[Mardelin]

Originally Posted by bjh

Donna, this thread was not started in any way to start a discussion on the ethics of coat enhancing, by that I mean changing a coat from a light steel blue to a dark steel blue, or changing the gold from a light gold to a rich gold. We all know that this goes on and it is a pretty much an acceptable practice among some exhibitors, particularly handlers and some long time exhibitors. It would just be nice if they were all shown 'a la natural'.

While there are some people that will go to extreme to surgically correct problems like bite, testicles, ears, etc, that is not that common in the show ring but it does happen. I have expressed before that we are in agreement that structure and soundless is of much more importance to focus on than color. That is the reason I have expressed that I wish the standard did not put so much emphasis on requiring a dark steel blue coat. Like you and others have stated many times, the correct shade of the steel blue is often up to the interpretation of the beholder but correct soundless should be unquestionable.

I don't know who the 'Silk' person is but I can say that I have been a member here for several years and I have never read where anyone openly admitted they enhanced a dogs coat. If someone did I would just applaud them for being honest. I do know that it is something people will not openly admit to on an open forum.

From what I have heard about the AKC judges, they pretty much know what dogs are dyed and they don't worry about it unless it is a really bad dye job and even then they don't usually dq them but they might withhold a ribbon if it is obvious.

Now what would really be great if a judge could look internally at a dogs health. Wouldn't it be great to be able to see those the bile acids of dogs who were a bit off the chart.