Baywillow Canape At Smalesmouth

Thank you to those exhibitors, who, in the present financial climate, gave me the highest entry in the Terrier Group, by a considerable margin, nearly half as many again as the next breed. Friday, M6, NEC, extortionate car park charges are not a good combination!! Thank you to my very efficient steward, who kept things running smoothly, so we could finish in good time, after the very late start due to the problems on the M6. Now, to the dogs themselves! I know that I was very lucky, in that when I started in the Breed, in 1980, I was taught about type, construction and movement by Ted Hutchinson, a master of the sport, who had campaigned the then Breed Record Holder, plus a string of Champions across many other breeds. This knowledge, plus, I would like to think, a natural eye for quality, has served me well over the following years. Therefore, it saddens me to see the type and constructional faults that are creeping into the breed. These faults are now so prevalent, that newer breeders, exhibitors and some judges, probably think, and accept they must be correct, so widespread are they. The Standard asks for an "otter" like head, moderately broad in skull. Too many have excessively broad skulls, giving an exaggerated, almost caricature look, rather than the refined beauty of an otter. Ear set is also a cause for concern. The standard calls for small, V- shaped, dropping forward close to the cheek. Too many ears are perched high, above the line of the skull, dropping forward to the temple, rather than the cheek, giving a foreign, almost Lakeland / Fox Terrier expression. While, I am sure, this may appeal in some quarters, it is totally incorrect on a Border Terrier. Now, to shoulders, and especially upper arms, a major problem today, particularly in the younger classes. Upright shoulders and very short upper arms, mean the front assembly of the dog appears "tacked on". The shoulder should be clean and well laid, with a long upper arm, meaning that the dog can stand with their front legs under them, perpendicular to the floor, rather than like a “milking stool. This, affects movement, giving an action that can only be described as "peddling a bike" and causing no reach on the move .They are, after all, a working breed, who are supposed to be capable of "following a horse". On the plus side, most were in good coat, and moved soundly behind, something which is much easier to achieve. Two exhibits were so thin, I felt their entry fee would have been better spent on a bag of quality food. My top winners are examples of Breeders who have stuck to their ideals, of breeding sound, honest, typical Border Terriers, bred to last, not following fashion by breeding, what, to my mind, are shorter coupled, flashier "terrier" types to appeal to the more modern way of thinking. They wouldn't have looked out of place from when I first started in the Breed, matching beautifully for type and construction.

Many reports start with a thank you and I would like extend one to all the exhibitors who provided me with an entry which really reminded me why I love this breed. I thoroughly enjoyed my day and would have been very happy to have had a handful of top honours to hand out. In a number of classes, especially in bitches, the quality went right down the line and even beyond the cards.

Thank you to my very efficient stewards. I think we have a real problem with the front construction and movement in the breed; there were far too many exhibits with short, steep upper arms, often resulting in a build up of bulky muscle on the outer line of the shoulder and the movement in front on many was very poor. The Border is ?essentially a working terrier and this type of construction will seriously compromise its ability to work.

Sincere apologies to my exhibitors, the committee failed to inform me the proposed order of group judging had changed & the Terrier group was brought forward, the tannoy call was the 1st thing I knew about it. My back spasm during junior dog meant I was reduced to shuffling, sorry. Most dogs were new to me & temperaments in the ring were good, my winners could do the job they were intended for being free from coarseness & lumber, spannable & narrow, with corresponding good construction & movement. Several heads were short in skull & blocky, more resembling the balance of an Asian Short Clawed Otter, than an English one, the latter have longer than broad flat skulls, clean cheeks & relatively short muzzles parallel in profile to their skull, Borders should have large teeth with good scissor bite to be effective. Today, square, deep skulls, often with round eyes & very short narrow muzzles with small teeth were in evidence. These too strong square heads tended to have heavy fronts & frames to match. Many fronts were placed too far forward with pro-sternum behind point of shoulder, which lacked length & layback, the too short & steep upper arms having no support, badly affecting movement, the dogs moved away with their fronts crossing, when only two legs should be visible. As an alternative a few were close behind & swung in front, so again "four legs". Profile movement lacked ?travel?, being up & down short choppy strides rather than smooth & forward going with drive off the hocks. Although bone wasn't generally too fine nor too heavy some didn't have enough through pasterns into feet, & they lacked the depth of pad to ensure soundness if worked regularly. My major concern, however, was coats & especially pelts. When I came into the breed Borders were shown in deep double coat, always.Dogs then looked heavier than they were due to these double coats & lots of pelt which the standard says MUST be thick - not because they had big frames with drum tight skins.. Coat density & pelt are directly related, no coat, thus thin skin, but they should still be loose & pliant. Tight, paper thin skins without depth of under or topcoat is not what the standard calls for, nor any use to a working terrier. A great advantage to the dog is a continuous double coat that can be worked or shown all year round.

I would like to thank the Officers and Committee of the Club for their kind invitation to judge this show, my third opportunity at a breed club show. My heartfelt thanks to my two stewards, Kathy Newsome and Jem Thomas who, by their calm organizing ability ensured that the show ran smoothly and finished in good time for the exhibitors to beat the inclement weather. Finally the exhibitors for braving the threatened snow storm and allowing me to go over their dogs. I only found one bad mouth. The quality of coats varied as would be expected in the run up to Crufts. Of concern to me is that a few of the exhibits were much too large for the standard. To be able to go to ground it is essential that the breed does not get oversized. Overall the quality of the exhibits was good and decisions in some of the classes were very close.

*Dog Critique* My thanks to the Committee for inviting me to judge the Championship Show for the second time, the first being 10 years ago, and thanks to my Stewards for their efficiency. The entry of 103 with only 9 absentees was pleasing. Some judges concentrate on heads, others on shape of eyes, or on small dark ears, some on presentation, others on neat accurate movement. As for me – I judge on a whether a dog is “fit for function” as a working terrier plus whether it looks like a Border Terrier and no other type of terrier. A good proportion of the entry had major faults of construction which would render them, not useless, but inefficient at the job Border Terriers are designed to perform. For instance, short rib cages do not allow for lung room for the stamina a terrier needs to run all day, and these short rib cages (often sprung) were very much in evidence in the entry. Some were accompanied by long loins which might give the impression to the ringside that the dog had good length. Secondly, upright shoulders, often with steep upper arms are a major design fault. A well laid shoulder with well angulated upper arm which brings the elbow under the body is not just a pleasure to look at – these act as shock absorbers when the dog is running so that his joints are not jarred, leading to wear and tear, thus shortening his effective life as a working terrier. Finally, wide fronts, often associated with the previous construction – a Border should be able to creep into any space occupied by a fox, and these, despite their chunky appearance have very little body under that fur. Coats were mixed as to be expected – and there were some really good pelts, only a couple with paper thin pelts. Undercoat was often missing on the back, but present on the sides. A handful of bad mouths, perhaps some all rounders might accept these but I could not. Few really outstanding otter heads which stay in one’s memory for years, but most were adequate. My critique will not contain descriptions of the dogs, but will give an indication of why they were placed as they were. If your dog was not as high in the placings as you had hoped, take a good objective look at him, and you might find out why. *Bitch Critique* A big thank you to the MBTC committee for asking me to judge the Ch. Show it was a great honour. Thank you also to my stewards Ray & Sharon for making the classes run so smoothly. A nice entry of 144 bitches. I enjoyed the day; it was lovely to judge the bitches. The depth of quality in most of the classes was very pleasing. However, the fronts are still a problem within the breed & need to be addressed in future litters. Some quality bitches went cardless, unfortunately there is only 5 cards & many went without being placed. I was so delighted that my fellow judge Marie, agreed that my BCC & BRCC, should win the top honours, Best in Show and RBIS.

I would like to thank the Officers and Committee for their invitation to judge, my two stewards and the exhibitors for their entries. It was an honour to judge this numerically strong entry 169 with 29 absent, the breed being represented from around the UK made it a very enjoyable day. Front movement is still a problem in the breed, with heavy upright shoulders in many. Size varied as did coats. There are some long necks creeping into the breed, which look very stylish, the standard does state “Neck of moderate length” and a few long tails again incorrect. Saying that it was a very nice entry to judge and in some classes I would have liked to have been able to award more placings, and could have awarded more CC’s.

I must first extend thanks to my very professional and able stewards, who kept me on track and on time. My general remarks here cover the real concerns I have about the way the breed is heading currently. Increasingly, upright shoulders and poor fronts are becoming the norm rather than the exception. Upright shoulders may produce a flashy show dog on its toes, but Borders are not flashy by nature. I suspect I have referred to this problem in every critique I have written for Championship shows I’ve judged and it appears to be getting worse, not better. Please read the standard carefully; look at anatomical drawings of the dog skeleton. Shoulders are now at a steep 60 degrees on some exhibits instead of the normal – and correct – 45 degrees. Undercoats are being raked out to give a cleaner profile – why? Borders – working terriers – need their undercoats 24/7 to keep them warm in bad winter weather while they are waiting to be called for action. It is a requirement of the standard, not a fashion statement. Sooner or later we will end up with a single coated breed, and to its detriment. Judging today, temperaments were very good; I found two kinked tails, several minor dentition issues, many dirty teeth and one undershot mouth. Males were all entire. Coats were mostly betwixt and between but the good double coats were exceptionally good. I love to see happy dogs with wagging tails but some dogs were very lack lustre and did not seem to be enjoying their day. There were also one or two exhibits too thin and lacking in condition. Finally, baiting is still a contentious topic for me – I use bait sometimes myself – but on occasions it was almost impossible to get at the dogs or examine them without getting round, over, or under an outstretched arm with bait. As a courtesy to judges, please keep baiting to a minimum, especially on the table. Thank you to everyone for accepting my decisions sportingly. It was a genuine pleasure to go over the entry – winners and non-winners.

My thanks, to the Club, for the invitation to judge their Club Show and the hospitality shown to Peter and myself. Thanks, also, to my Stewards, Wendy Mooney and Denise Townsend, who valiantly coped with the paperwork in the, at times, rather blustery conditions, keeping everything going smoothly! Thank you to the exhibitors, also, who entered for my opinion. The grass, in the ring, wasn’t exactly “bowling green”, so it certainly sorted out the good from the bad, on the move! As is usual, from me, not an “everything in the garden is rosy” preamble! After 35 years, living and breathing Border Terriers, I tell it, as I see it! As with my last appointment, Crufts, it is just over a 3 year gap, since I judged the Breed in the UK. I had obviously made my point, last time, that I wouldn’t pass the excessively broad skull, almost caricature like, that had become popular, despite the Standard asking for “Head like that of an Otter. Moderately broad in skull”, as there were none I thought overdone, on the day. I think, the problem lies, possibly, that the Standard doesn’t specify, as I was taught, that it refers to English River Otter, some people, mistakenly thinking the commoner headed Sea Otter, or deeper stopped Asian Short Clawed Otter is being referred to. There is a big difference between the three! Not helped by critiques, apparently, praising “broad” skulls, which, to me, sends out the wrong signals! At Crufts, I had thought the breed had turned a corner, with regard to forehands ie. shoulder and upper arm construction…….how wrong was I?!!! I think I had the full range of faults today, upright shoulders, short upper arm, out at the elbow, sometimes all on the same exhibit! The widest part of a Border Terrier, “Essentially a working Terrier”, bred to go to ground, shouldn’t be the elbows, this fault usually being because the forehand isn’t set on the body correctly, being too far forward, due to a short, steep upper arm, usually, although not always, accompanied by an upright shoulder. These faults also affect that other line from the Standard “Capable of following a horse”, as, due to the incorrect angles, the movement is no longer efficient, being restricted to a shorter, hackneyed, step in profile, almost as though they are walking on hot coals, due to the foreleg not reaching full extension. It may look ok, coming and going, being accurate, as the shorter stride means there is less room for error, but the lack of a ground covering stride would mean the dog working twice as hard on the move, doing its job, soon becoming exhausted. This was brought home to me, discussing the stamina of various dogs with a friend, his son exercising their two Border Terrier champions chasing after him, on horseback, around a field. The accurate mover, with the shorter stride was soon exhausted, having had to work twice as hard, whereas the more angulated one, with the longer, ground covering stride, was up for more! Like, usually breeds like, good forehands being bred for. They don’t appear as if by magic! I am well aware that these faults are seemingly being passed by Judges, not just in the UK, at the very highest level, but that doesn’t mean that they are either correct or desirable and they are very difficult to breed out. I’m left wondering, having read a number of critiques, then having seen, or judged the dogs being praised, are the Seminars failing to educate the correct mechanics of economical movement, or are people just not seeing the movement faults, as long as its trots up and down, with its head and tail up, showing nicely for the Judge! Conversely, as ever, hind movement was pretty good. It was interesting to note that those I have rewarded in the past, with the correct forehands and narrow fronts, at Crufts and previous engagements, came back, having retained their virtues and have also passed the same, narrow, lithe bodylines on to the next generation. If they are made right, they last right! A working Terrier, whose front is going, or has gone, by the time it is reaching maturity, is neither use nor ornament and is a liability to itself and its owner. I would like to think, from ring side, that it was obvious that I was looking for Borders with a pattern of moderation and workmanlike construction, with sound, free, scopey movement, who also had quality and style. It wasn’t always easy, in some classes, but I thought my final line ups, in both sexes, demonstrated my priorities. On the whole, coats and pelts were good, as always my opinion being that coats are transient. I don’t expect them to be aimed specifically, time wise, for me, as I am more concerned with correct construction, but it is “the icing on the cake.” As long as there was evidence of the correct textures, no one was unduly marked down, until it came to the top honours. Most were spannable, although very few were easily spannable, slightly worrying, as my hands have a big span! This isn’t just a UK problem! Mouths were all acceptable, a few with the odd broken tooth, which is only to be expected in a working Terrier and certainly wouldn’t be penalised by me.