Page 39 - WUT Magazine

each judge, – they shouldn’t be the same, and I hope they won’t, – but it’s already the mat- ter of competition. Regarding the Standard, all the judges must go straight!
Because they have to think about the breed, not about their future appointments! And “Very Good” is not a catastrophe...
You can even breed with “Very Good”! If this is a female, and you mate her with the right male, you can get super puppies, but you must know her faults and the faults of the male. In Dachshunds, for example, when you use dogs with short upper arms, or with the tails up, or without drive, you can be sure that you will have the same problems in the next generation. In these points, us judges, have a lot of influence, and we have to remember our responsibility.
You’re talking about the ideal situation. But in the reality, how should the breeder understand the di erence between the dog for “Excellent” and the dog for “Very Good”, if both have the same title of International Champion?
Yes, when they are Champions, we have no way to mark the di erence in the quality. Elderly people, who are a long time in the breed, have their own eyes and choose what they like, no matter if the judges evaluated these dogs right or
wrong. But the young ones, who are just starting, can make big mistakes if they rely upon the ti- tles. They think: “Oh, Mr X and Mr U put this dog up, they should have known what they were do- ing, then why not to use him?”
And if we don’t want to ruin the breeds completely, may be better not to look at the show results at all?
Another point is that in the old times, in my region for example, 60% of Dachshunds were used for hunting. If the dogs were functionally not sound, they couldn’t hunt well, so they were elimi- nated from breeding due to the hunting side. This moment almost doesn’t exist anymore. Now such dogs come back to the breed, as they don’t lose their qualification for breeding even if they are not able to hunt. And without hunting practice, it’s more di cult to see non-functionality in the breed.
You were for a long time the President of the FCI Judges’ Commission. How do you think, is it possible or not to improve the situation? You know it from inside.
First, from over 80 member countries, that we have in the FCI, a maximum of 35 take part in the meetings of the FCI Judges’ Commission. This means that more than 50% of the countries are not interested. Next, we make rules, the General Assembly accepts them, we send them around to the member countries, and hope that they will give the information to their judges, and will control if the judges follow the FCI rules or not. This is how it should work. But in many countries, the information doesn’t get to the judges, – the kennel clubs prefer to forget it. Not all of them are interested to have the judges working by the FCI rules, and even to work by these rules them-
WUT Magazine. 2017/#1 37