Psychology and Politics of Breed Clubs

Ron Zimmerman, a previous guest blogger on Dalmatians, writes this week about the psychology and politics of breed clubs:

Two years ago, Terrierman Patrick wrote a review of the movie "Best in Show" that was also a brilliant commentary on the psychology of people who show dogs. I strongly recommend you read that piece as preface to what I am about to say.

For people who breed show dogs and show them, a very large part of their lives is consumed by that activity, and a tremendous attachment to the dogs develops. Winning becomes proof that one has value in life for producing this wonderful animal. Winning becomes practically a reason to exist. Making money isn't the objective. I have seen people spend hundreds of thousands, with little if any return expected, just for winning. You could call it the thrill of winning, or the prestige of winning, but it is more than either of these. It is a validation, a vindication. The degree of prominence one achieves in showing becomes an important aspect of one's identity.

When showing a particular breed in a particular region, one is going to be competing against the same people - show after show after show. It becomes kind of a closed culture. Dogs not worthy to compete are referred to disdainfully as "pets". And the people who own them are similarly devalued as "pet owners".

The psychological criticism of dog show people isn't as much about them (I should say us) being so different from the "normal" population, as it is some kind of barometer of where we all stand as a culture and society. Even the ones who pride themselves as "not being a joiner" live in a context of desperation regarding their own form of the sacred blue ribbon. I wrote a retrospective once of my favorite aunt which included the observation that - it was very important to her for people to think that it wasn't important to her what people think. We are all blind to our own efforts and our own motivation to be thought of in the way we want to be, and we all deny that's what we're doing.

50 shows per year is not uncommon (2 or three shows in a weekend). And spending a thousand dollars per weekend is not uncommon - with gas, hotel, food, entry fees, grooming products, the pro-rated cost of having a special vehicle for that purpose, etc. Of course you can save by buying a hundred thousand dollar RV, which uses several times as much gas, and the hookups cost about the same as a motel room.

No, it's not about making money, but it is about getting value from the money you spend.

About Breed Clubs

First, you should understand the role of the parent or national breed club. Each breed has one - sanctioned by the AKC in America or the KC in Britain. This group in a very real sense has responsibility for the design of their breed. The clubs control this by being the repository of the standards for conformation and to a somewhat lesser extent for performance competition (depending on how restricted various types of performance are to particular breeds).

So, you and I, as the owner of a purebred dog, are at the mercy of the parent breed club for the form, function,and health of our dog.

Control of the standard is very important, and most clubs have on-going discussion and arguments about this (sometimes heated), although standards are rarely changed - mostly because of the difficulty to reach consensus.

Why is it difficult to reach consensus? Because any change is going to favor the "lines" of some breeders and disfavor other lines. And success in the show ring has a lot to do with power in the breed club. Those who have been successful under the current system, the ones with power, are generally the guardians of the status quo.

In fact, with regard to exaggeration in breed characteristics, it might be said that breeders look at what characterizes their breed, and usually want to make the distinctive features more pronounced. They phrase that as an objective and then keep making it more and more extreme. It could also be said that the breeders who shape the breed are always looking for a competitive advantage, and one way to do that is to give more importance to what characterizes their line.

The breed club has responsibility for the health of the breed in many obvious and non-obvious ways. Not only does the standard dictate health, but the parent club gets to decide what research is supported and pursued relevant to the issues and problems of that breed. Most parent clubs have a charitable arm or "foundation" which among other things approves money for research, and is one of the first places researchers go when looking for money.

What role does the AKC and KC play in this drama? Historically very little. Why should they? Their objectives are primarily financial, and the relationship between breed health and income are very tenuous in the short term. If you've worked for a company, you know that this year's income is much more important than next year's income. The KC has recently taken more of an interest in breed health, with a little encouragement, at least according to their press releases, but the AKC doesn't yet seem to have gotten the message at all. They think it is right and proper to leave the design of the breed in the hands of the wonderful people in the parent breed club.

The breed club is charged with acting in the interest of the breed, and each one has a statement of purpose or vision which at least pays tribute to that objective. In reality, people are much more motivated by self interest.

So how are self interest - and the welfare of the breed in conflict? Patrick has alluded to this being about money, and I want to say that it is much more about prestige and power than actual money.

Most research into health issues is related to genetics. And studying the relationship between genetics and health problems, is among other things almost invariably going to result in a recommendation to not breed dogs that are affected by the health condition or closely related to dogs affected. Actual genetic tests for a condition are rare, and expensive to develop, so breeding away from affected individuals and relatives is, in most cases, the best that can be done - if the condition is known to be genetically influenced.

This of course restricts genetic diversity in a scenario where genetic diversity is very limited to start with, and some will make that argument as a reason to remain uninformed about cause and effect.

Resistance to genetic research, information, is incredible. And note that the "charitable foundation" for a breed club is controlled not by the members, but by the governing body - those with power and prestige under the status quo.

In the Dalmatian club, for example, there was an initiative for research into a certain condition suspected to be genetically distinguished. The resistance in the club to genetic research and the arguments against it were incredible in my opinion.

Some people said - it's more likely to be related to nutrition and environmental conditions like stress, so we should put our research money there, not into genetics.

Others said - as far as we know all are equally at risk, therefore there's no reason to not breed even affected individuals, because most likely the risk is the same.

My breed club has an election coming up very soon, and on the official club email list, "campaigning" or making references to candidates candidacy or their qualifications is forbidden. I guess it's not considered polite, in the same way the AKC doesn't consider it polite to criticize judges and actively discourages that.

For the record, I completely agree with Ron that showing dogs is mostly about the human need for competition and the self-identification and ego gratification that comes with that. There is not a lot of money in breeding show dogs. Breeding show dogs will not help you pay for your mansion.

That said, there is some money to be made in breeding dogs. Though it it not enough money to attract people like me (or you, I will bet), it does attract some folks who are lower on the economic food chain, and it does attract the American Kennel Club which is only too eager to attract and recruit commercial puppy farm breeders if for not other reason than to help prop up their failing economic model. And, of course, someone is paying for all those kennel ads at the back of all those canine publications.

Though show dog breeders may not be getting rich, my experience is that many are breeding dogs to defray their show ring expenses -- payments to professional handlers, payments on motor homes and hotels, veterinary expenses, etc.

With "hobby" expenses of several thousand dollars a year, selling puppies is a significant part of the economic engine driving the show ring model. If show ring folks could not sell their current crop of dogs because an AKC standard had been changed in order to improve canine health, that would be a serious economic hit.

Finally, I think there is another reason Clubs are resitant to breed standard changes and a focus on health issues; it is a negation of their own life and their own expertise.

What does it say about the breed club and its breeders that the dog they claim to love so much is now in such dismal shape?

Dogs are not dying young and in pain because they are committing suicide.

Entire breeds have not been wrecked by accidental vehicle impacts.

No, the story here is quite a bit sadder than that.

It is a story about a lot of people with misplaced priorities intentionally breeding dogs, and the horrific results they have achieved despite decades and decades of putative expertise "in the breed."

For these folks to admit that the results achieved have been a collective disaster has a huge emotional cost attached to it.

They are in the same position as the person who has given this or her entire life to a company only to be fired in humiliation, or the wife who has been married for 25 years who comes home to find her husband in bed with another man. Was the whole thing a joke? A charade? A huge waste of ? Did this investment of my life mean nothing?

Little wonder that a lot of people are willing to do almost anything not to have to face those questions!

.