No Tolerance for Diversity

The American Kennel Club has very little tolerance for diversity. The goal of conformation, after all is to conform.

And so, if we follow the history of AKC breeds, we find that the Norwich Terriers could not be shown very long with both ears up and ears down -- they had to be split into two breeds to conform to the AKC's intolerance for diversity.

The Fox Terrier could not come in both smooth coats and wire coats -- they had be split into two breeds.

The Corgis were split into the Cardigan Welsh Corgi and the Pembroke Welsh Corgi.

The retrievers were split into Curly Coated and Flat Coated (to say nothing of all the other divisions).

Cocker Spaniels were split into "American" and "English" varieties, while the Springer Spaniel was split into "English" and "Welsh" varieties.

The Mountain Dog was split into the Bernese Mountain Dog and the Greater Swiss Mountain Dog, while the Cairn Terrier cleaved itself into colored dogs and the all-white "West Highland White."

Can you tell the difference between a show Lakeland Terrier and a show Welsh Terrier? The difference is only a slight shift in color, but it is an intolerable difference to the AKC show ring.

Similar intolerances led to collies being split into Rough and Smooth coated collies (to say nothing of Border Collies).

The Poodle was shattered into three separate breeds based on size (while also being moved from its sporting roots into the "nonsporting" category).

Now, in the AKC, there is a push to split the Akita into two breeds -- the American Akita and the Japanese Akita.

As for the Jack Russell Terrier, the AKC has already split it into two different breeds -- the "Parson Russell Terrier" and the "Russell Terrier," each with their own invented histories.

And what is the point to all this breed atomization? No point higher than the chasing of rosettes.

Does the bird in the field, alive or dead, care about about the registry or "breed" of pointer or retriever?

Does the sheep care what about the registry or "breed" of the herding dog coming up the hill?

Is a cart pulled differently by a Swiss Mountain Dog as compared to a Bernese?  And what does the lay of the ear or the color of the nose have to do with it?

Does the fox, raccoon, groundhog or possum care about the coat color shift between a show Lakeland and a show Welsh Terrier?

Do rats run terrified from Norfolk terriers but give high-fives to Norfolk terriers based on whether their ears are up or down?

It is all pretty absurd and speaks to theory, bigotry and exclusion and rather than experience and practice.

The fox, raccoon, and groundhogs on my farms do not have theories about the shape of working terriers -- they have experience.  Length of leg?  Rough or smooth?  Ears up or down? Lay of shoulder?  It matters not a whit to them.

And so it goes, around the world, with sheep, cattle, hares, duck, quail, and pheasant each having experiences with dogs that are not too heavily impacted by theory.

And, of course, the working people have their opinions too. If you put any three of them in a room, see if at least five schools of thought are not presented on any given subject!

That said, do American houndsmen turn to the AKC to stock their hunts with American Foxhounds?

Do the indigenous people of Greenland consult with an AKC judge before selecting their sled teams?

Are rich gulf-state Bedouins standing ringside at Westminster, Crufts or Hialeah with rolls of money in their hands, so anxious are they to buy the winners at any price?

Nope, nope, and nope.

It's not that folks who work their dogs object to beauty; it's that conformity to patent nonsense is not how they define beauty nor is it a value they are likely to salute.