Biddestone Pineapple At Kelphope

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.