| Just for Fun |
Bill Rosenthal of California created a charming slide show that takes a lighthearted look at the meat of the debate. Click here!
|
|
Over the Electronic Transom
|
Ridgebackers who took our Great Bait Debate poll (look for the results in the righthand column) had a lot to say about the no-bait rule at the 2010 National. Here are some comments from across the spectrum:
"This decision by the judge would have affected her being awarded the assignment in my opinion. She has never had this rule before and recently judged the breed ... to make this decision now is inappropriate."
"I think the folks that are complaining are a bunch of crybabies and should be embarrassed. I have never seen such a juvenile reaction."
"The judge has the right to set the bait rules; however the National Specialty is not the time or place."
"While there are a lot of declarations by individuals that they will not attend, I believe that when the time comes, they will."
"Judges make arbitrary decisions all the time. I will live with it and really don't understand why people are so concerned."
"I think that the Board of RRCUS should discuss with the judge her reasoning and maybe work out a compromise."
"I think it is a shame that folks cannot or are too lazy to try to show a dog a different way. Most of the people complaining the most only have one or two dogs anyway. Surely they could find the time to actually work with their dog."
"I have waited too long for a National out west. ... I am not happy about the decision and feel I will exhibit at less quality then I could. I will support this one, but will not bring youngsters that 'need' bait. Too bad, as the youngsters are our future!"
"Because it is a National Specialty, it is even more important than a normal dog show for people to exhibit their dogs. I have never had a judge tell me I could not use bait in their ring -- just that they did not want it visible when examining the dog, or they did not want it thrown in their ring."
"I think it would in poor judgment for the RRCUS BOD to persuade the judge to change her ruling. What 'other' restrictions would the members ask? No long dresses for fear of touching and spooking a dog? No tall bald men as they might spook a dog? No judges who won't put up a livernose? It just takes us down a rat hole and taints our image."
"I strongly respect Sandra Fikes even though I've never met her. I was thrilled to learn that she was going to be the judge in 2010. I am confident that she would undoubtedly find the best dogs. Too bad they'll be referred to as the 2010 limited-entry winners."
"In obedience the mantra is 'Train, don't complain.' People should train their dogs to not always expect to be fed when in the show ring."
"I wouldn't want to do it very often and am glad that she gave us notice, but I also don't think most people understand what she is saying. I'm game to try it. My old girl won't be thrilled, but on the other hand, she also won't be vacuum cleaning other people's bait."
"I intend to travel across the entire country, and was hoping to pick up dogs that are co-owned or sired by my dog. That will be infinitely harder without being able to use food to encourage young dogs who don't know me!"
"Storm in a teacup."
"I don't think it's fair to RRCUS, our Specialty committee, or our exhibitors."
"Yes, I have been victim to bait on the ground, and handlers with better smelling pockets. But I have also been in circumstances where non-bait items such as clickers, whistles, squeaky toys and rubber balls have been used by other competitors. Honestly, those caused far more of a disturbance than any small piece of liver or chicken laying on the ground."
"It's her choice. It was considerate of her to give this much advanced notice."
"Not remotely interested in watching several hundred, bored, poorly motivated hounds who would rather be anywhere else on earth!"
"I have showed under many judges that when you arrive the day of the show there is a sign up on the ring that states, 'No bait in the show ring.' End of story."
"To go into the big (long) classes at a National Specialty with nothing to offer as enticement or reward -- well, you might as well wear heels!"
"My dogs perform for me in the ring because they want to! We work as a team! We have a bond and a friendship that most handlers don't have with their clients. What is the point of chewed-off fingers and a dog only performing for bait because he or she is starving?"
"A ring full of undistracted intact male Ridgebacks is a loaded gun waiting for a reason to go off."
"While I use food bait, I am happy to re-think and use some other item or method to train my dog with for the conformation ring. Food does not make a show dog."
"I am an owner-handler who will still be baiting in the ring -- just behind the judges' back, just like we were still in grade school."
"The purpose of the RRCUS National Show is to showcase the dogs. The judge for 2010 has made herself and her agenda the center of attention and has drawn all focus away from the dogs."
"This is a non-issue. It might be regrettable that she has decided to remove a crutch that so many professional and amateur handlers have come to rely on and think of as a necessity. But it is just that, a crutch. Despite the naysaying of the discontented, a Ridgeback can be presently very well without food bait, and if it is the prerogative of the judge, then so be it."
"Of all the things that are important in Ridgeback judging, the use of bait must surely be near the bottom of the list. Silly for the judge to have made this an issue."
"I am not thrilled with the thought of having to work a little harder at training, but will suck it up and do it. Everyone should quit whining and train."
"From an observer's viewpoint I do not feel I will have a fair comparison of dogs seen from specialty to specialty."
"The judge has the right to set the rules for her ring. Even if I don't personally agree with her decision, it is still ultimately her decision to make, and I can deal with it accordingly."
"I think that it is a shame that this has happened at all, and it will leave a sour taste in a lot of people's mouths by the sound of it."
"As I see it, this is no different from entering a Specialty under a judge that you know will not put your dog up. Winning is not the only reason that I attend specialties and show my dogs."
"I
have to comment for the poor veterans! I look forward to watching them,
and I think that this no-food-bait rule hits them the hardest. How
unfair to all of these greybeards that have worked on a food currency
for their entire show careers, only to be denied in their golden years
when they should be celebrated."
"Some of the people who are objecting are saying it in ways that are disrespectful to the judge and the sport, which is sad."
"I can't believe this is
happening to the National out here. What a mess. The only other things we need are an air embargo, a good earthquake and a
tsunami!"
"I'll be glad when it's over!"
|
|
Greetings!
 It adds a whole new dimension to the term "liver lover."
The Ridgeback show community in the United States found itself in an uproar last week when Sandra Fikes, the judge of the upcoming 2010 National Specialty in Ventura, Calif., announced that she would not permit the use of food bait in her ring during the show.
The reactions ranged from accepting to acrimonious, and everything in between. It appears that this discussion is about more than the use of food in training show dogs; it is about our dog-show culture, our priorities, indeed the very way we see our annual gathering and what it symbolizes. My liver, myself.
This issue of The Ridgeback Round-Up focuses on the Great Bait Debate, as it has been affectionately dubbed. Scroll down to find an exclusive interview with Sandra Fikes on her inspiration and reasoning for the rule change ... as well as the results of our anonymous poll, which garnered 200 responses -- more than any other survey we have conducted.
While some online observers have criticized even the existence of this debate (not to mention its duration), we think that any discussion that engages the Ridgeback community at large and promotes any degree of self-reflection has to be good.
Messy, at times, for sure. But ultimately good.
Theresa M. Lyons
Denise Flaim
The Ridgeback Register
|
Flexing at the Polls
Here are the results of The Ridgeback Register's Great Bait Debate poll -- and great it was. With 200 respondents, this was our most popular poll ever. That's right: Evah.
|
In Her Own Words
 2010 Specialty Judge Sandra Fikes answers The Ridgeback Register's questions about the current controversy.
Did you expect the reaction to your
no-bait rule to be as strong as it
has?
I'm not aware that it is. I've received loads of emails thanking me, or
saying they are willing to give it a try. I find it very sad that the
few who have express their displeasure are either afraid they can't
compete or just determined to not even try.
Was there one event or experience that made you decide to implement
this rule?
Yes, this has been in my head for a number of years. It all began when I
was doing an in-ring observation at a show in New Orleans. A young man
in a nice suit walked into the ring with a class Afghan. He simply
stopped and the dog stood stunningly perfect. No baiting, nothing.
The judge was writing something on his judging sheet at the time.
Without thinking, I blurted out, "Now that's what I call an Afghan!" The
judge looked up at me and said, "I'll be the judge of that" and laughed.
Then he turned and looked at the dog, whipped his head back to me and
said, "Oh, my God!" He told me to look up the sire and tell him after
the judging.
It became obvious to all that the handler knew nothing about showing ...
We had to tell him where to go and when. He easily won the breed.
Unbelievably, we had been so stunned that we forgot to tell him to stick
around for Group ... he went home!
After that I thought that my goal in breeding would be to breed a dog
who was so stunning and balanced that all I would have to do is hold the
lead. (So far, I haven't, but I'm still in hopes.)
Fast forward to the RR specialty in Denmark. Many of the exhibitors were
seasoned and had beautifully trained dogs. Most showed without treats.
There were many novice handlers who had lovely dogs, but simply stood
there holding the leash. At first, it was a bit disconcerting. It dawned
on me that perhaps the dogs I was seeing were so nice BECAUSE no one
knew to try and hide faults!
Have you ever forbidden bait in the ring before?
No, but I have taken bait away from handlers messing up their
dogs....and then given them a placement or Winners.
Did you confer with anyone (i.e. other judge mentors, etc.,) before
deciding to go this route?
I have talked with other judges, many have the pet peeve of handlers
constantly stuffing liver in the dog's mouth. You open the mouth and can
see nothing but liver! I also emailed Clayton [Heathcock, 2010 Specialty Chair] beforehand.
I have received email from foreign judges saying they plan on doing the
same their next assignment -- for the breed's benefit.
As a breeder-judge, do you think you have a degree of connection with
the breed that makes showmanship less important than it might be for an
all-rounder? Did this factor into your bait decision?
Since this is my breed, a specialty is the ultimate "shopping" center
when planning the next breeding. You get to see what's being produced
and are able to look for those elements you need to improve on. The no-bait idea really helps the novice handler gain a footing with pros and
lets the spectators get a real time look at dogs when they are relaxed.
You don't have to chase after a dog you've seen to see what it looks
like relaxed.
I'm not interested in seeing a dog be "on" all the time. I might be
looking for smoother shoulders, to get a naturally long neck, checking
for weak pasterns, trying to avoid over-angled rears and get a good look
at the feet.
People are now talking about toys, etc. If they are used in the same
way as bait, will they be forbidden as well?
No, they can use whatever as long as they are not creating a problem for
someone else's dog.
What do you hope owners and handlers take away from the no-bait
experience?
That they should have more faith in themselves as trainers and that
their dog will get a good look from this judge.
I did not use bait when I first started in conformation. I came from an
obedience background and my mentor was a poodle handler, who never used
bait. If I use it now, it's just a small piece to get my dog to think
they might get something. Although, my two latest dogs love bait outside
the ring, then disdain it inside the ring. So, I've taught them to walk
into a stand and hold it for the judge to go over them. We play focus
games, like touch and bounce when awaiting the rest of the class. (Good
training for agility, too.)
Are there any other aspects of your ring protocol that handlers should
be aware of?
Have fun!
BTW: My dog club just did a demo of agility, obedience and tricks at a
local rescue event as the entertainment. I'm not claiming I'm a great
trainer ... I'm average ... but since we do not use food treats on our
mats, I had two weeks to teach my dog to perform a "trick" for the crowd.
He's not a tennis-ball or tug-toy player. I taught him to jump through a
hoop ... actually as a way to get him to understand the tire jump in
agility. I started with treats, added the clicker, added voice and hand
commands, and dropped the treats. He was the crowd favorite. If I can do
that, I know people can easily have a dog stand in conformation. Photos are here:
http://kalarragile.blogspot.com/
|
|
The "Other" category included such delicacies as dried lamb lung .. "the way to go!" proclaimed one respondent. Another had a dog who was an unrepentant box killer; a piece of torn cardboard worked for her.
