinscher repopulate dog shows, where you have the opportunity to see major entries in these “unusual” breeds. While they are somewhat regional with their entries, they do have majors which were once few and far between. To me, this is a big deal. There are other breeds experiencing the same advancement and we should all be applauding those breeders’ efforts. To see a large entry of Swedish Vallhunds or Norwegian Buhunds, or even a large entry in the highly successful Norwegian Elkhound, is a gift to the fancy.

We all know that registrations are down, and I know that this is the missing component: BREED MORE LITTERS! I have said for many years that breeders having one litter a year is very limiting. You cannot make great strides in improvements with one litter at a time. People may hate the high-volume discussion, but volume means having options. It means different pairings, different genetic makeup, and ways to solve genetic problems within your own family of dogs by having multiple litters produced in a given 18-month period. It’s really rather simple; you are creating different options for future use.

A very common rule for breeding is to have a terrific stud dog of better quality, genetically clean, testing clear for lots of breed-specific ailments, perfect in temperament, great mouth with correct dentition—all of these things—and that dog become the sire du jour in your breeding program. And you breed that dog to 10 bitches over the course of three years and you learn where he is strong and where he is weak as a sire. If all goes well, others will also use this dog and many offspring will result in populating a generation of quality kids. Then you replace that dominant male in your kennel with another dominant male that can be bred to all of those same 10 bitches, and that’s how you build your arsenal of dogs. That’s what it’s about. That is how it is done. It is not a mystery or a secret; it is what the best kennels have done for decades.

There’s not one person breeding dogs who has a secret voodoo magic that makes things happen. It is very elementary. The difference between breeders is in the genetic lottery that is played with. Do you have good GENES or do you have bad ones? And do you know the difference? If you’re working with a winning lottery, you move forward and you improve when you select based on more positive virtues each time. So, what people have to learn is that with a slower progression it’s going to take you longer to get there. The only way to get a silk purse from a sow’s ear is if both parents are silk purses. Then, 25 percent of that litter could be a silk purse; the other 75 percent might not be worth much!

I’ve never subscribed to the “popular sire syndrome drama.” It’s negative and it’s limiting. Novice breeders use it as part of the anti-breeder mentality, but it is overly simplistic. A good sire is a proven commodity. If you have a good dog that is meaningful and useful, there is no reason not to use him and use him often. I recall a comment from one of the most famous AKC breeders I ever met, Julie Gasow. She told me her top stud dogs needed to pay their way through life. They were career stud dogs. I have always admired her comment and see the value in that sentiment.

One dog cannot save a breed, but I do believe one dog can do damage to a breed. So, proceed with caution here. If you are using a dog that carries cataracts on 10 of your bitches—you’ve got a problem. If you are using a dog that has epilepsy—you’ve got a problem. But if it’s a quality animal, in my opinion, go for it! I debunk the myth of the popular sire syndrome. You can never have too much of a good thing.

People also claim that serious breeders breed too much. Well, no, we don’t. Case in point is that overall registrations with the American Kennel Club are down. I’m not so sure that our dog-showing participants are doing enough (or anything) about that. In the simplest of forms, they are just not breeding enough. They are not breeding enough Weimaraners, for example. I recently judged their National Specialty and their quality has diminished over the years. There was still quality, but not like it was the first time I judged the breed. This was not a mystery to those who were at the show. They know this. The higher volume kennels are gone and the breed is currently left with a few shining stars and not a lot of consistency. The long, sweeping angles and curves are gone and a rather common imposter has been put in as a replacement.

In all of the breeds that are fighting to retain quality, there are too few breeders who are not making enough good dogs. Without breeding, quality animals disappear—and they disappear immediately. And once they are gone it can take generations to get them back. The breeds that are thriving today (e.g., Sussex, English Toy Spaniels, Affenpinschers) have registrations that are slightly up, and it doesn’t take much to figure out why: The volume is increasing the quality.

Another breed that is doing tremendously well, with a lot more people involved than I ever remember, is the Wirehaired Pointing Griffon. That breed is strong, with depth of quality and breeders who are breeding more and participating in all kinds of events with their dogs. The Glen of Imaal Terrier is another breed that’s starting to come along. We find these rarer breeds taking hold and thriving in the hands of quality breeders, dedicated individuals who want to see their breed advance. And they also don’t want their breed to go away. This is our mission as breeders of minor breeds. We’re fighting against extinction, which is a different battle altogether.

This is worth repeating: I have been saying this for 30 years, but I think breeding is an obligation. Breeders need to ask themselves, “Why am I not breeding more?” And if you’re a premiere breeder of dogs that are known for their quality, it is your obligation to produce because we need more of those quality animals. We need breeders to produce more because the public needs our dogs. We need to breed more so that the next generation that comes to dog shows will be inspired to want a particular breed, or else our breeds will go away. We need to understand that the lack of entries has an impact on the public’s perception of purebred dogs. Kids today need to know that purebred dogs need them. We have to educate families to the benefits of our own versions of “designer dogs,” which are often living antiques.

I recently judged class dogs only in ASCOB Cockers at the National Specialty where Winners Dog, Reserve Winners Dog, Winners Bitch, and Reserve Winners Bitch were all sired by the same dog. They weren’t littermates; I had three different litters represented by the one sire. And the year prior, Jamie put his son Winners Dog in Blacks and his daughter Winners Bitch in ASCOBs. So, that is a fourth litter of great quality sired by this dog. That dog is the common denominator for some quality in a breed that is currently suffering from a lack of quality. I already know he’s the one because he’s got the goods. That dog should have a stud career where every viable bitch in the country is bred to him. That’s how breeders in any breed should be looking at breeding. People should be standing in line to use him.

In some breeds, breeders seem to have forgotten the pet market, and so buyers have moved on to another choice simply because there’s nothing available to them. Or they may luck out at a retail “pet store” where there’s one puppy in a stall waiting to be “adopted” for a larger fee than they would pay if they’d gone to a parent club member-breeder. Back in the day, breeders produced a lot of puppies each year until they physically couldn’t do it anymore. And the impact of their breeding on those of us watching has lasted, because we know the difference between today’s quality and the quality of the past in many breeds. We watched Rose Ross and Celeste Gavin parade many a top-quality Irish Setter around the ring. It is hard to unsee the impact of breed type that’s stamped on the breed and not judge against it all these many years later.

The average breeder-exhibitor today does not always recognize, or even realize, what they have had available to them through exposure to quality animals. I worked for Bryan and Nancy Martin for a year and was exposed to a lot of different breeds that I would never have otherwise been around. I was exposed to amazing Tibetan Terriers and English Springer Spaniels, the most gorgeous Basset Hounds you’ve ever seen, Dachshunds, Samoyeds, Great Danes, Japanese Chin, Mastiffs, and Canaan Dogs. And all of those experiences I still have in my repertoire as a judge. My experience with 30 different Great Pyrenees formed an opinion of what they should look like—even as a young kid in my 20s. At that point I was learning as a kennel assistant, but my brain was retaining the information for a lifetime in the Sport of Purebred Dogs.

It’s important to remember that having access to local shows and exposure to other breeders is an integral part of our development as breeders. We need the venues to showcase our dogs, and we need these events to expose ourselves to others who are doing the same work but in different breeds. We learn from each other the most, over time, by way of emulating our peers’ success. We watch and learn skills from those around us who are successful and winning. Competition is good for the advancement of purebred dogs.

Over the years, I’ve given many breeder seminars, including week-long Sporting Dog Seminars, but there needs to be a breeder symposium on how to breed better dogs. We need a breeder’s forum; how to breed dogs, how to make good choices on pairings, how to raise puppies, how to socialize them, how to train and groom them, and how to keep them healthy and strong. This is a project I am working on now. Stay tuned for details!