It does seem impossible to think that the summer is basically over as September is upon us. The dog show calendar this year has the Westchester-Somerset Hills” weekend the first couple of days in September. Coming on top of the GOP meeting held in the City, it is more than hectic for us and has been a mind boggling time. Getting to and fro from where our offices are
located — to say nothing of commuting to Penn Station — has been anything but easy. My politics aside, recreating the atmosphere of 9/11 in New York City again was a very poor idea and counterproductive to the lives of New Yorkers, for sure. While it may have been politically expedient, it brought back difficulties and memories for those of us who actually lived through 9/11. Better to have kept those incidents as memories than to have the entire scene resurrected. It may serve to get some people votes, but compassion for those us who live here was not the motivating 
factor for those who pushed so hard for this New York City venue.
There are two articles in this week's issue I would call to your attention. One is by my friend from Greece, Maria Winsor Ginala. Maria is a devoted and loyal dog person in every sense of the word and has been a prime mover in pushing the Athens dog show scene. Her "Look at Judges" is
fascinating, certainly from an American point of view. That she is idealistic cannot be denied, which is charming for sure. It is an interesting essay worthy of study. The most glaring flaw to my mind is her admiration of the so called “Nordic judges”, who she claims have "contributed to our hobby some of the best judges of today." I really have a problem with that one since I have seen Nordic judges I have admired tremendously, and some I would never hope to see adjudicate again in a lifetime. But I suppose that's true of judges from any country. Her use of the words “hobby” and “amateur” throughout this piece shows me how little Maria understands the American judging system. Certainly the foundation for our system is money and professionalism—our judges "work"! Just ask them. Most of them don't judge they are at a show to make the buck, and without it they would never be there. This is a unique attitude that I must admit does not exist in Europe or anywhere else for that matter.
Then, of course, there's my good friend John Mandeville's weekly column. 
This week, John is more than cynical; he is downright negative. Not so much about what he says about the Board giving itself the opportunity to get more breeds but in his disbelief that the Board has actually taken itself out of the judging approval process. Well, in a sense they have, and in a sense they haven't. They still have established the policy, which is their option, but they have turned the actual approval matter over to Staff. True, the right of appeal to the Board Committee still is in place. Where John is disingenuous to me is in not accepting the fact that this Committee, appointed by Dennis Sprung, will in fact so act. There is no doubt in my mind that this Committee will so act! What I object to is the kind of Committee Dennis appointed.
Let's face it, in any matter as controversial as this one, everyone's going to have different ideas. I liked the idea when I first heard about it that Dennis was going to have the power to appoint a committee to approve judges' applications. Then I began to hear it was to be limited to Staff only—however, had Dennis preferred, he could have asked the Board to expand the backgrounds of the committee members to include people other than Staff members. I am of the impression Dennis alone made the decision not to do this. Possibly because this would have required an additional Board approval of the concept, but not of the members themselves. Perhaps he thought this would open too many doors to controversy, which there is little doubt it would have done. From where I sit, I had hoped that at least one peer judge and one breeder would have joined the committee of five, but this was not to happen.
I was disappointed that Dennis did not Chair this Committee, and candidly, I do not and did not think that both he and John Lyons should sit on it together. One or the other, fine, but both was questionable to me from an internal AKC standpoint only. Of course I know Dennis's argument to me is that he does not intend to stay on that committee forever and that there will be room for others in the future. Perhaps non-staff members could be included then. As for the work of these men, if in fact they put a halt to the past policies of approving everyone who made out correct applications, they will have accomplished a significant feat. You know that sixty light theory put into effect never could work. I just hope those responsible for doing this when they were on the Board are not thinking of running for Board again. Wanna bet!
When the Dancing Dogs were introduced at Crufts years ago, I thought this was a death type idea. Shows how wrong I am. USA TODAY just a week or so ago ran a Lifestyle Cover Story on how this theme is sweeping certain areas of American dogdom. Chacun son gout, I say. You know, I just can't stand it when people dress dogs up in costumes so you can imagine what I think about those dance routines! •
