The AKC/Eukanuba National Championship show is not like any other dog event. For one thing, it’s the only show anywhere that’s hosted by the American Kennel Club, not by an AKC member or licensed club, and that naturally makes it more closely scrutinized than others. If we accept that AKC is the leader in purebred dog activities — and there really can’t be much question about that — then how AKC conducts its own show will obviously say something about us and about the whole sport.

There is a lot of good that can be be said about the Sixth Annual AKC/Eukanuba show, held at the Long Beach Convention Center in California on Dec. 2 and 3, 2006. There were generous prizes for the winners, a healthy emphasis on the breeders, a well-rehearsed TV presentation, a much more cosmopolitan atmosphere than at most other dog shows in America, and an absolutely wonderful feature called “Meet the Breeds,” which even the most critical outsider must agree is a stroke of genius and ought to be incorporated in some form at every dog show. There was agility, obedience, junior showmanship, vendors, fly ball demonstrations, frisbee, both police and arson canine demonstrations, clicker training, hearing dogs, herding dogs, retrieving and pointing breeds demonstrations, ralley (that’s how they spelled it) and Canine Good Citizens. What more could you ask?

So why isn’t this show much more popular with the rank-and-file of active dog fanciers? Why doesn’t it get more respect, why aren’t there twice as many entries, and why do I hear so many dog people call it “just another PR ploy by the American Kennel Club” — as if we didn’t need all the positive media coverage of dogs we can get?

OK, I can think of a few reasons. I’m not sure if anyone up there is listening but if AKC really wants to make this “the planet’s greatest dog show,” as their PR people with more gall than accuracy call it, I hope the following is accepted in the spirit it’s offered. Trust me, this is not just one person’s opinion; I’ve talked to a lot of people and I think we all agree that the sport of dogs would be well served by a really “national” dog show, one that truly deserves that name — and this one has more of a chance to become this than any other.

The first thing that AKC should probably do is fire those PR people. Overblown hype that borders on outright lies may work for Barnum & Bailey, but it’s beneath AKC and it backfires: if you know the hype isn’t true you are likely to doubt everything else from the same source. This is a very nice show, no question about it, but to pretend that it is much better than all other American shows or even in the same league as Westminster, Crufts and the World Show just does not make sense. It’s not a question of size; it’s a matter of history and tradition, of prestige and reputation that’s earned by achievement. Surely an institution of AKC’s age and respectability should not have to resort to what borders on false advertising to attract attention for this event?

Entries and Prizes

The AKC seems perfectly satisfied with the total of 2,285 dogs that were entered. (1,769 dogs actually competed.) This is a good figure by contemporary American standards but a couple of hundred fewer than at the last AKC National show; it does not even get close to the entries at the biggest 25 AKC shows held last year. Sure, this show is not open to everyone, but obviously a lot of those who were eligible didn’t bother to enter. When you consider that the top 25 dogs in each breed are invited, plus all champions that finished from the Bred-by-Exhibitor class, all Best in Show and National Specialty winners and an undisclosed number of foreign dogs, there could easily be more than 4,000 dogs. Size isn’t everything, but it would certainly help make this a more important show if there were more dogs.

As for those who feel that money prizes taint the supposed purity of our sport, I say: get a grip! Many prestigious dog shows in the past, including both Westminster and Morris & Essex, offered prize money that if translated into modern currency would equal or even surpass the $225,000 paid out at this show. Nobody complained then, and I don’t see why anyone should do so now. Sure, the big money for top wins usually goes to people who are not in urgent need of a few extra bucks, but it trickles down, too: you make $400 if you win Best of Breed with a dog you bred. Even getting $100 for going Best of Opposite Sex isn’t bad, and you can make a tidy sum by winning one of the Bred-by-Exhibitor awards, a couple of hundred dollars at the breed level, much more if you place in the Bred-by Group, $15,000 for Best Bred-by-Exhibitor in Show.

Isn’t it a little hypocritical of those of us who complain so bitterly about the high cost of showing dogs to also criticize an offer of earning something back? Personally, I think it’s great that regular dog people have a chance to make a little money (or even a lot!) from winning in the show ring for a change.

1 | 2 | 3