CHARTING THE COURSE
James R. Engel, President, The North American Working Bouvier Association,
November, 1994
An arduous journey can navigate day by day
by dead reckoning, by relentlessly pushing ahead. But periodically one must
take a fix on the stars, see if the course is true; for dead reckoning can be
biased, leading the unwary in circles. The American working Bouvier movement is
on such a journey, an up hill effort to restore the Bouvier des Flandres as a
serious working dog. And, unfortunately, we have drifted off course and gone in
a circle.
The decline of the Bouvier world wide has
one root cause: conformation shows and breeding conducted only for trophies and
ribbons, devoid of concern about character or working aptitude. The result is a
proliferation of false champions, for how can a working dog be a
"champion" without demonstrating his willingness and ability to work?
As a result the breed and the national organizations have fallen into the hands
of show breeders grossly indifferent to the character and heritage of our
breed.
A preview of where this leads is available
in the German Shepherd ring, especially at the specialty clubs. There you can
see for yourselves the over sized, lop eared monstrosities whose distinguishing
feature is an exaggerated "floating trot" and angulation that makes
the standing dog appear to be slinking, which is in most instances indicative
of his character as well as his physique.
The Bouvier show ring is on the same course,
tending to massive, lumbering dogs with elaborately groomed coats in place of
the honest, lean, agile, powerful dogs of our forefathers. Not only are these
dogs lacking in character, they are being transformed into a breed physically
as well as morally incapable of their work.
The working Bouvier movement arose to turn
back this evil tide, to return to the ideals of the founders. Although there
were serious efforts to work within the established organizations - in the
German Shepherd and especially the Doberman as well as the Bouvier - these
efforts proved futile. The simple fact is that prior to our founding no
American canine institution was willing or able to support the Bouvier as a
protective heritage working breed. Indeed, the American Kennel Club - and by
its association the American Bouvier des Flandres Club - are dedicated to the
emasculation of our breed, the extinction of his working character. When the
AKC bureaucrats formalized their long held but softly peddled disdain for
working dogs by banning protective sports, such as Ring and Schutzhund, the
breed clubs for the German Shepherd, Doberman and Bouvier were quick to abandon
any pretense of concern for the working character of their breeds and revert to
their natural inclinations, that is to be show dog and pet dog clubs where work
is emasculated "obedience" appropriate for dogs deemed to be less
than "show quality."
In 1983, Mike Reppa and I, with the support
of the Michigan Club, conducted the fourth working championships in the Detroit
area. In addition to the working events, Annie Verheyen, the Belgian judge,
conducted a European style conformation event. The reason for this was to
demonstrate our commitment to the complete Bouvier, that is dogs with correct
physical structure as well as courage, stability and the other working
attributes.
There was never any intention of segregation
of the Bouvier into working and show lines; the desire was always to bring the
two traditions together in one breed by encouraging joint expectations. We
really did believe that if we drew Bouvier enthusiasts together there would be
a natural evolution toward a unified race, as exists for instance in the
homeland of the German Shepherd where a Schutzhund or herding title on both
parents are necessary to register a litter.
But some ten years later it became evident
that we had gone in a circle, fallen into the same errors we set out to
correct. Rather than seeing the people coming to show their dogs gradually
becoming concerned about character and work, we find that we are being used as
a convenient mechanism of bringing in European judges, many with no true belief
in the breed as a working dog, and using the association as a promotional
device, implying that their show dogs could work just as well as the ugly
working dogs if only they had time to train them.
More importantly, we have been sending the
wrong message, especially to potential working enthusiasts who quite naturally
equate our Mickey Mouse working events and failure to progress in working
requirements as a lack of serious purpose. I have seen too many of these people
go on to other breeds whose working organizations are perceived as more serious
to allow our current situation to continue.
Part of our problem, and I accept a full
share of the blame, is that we have confused rising membership, elaborate
events and social activities with progress. In an effort to draw in new people
we have taken a broad view of what constitutes "work" with the
implied belief that people attracted to elementary activities such as AKC style
obedience would ultimately move on to more serious efforts.
Instead, we have watered down our
association, almost to the point of triviality.
In order to correct this situation, we must
return to our roots with a clear and unequivocal statement of what constitutes
work, that is, serves to define the breed. AKC style obedience is most
certainly not work as envisioned by our forefathers; indeed it is an outgrowth
of British systems overtly hostile to the Continental protective heritage
breeds. Agility and lure coursing are pleasant diversions, but not work in the
sense we are interested in, not systems appropriate to measure the character of
a dog and see if he is worthy of carrying on his race.
The heritage of the Bouvier des Flandres is
that of the guard, protection and police dog; it truly is as simple as that.
Although part of his back ground is that of the cattle herding dog, during the
eighty years of his formal existence he has not been breed for nor used in
significant numbers in the herding role.
Nevertheless, it is appropriate to consider
herding a legitimate potential working function, and if the need and suitable
working tests evolve, then we should accept adequate performance in either a
herding test or a police/guard test as suitable certification for breeding
eligibility or entry into the conformation ring.
As a result of this, we have taken the first
step toward unity by requiring an obedience and stability test as a
prerequisite to the designation "Select" at our conformation event.
In doing so, we need to keep one eye on the ultimate objective, the requirement
of a serious working title for breeding and conformation, so that eventually
every Bouvier to be considered for the designation "Excellent" or
"Select" will be of proven working character. This is the standard in
the working dog world, and to aspire to less would be to accept permanent
second rate status as a working breed.
For fifteen years the working Bouvier
movement has proceeded with deliberation, understatement and caution. Now the
time for caution is at an end and the time to sort the wheat from the chaff is
at hand.
Within three years we must require an
elementary protection test for entry into the adult show ring; and by the turn
of the century we must eliminate the open class.
In spite of two years of discussion and
explanation, and some seven months after the unanimous board vote taking this
first small step toward a unified program, several members stood up in
California to protest even this small step, to demand that their show dogs be
allowed to compete without any indication of working character or stability at
all.
In private these whiners complain that our
real motivation is that we cannot beat their show dogs in the ring and thus are
trying to accomplish by regulation what cannot be done by breeding. And in this
they are correct, for even the dog most perfectly built for his work will by
definition lack the massiveness, elaborate coat and bait and gait demeanor
necessary for show ring success. It is the show ring which is wrong, and which
we must correct.
Their real intent is thus not to question a
detail in the regulations; it is rather to alter our fundamental nature, to
have us prostitute our most fundamental values and accept "show only"
dogs as legitimate Bouviers des Flandres, to embrace the standard that has lead
to the debasement of our breed here and in Europe.
To do so, to accept the validity of showing
dogs as a means of establishing quality and breeding eligibility without a
working test, would negate the very reason for our existence; for how then
would we in any fundamental way differ from the AKC and the American Bouvier
club?
We are a working dog association, and it is
our first principle that dogs who can not work are not truly members of the
race, and should in the ideal not be eligible for breeding or conformation
evaluation.
In spite of all of this there was the demand
for a vote of the membership on this issue. As David Evans so eloquently
pointed out, if we are to abandon our fundamental reason for existence than we
most certainly need new leadership to guide us on this false path. Were this to
come to pass, were we to falter on even this small step toward our goal, I for
one would resign my office and repudiate the association.
Quite simply, these people failed to
participate in the process leading to the new requirements, and failed to take
advantage of the clear legal remedy, to nominate and elect a board in agreement
with their agenda of permanent acceptance of the separation of the Bouvier into
working lines and show lines.
Furthermore, it is beyond my comprehension
why those who believe a "show dog" is a Bouvier because politically
appointed judges, mostly ignorant of the breed heritage and working dog
structure, dispense ribbons, trophies and championships utterly irrelevant
within a working culture should want to be members of a working dog
association. Perhaps they should revert to a more natural home, such as the
American club, which shares their philosophy of the Bouvier as pets and
"show dogs."
Yes, I can hear "you will be down to
twenty members" ringing across the land. The same dire predications came
forth when we began, and yet again when we required a dog to bite in order to
be working champion.
Lot could not find ten good men in Sodom and
Gomorra and was forced to march into the wilderness to build a new society,
leaving his wife on the plain as a pillar of salt for the sin of looking back.
We must not look back; if only twenty take up the challenge and return their
dues, if old friends turn their back because, ultimately, they can’t truly
believe, then with both regret and determination we must cast them aside and
march on together. To do less would be to repudiate our most fundamental belief
in the Bouvier des Flandres as a working dog.
James Engel,
November 1994