Originally Posted by gemy (Post 3220638)

Not so because handlers on average would show more dogs in any given day of competition then your average owner/handler. So at any given show there are likely to be at least 2-3 times as many owner/handlers, then pros showing the dog.
What I get from this chart is that once you get to group level handlers avg wins goes up markedly. I wonder if that is a self fulfilling prophecy. Common knowledge in show world, that unless you are a very experienced exhibitor best to hand off your dog to a pro for the group.

Originally Posted by gemy (Post 3220638)

Not so because handlers on average would show more dogs in any given day of competition then your average owner/handler. So at any given show there are likely to be at least 2-3 times as many owner/handlers, then pros showing the dog.
What I get from this chart is that once you get to group level handlers avg wins goes up markedly. I wonder if that is a self fulfilling prophecy. Common knowledge in show world, that unless you are a very experienced exhibitor best to hand off your dog to a pro for the group.

Originally Posted by Woogie Man (Post 3220659)

I'd like to ask about puppy mills and their connections with registries and how that affects the standing of American and Canadian dogs worldwide. It seems that this connection is what prevents both countries from being full members of FCI.

This quote may explain what I mean...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"• Competence and responsibility for breeding rests with the member countries and contract partners of the FCI and includes breeding guidance, breeding advice and monitoring breeding as well as the keeping of the studbook.

• The FCI member countries and contract partners are under the obligation to draw up their own breeding regulations based on the FCI Breeding Regulations, in which the breeding objectives are laid down. Such regulations must take appropriate and reasonable account of the specific working characteristics of the respective breeds.

Dog traders and commercial dog breeders are not permitted to undertake breeding in a member country or contract partner of the FCI."

From this source.. fci.be/uploaded_files/Breeding_EN.doc
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Are the parent clubs not concerned that this one thing (dog traders and commercial breeders) is the sticking point that separates us from the rest of the world? While the AKC and CKC certainly can't outlaw puppy mills on their own, they can specify what one is and refuse to register dogs from these sources. Would that be good enough for FCI?

I've also seen on other breeds' forums and pages that North American dogs are not the 'same' as dogs from other countries, and not for the better. Do the breed clubs not feel it's desirable to conform to FCI or are they content to go it alone, as far as stewardship of breeds? After all, isn't the #1 priority of any breed club the 'betterment of the breed'?

Just asking a few open questions as it seems like both the U.S. and Canada stick out like sore thumbs in the dog world.

Originally Posted by JeanieK (Post 3220739)

Wow, good observation. it sounds like the breed clubs need to put the pressure on the AKC. I understand the concerns, as they have been explained. But it seems to me if the breed clubs worked with the government, on the wording of the bill, most of the concerns could be avoided.

Originally Posted by gemy (Post 3220806)

It is not just puppymills per say, but HVB's ie high volumne breeders.

I am certainly not comfortable with AKC and the CKC sleeping with the HVB"s. Maybe this is a short term strategy until they work on getting them closed down, IDK. You know keep your friends close and your enemies closer.

IMO HVB's have no place in the pet industry at all. Look at the illogic of it. You are breeding to place dogs in PET homes and you keep them in cages, and sheds, and an environment so totally divorced from what this pup will actually be sold into. Where is the socialization? There is None.

Work to get the law changed, easier at the AKC to do I think. Mandate, mandatory health tests on all breeding sires/dams, prior to being able to register a litter permanently with the AKC. The HVB's will literally scream at this one.
Paperwork must be submitted for those tests through a reputable agency.
Demand microchipping on all purebred dog registrations, and consider going to mandatory DNA testing.

Anyhow just a few suggestions.

Originally Posted by Mardelin (Post 3220710)

Gail,

It's very dependent on what your goal is in showing your dog. Are you showing the dog to gain approval of it's worthiness; are you attempting to put Breed Points on him to the top standings; or is your goal, group wins and BIS wins.

There are all kinds of records to beat. However, I've seen Breeder/Owner/Handled dogs make it to #1. No one is arguing that Professional Handlers have a bit more clout in the Showing Arena, they travel all over the country/world, it's their business. My preference is to handle my own dog, to me it's a bit more satisfying and at times a bit more expensive. Would I hesitate to send my dog to a handler? Only if I was physically unable to handle my own dog and then I would only send them the best.

Originally Posted by gemy (Post 3220827)

Mary for me those statistics were eye opening, at least at the class and BOB level a owner handled dog looks to have as good a chance as any to win.
I'd love to see some stats from Canada though. When we went for top dog for Magic he was with a handler (ringside pickup only) and we placed in the top 3 for breed two years in a row. This was in Canada.

I do hesitate all the time to send my dog to a handler. Even though I do have some physical infirmities to deal with, I've had at least one bad experience in the past with sending a dog out to a handler.

Now I always try to do ringside pick-up and baring that if absolutely necessary I will send my dog off with a handler. And like you, I do try to find the best of the best.

It is nice to see an organization recognizing an interesting topic, and taking the time to number crunch.

For me generally speaking, I would compete more in the obedience/agility realm, and then do other fun dog sports with my dog. Once the dog has his/her's CH, then my focus will change to obedience titles.

At least in the obedience rally and agility rings they don't penalize if you as the handler can't move so well.

I remember with Magic for one of his trials in CD, we were moving out at the fast pace, I stumbled and fell, not a good thing for me as I have trouble getting up. Magic stopped, turned, came back to me, I did his command for him to stoop, then I placed my body weight on him, and command lift, he brought me back up to my feet. We lost no points for that, in fact we took high in class at 194.5 that day.
I will one day get his service dog title, then we can fly anywhere together:D

Originally Posted by yorkielady06 (Post 3220912)

I also have a disability that would prevent me from handling caused from a surgery a little over a year ago. However only been in the ring a few times eons ago and really did not like it, preferred handlers, but now because I cannot I find myself thinking about it. But alas, reality takes hold and I come back to my senses.

Originally Posted by gemy (Post 3222018)

Well in another thread I think in showing, Mary and Ladyhawk did say they saw ppl in wheelchair/walker, and there is a pro handler with only one arm.

Somehow I thought and not too sure where I read this that motorized wheelchairs were unacceptable in the show ring.

If this is true, maybe you can consider a motorized wheelchair.

I'm not sure what breed you have. But if you have YT how would we be able to stack dog on the table with a wheel chair? Table heights are usually high. IDK, maybe they lower them for that.

Originally Posted by YorkieRose (Post 3219855)

I do not think dogs/cats should be sold in pet shops..pet buyers should have to deal directly with the breeder. NO dog should leave a breeder without being chipped and registered...if at any time in it life it is turned into a pound etc..they breeder would be required to take it back...if I breed a bitch to a dog, a litter results, I am responsible for the results of my actions for the life of the dog...that would help with the dog populations in pounds to some degree I would think...and if breeders would not comply, levy huge fines and make breeding more litters not such a $$$ endeavor.

Originally Posted by megansmomma (Post 3222546)

I have said the exact same thing regarding being responsible for what you breed. I LOVE this idea! If all breeders were held accountable for what they do for the life of their dogs I believe it would make many think twice about the responsibility of breeding. :thumbup: