1084

 JUDGING SCENTHOUNDS - respect function ahead of fad
By David Hancock

 “Hounds should combine strength with beauty, and steadiness with high mettle. Perfection of shape consists in short backs, open bosoms, straight legs, and compact feet. The first qualities of hounds are fine noses, docile tempers, steadiness to their game and stoutness in chase.”

            From The Life of a Sportsman by Nimrod, (Methuen, 1903)

  When I first went to KC-approved championship dog shows over sixty years ago, the judges of hounds were often from the hunting field, men who knew the demands of the chase on scenthounds. In the 21st century this is rare and in time, as the hunting ban restricts experience, hounds at such shows are going to be judged by people with no knowledge of the field use of the hounds before them. This could be disastrous for the breeding of functional hounds, whether for exhibition or field employment. You only have to look at judges’s critiques in the last few years to see the falling away of standards in this Group of show dogs. The judge at The Basset Hound Club’s 2011 June show stated that, as in most places around the world, the front assembly in the breed is not correctly assembled, with short upper and fore-arms, leading to short-stepping. Such a fault is serious in a hunting dog relying on stamina to succeed. The judge at the Bloodhound Club’s show in that same month, and an ex-working trial owner, lamented the loss of true head shape in the breed, faulting the narrow muzzles on view at the show. It was alarming to read of several Rhodesian Ridgeback judges reporting weak pasterns and even flat feet in the entry, not good news in a hunting breed. If any breed of hound is not capable of hunting, reallocate it to the Toy group!

   For any hound carrying the disadvantages listed above to be even taken to a KC show for hounds is disturbing. For the exhibitors to be seemingly unaware of such basic flaws is even more disturbing. Judges at such events have to ask themselves "Could the hound in front of me succeed in the hunting field?" A KC judge knows that the entry before him will be bred from. Show winners become breeding material. The late Sir Newton Rycroft once wrote in Hounds magazine: "...if a truly great breeder wins prizes at a big hound show in front of two good judges, all credit to him, he will never let it affect his breeding plans..." Wise words; hound shows have a role but it needs a concentration not on canine beauty but on structural soundness; but the judges have immense influence too, their mistakes or misconceptions affect breeding plans and therefore the future of a breed. Any breed claiming to be a hound breed has to be able to carry out the function of that breed, wherever it's judged.

   I have seen some quite magnificent scenthounds on parade in show rings, from Honiton to Hungary; I have also seen, both in Kennel Club conformation shows around Europe and in shows for hounds from the packs in England, some disappointingly mediocre ones. At Crufts you expect to see ‘the Best of the Very Best’, as the KC promises. But I do see Beagles there with too much flesh, far heavier bone than in say a working pack like the Dummer and with front feet that toe-in. The Basset Hounds there are to me woeful exaggerations of hounds originally bred for the hunting field. The Bassets Fauve de Bretagne, however, usually impress. The Otterhounds seem to be heading away from the waterproof coats of their ancestors and the Bloodhounds are too loose-lipped, over-dewlapped and too throaty. I have seen a couple of sound Foxhounds, but their breeding was closer to the packs. I like the look of the Bavarian Mountain Hounds and the Vendeen Bassets. The Hamiltonstovares are a handsome breed but how good it would be to see a parade of Harriers, Fell Hounds, Trailhounds, Welsh Hounds and Staghounds from the packs. The total separation of the three sports, showing, trailing and hunting, does not benefit the hounds. The show breeders could learn a great deal from the hunting field and mutual understanding in times when using hounds are so curtailed has to be for the better. It would be good to see the KC encourage the packs to attend their shows, if only as parade of hounds items, and have the very best long-term interests of the hound breeds at the front of their minds. Are show Beagles, Bloodhounds and Bassets not becoming quite separate breeds from the pack hounds?   

    Watching the judging of the hounds of the pack will always be a source of joy to me, the condition of the hounds alone giving so much pleasure. A hound show, especially one as well-conducted as the annual Honiton or Dunster Lawns events, is for me a celebration of all the pleasures provided by these canine athletes. The sheer style and restrained pageantry of judging at a hound show adds to this celebration, a welcome contrast to the urban atmosphere of most KC-licensed dog shows. Thirty years ago I was standing at the ringside of a KC championship dog show when I overheard the following conversation; younger man: "Why does the judge need to put his hands on the dogs?" Older man: "Because you don't become an architect by staring at walls!" I was reminded of this snatch of conversation when attending the 1999 hound show at Honiton and one a decade later on Dunster Lawns. The judges were immaculately attired; the hounds beautifully presented; their handlers colourful and impressive; the sun shone, all was right with the world; but was it? Was the judging, even here, as meticulous and systematic as judging any dog to be bred from really must be!

 The splendid Honiton show, with its dazzling array of hounds: Beagles, Harriers, Foxhounds, Staghounds and Minkhounds, is always rewarding to visit but last time I felt disappointed. First of all, only the Minkhound judge examined the mouths of exhibits; does dentition, 'bite' and jaw construction not matter in animals designed to hunt? Secondly, the hounds were never touched, hands-on, by the judges, to verify muscle tone, bone and the construction of key joints. Thirdly, the hounds could only be animated in the ring by being urged to chase a constant shower of small biscuits. To me this totally degrades canine athletes bred to near perfection and shown in superb condition. Here were magnificent hounds from distinguished packs being treated like village curs. Could they really not show off their movement without such demeaning public bribery? Hounds intended to be exhibited have to be trained to show themselves off not bribed!

   Writing on this in Hounds magazine in December, 1994, ‘Mariner’ contributed to a debate on Beagle judging at a hound show by giving the view: “This summer, as I walked out my own hounds…I pondered more and more on…how we judge our beagle hounds…In the show ring, we ‘stand’ our hounds – and ‘move them’. This entails getting them, by judicious dispensing of biscuit, to gallop continually from one end of the ring to the other. This is an important ‘exercise’, because it helps to judge ‘stride’ and ‘balance’. But at the gallop it is very difficult to see how straight a hound moves…In the horse world or at championship dog shows, no judge would want to put up any entry that he had not seen fully at the slow paces as well as the fast…Finally, why do hound judges never look at a hound’s mouth?” I share his concerns; it is not just the knowledge the judges possess but the technique they use to ensure their knowledge is precisely applied. Every judge needs to follow a system.  

  After several months of watching all too many overweight under-muscled dogs parading, sometimes waddling, around the rings at KC conformation shows, it was a delight at Honiton to see the rippling muscles, effortless movement and sheer athleticism of these well-bred functional animals. These were surely the best of the best, this was their day, rosettes awaited. But then came a further disappointment as I studied one or two hounds quite closely and was allowed to run my hands over them. Behind the muscular suppleness, graceful outlines and noble bearing, were some of the long-acknowledged anatomical scenthound faults: Fleshy feet, toeing-in, over-boned pasterns and ramrod-straight forelegs when viewed from the side. This was disappointing, because although none of these flaws were present to an alarming degree, these were the very best hounds of their packs, carefully selected representatives. Flawless hounds are understandably rare, perfect hounds highly unlikely!

  I suppose it could be argued that if hounds can hunt successfully over a long day in difficult country, then that is the best possible test for them. But a hound show is a competition to find the best-made hounds, often with breeding programmes in mind. If judges are not going to bother to look at mouths, examine the feet or feel the shoulders and loins of the exhibits, faults can so easily be overlooked. If hounds can be entered, with the intention of their not only representing their pack but also striving for the honours, whilst carrying noticeable physical flaws, then, behind all the admirable glamour of such a prestigeous show, is there real credibility? That may sound over-critical and as though arguing a case for fault-judging, with the latter of course something to be discouraged. But I don't want our precious hounds to be judged on the bloom of their coats, their showiness when 'stacked' or their flashy markings but on their soundness. In any sporting dog, and especially in a hound used to hunt live quarry, feet and legs, shoulders and loins, the position of the elbow and jaw construction are vitally important. If the hounds taken to a hound show to be judged on the flags by the experts of the day have worrying faults, what are the hounds like which are left in kennels?

      In the second half of the 19th century, the Foxhound fraternity lost its collective head and actually favoured massive leg bone, over-knuckled feet, bunched toes and woefully pin-toed fronts. The redoubtable 'Ikey' Bell and his followers fought hard against such folly and the penalty to a hound of being over-timbered or unsound afoot was eventually conceded. Quite why any lover of hounds would want them to resemble carthorses has never been satisfactorily explained. What is frightening about what Daphne Moore has called the 'shorthorn' era is that so many highly-experienced MFHs and huntsmen went along with the foolishness of the day. Consensual foolishness is still foolishness! We see it in the wrinkled heads on Bloodhounds, overlong ears in Basset Hounds and over-boning in Beagles. Just look at the Mastiff breed to see the harm caused by mistaken consensual thinking!

 That is why it is worth the risk of the accusation of being hypercritical and of suggesting judging on faults. At a time when there are serious external threats to our native hounds we can do without internal ones. When I judge working terriers, I assess their physical soundness, the ability of their anatomy to allow them to perform in the field. When I judge working tests for gundogs, I assess them on their working skills as displayed at the time. When I judge, say, American Bulldogs, I look for the construction of a 'catch-dog' or 'holding dog', as once needed by primitive hunters to 'grip' their quarry after the scenthounds had hunted and 'bayed' it. Sporting dogs, whatever their cosmetic appeal, have to function. A Breed Standard must represent a word picture for 'desired function-in-the-flesh'.

   In an article in Hounds Magazine, November issue 2012, hound expert Al Lonsir wrote: “The two things it is impossible to judge in the show ring are nose and voice. Are there any more important qualities in a hound (apart from drive)? So when I am told of Masters going to the kennels of Peterborough dog champions and asking if they can use them on their bitches, without first at least asking how they perform in the field, my heart sinks. Even worse, I have heard stories of such people being told that the dog’s brother is better in his work, but then still insisting on using the champ. If you breed enough litters on this basis, the chances are you will get something half decent enough to show – breed a few more litters and you might get a hunting pack as well.” He makes a number of important points: the difficulty of judging a successful hound on appearance alone and the folly of breeding from winning hounds ahead of the best hunting hounds. If pack-breeding is wrong-footed in such a way - what hope for show breeders and their breed!

   Major Maurice Barclay, in Hounds and Dogs (Lonsdale Library), 1932, makes a point for me when he states: "...it is with the working capabilities of a foxhound in view that judges at Hound Shows look for certain points. These points are not just for show purposes to please the eye and fashion only, as so many unthinking sportsmen seem to imagine." I would like to see hound show judges, and 'not just for show purposes',   examine mouths. Jardine, in his well-known Hounds of the World, 1937, wrote that: "In judging hounds, little or no attention is paid, as a rule, to their heads..." Whatever the precedent, it cannot be good sense, heads, especially jaws, really do matter.  Jardine also wrote: "...that exaggerated straightness which causes a hound to turn his toes right in, is a mistake." At Honiton there were several hounds with pin-toed fronts. There were several hounds there that were far too straight in the foreleg when viewed from the side. In his Foxes, Foxhounds and Foxhunting of sixty years ago, Richard Clapham noted that: "It will be easily understood that the shorter and straighter the pastern, the more jar will there be, and the quicker will it be carried to the knee, and so upwards. Also, the heavier the bone, the greater the concussion..." There were several hounds at this show that were too straight in the pastern in profile and over-boned at the knee. He would not have liked the show Beagle of today!

  In her informative Foxhounds of 1981, Daphne Moore wrote: "Good clean flat bone, similar to that of a greyhound, is the type required, not the rounded vulgar variety..." Why would anyone want a hound with thick ankles? When the esteemed Beckford wrote in his Thoughts on Hunting of 1797 on the Foxhound "Let his legs be straight as arrows...", he meant when seen from the front, not the side. Most of the hounds in the ring at Honiton in 1999 were excellent. Some however displayed too much weight on the forehand, standing on the outside of each foot, pin-toed fronts, out at elbow, knuckling over at the knee and bunched-up toes. Some may have had defective mouths but this would have gone undiscovered. But feet and knees are even more important. It would pay hound-breeders to study the wolf's foot shape and construction; the wolf hunts by stamina, in a pack, supremely successfully.

  The arguments over whether a round compact foot is preferable to the oval hare-foot in scenthounds have gone on for two centuries. In his contribution to The Lonsdale Library’s Deer, Hare & Otter Hunting of 1929, the Earl of Stradbroke, Master of the Henham Harriers, had this to say about feet and pasterns: “I have found that the hounds that last the longest, and go out on the greatest number of days in the season, are the lighter built hounds, often, too, those with what we all try to breed out, ‘hare-feet’!…I cannot help thinking that in advocating so strongly a short joint we go too far, and there should be a little more length, than is generally considered to be the perfection aimed at. Greater length gives the necessary elasticity to save a jar to the shoulder, when landing from a jump.” If, however, you look at the breed standards of the hound breeds, hunting by scent, recognized by the KC you find considerable variation between them. A Beagle’s feet must not be hare-footed; the Otterhound’s and the Foxhound’s feet have to be round; the Grand Bleu de Gascogne’s feet have to be long and oval; the Norwegian Elkhound’s feet have to be slightly oval; the Finnish Spitz’s feet need to be round; the Basset Bleu de Gascogne’s feet should be oval. No wonder the breeders of these breeds and those who judge them in the ring get confused by conflicting instructions.

   Stradbroke’s point about saving ‘a jar to the shoulder’ is a fair one; ramrod straight front legs, as seen from the side, lack spring and force-absorption; too short a pastern in the front legs restricts that essential springiness. The breed standards also insist that such breeds are well let-down at hock i.e. having their hocks close to the ground. This is an often misunderstood term; in both racehorses and sporting dogs, the seeking of long cannon bones led to the use of this expression. It was never intended to promote short rear pasterns but the promotion of long muscles in what in humans is the calf, leading to a low-placed hock or heel. In a different sense sporting dogs are being ‘let down’ by such advice in both cases set out above; elasticity is essential in the hound’s front legs and ample extension is vital in the hind-limbs. Over-compact feet, rounded and too tight, are in fact a handicap when the hound is striving to gain from ground pressure at pace, as users of the Fell Hound have long accepted. The KC’s Breed Standards are often too open to interpretation and ill-advisedly worded - and judges are slavishly obeying them whereas they should be challenging them - not destructively but constructively, using words based on hunting needs not flashy show ring fads.

   In his informative book The Dog: Structure and Movement, published in 1970, RH Smythe, a vet and exhibitor, wrote: "...many of the people who keep, breed and exhibit dogs, have little knowledge of their basic anatomy or of the structural features underlying the physical formation insisted upon in the standards laid down for any particular breed. Nor do many of them - and this includes some of the accepted judges - know, when they handle a dog in or outside the show ring, the nature of the structures which give rise to the varying contours of the body, or why certain types of conformation are desirable and others harmful." There are many misconceptions amongst show breeders and exhibitors; some concern the angulation of the hindquarters, some affect the thinking behind short legs in breeds like the Basset Hound and, more generally, the shoulder placement in scenthounds that rely on pace, sustained pace. In every animal walking on four legs the force derived from pressing the hind foot into the ground has to be transmitted to the pelvis at the acetabulum, and onwards to the spine by way of the sacrum. In over-angulated dogs the locomotive power is directed to an inappropriate part of the acetabulum. In addition, so as to retain the required degree of rigidity of the joint between the tibia and the femur, other muscles have to come into use. In the over-angulated hind limb, the tibia meets the bottom end of the femur at such an angle that direct drive cannot ensue. The femur can only transmit the drive to the acetabulum after the rectus femoris muscle has contracted, enabling the femur to assume a degree of joint rigidity when connecting with the tibia. This means that the femur rotates anticlockwise whereas nature intended it to move clockwise.

   Excessive angulation in the hindquarters, with an elongated tibia, may, to some, give a more pleasing outline to the exhibit when 'stacked' in the ring. But, in the long term, it can only lead to anatomical and locomotive disaster. Such angulation destroys the ability of the dog's fore-limbs and hind-limbs to cooperate in harmony in propelling the body. Yet I have heard it argued by breed specialists at seminars that it will increase the power of propulsion operating through the hind-limbs and on through the spine. If it did, the racing Greyhound fraternity would have pursued it with great vigour. I have heard a dog show judge praise an over-angulated dog because it 'stood over a lot of ground'! So does a 'stretched limousine' but it requires a purpose-built construction to permit the luxury.

   In his Hounds for a Pack by Comte Elie de Vezins (Allen, 1974, published originally in France in 1882) Comte Elie de Vezins, the greatest hunting expert of his day, wrote:

 “The hound, to be well-made and beautiful, should have the head well-made and longer than it is broad; the forehead wide; the eye large and bright; the nostrils well-opened and moist rather than dry; the ear low, narrow, hanging down and curled inwards and longer than the nose by only two inches. The body of a size and length proportionate to the limbs so that without being too long it may be more slender than stocky; the shoulders neither too wide nor too narrow; the back broad, high and arched; the haunches high and wide; the stern broad near the back but terminating like that of a rat and loosely curved in a half-circle; the thighs well tucked up and well muscled; the leg vigorous, the foot lean and the nails thick and short. The height of hounds for the hare and the roe is from 21 to 23 inches; that of hounds for the stag from 25 to 28 inches; and that of hounds for the boar and wolf from 23 to 25 inches.” He would have been saddened to have seen today's Basset Hounds of the show ring.

   The Basset Hound, and the Dachshund, are examples of achondroplasic animals; achondroplasia is not a disease but an inherited condition in which the long bones of the leg do not attain normal length, disproportionate dwarfism in effect. Scientists tell us that the achondroplasic short-leg gene affects heavy bone more than fine bone and that it will therefore be more difficult to obtain a short-legged dog with straight legs if the bone is heavy than if it is light. It is not surprising therefore that the straight-legged English Basset of the hunting field has appreciably lighter bone than the crooked-legged standard show-type Basset. In their book, Medical and Genetic Aspects of Purebred Dogs (Forum, 1994), Clark and Stainer report that "The Basset Hound is placed in the chondrodystrophoid group of dogs. The conformation of the breeds in this category leads to many inherent problems. The most common problem in the Basset is the high incidence of shoulder and foreleg lameness. There appears to be a high incidence of osteochondritis dessicans. Deformities of the distal radius, ulna and carpal joint are frequently seen." Basset Hounds with excessively short crooked legs suffer; a sporting breed should not be bred to suit our whims but always to honour past function.

    In an article in Hounds magazine, December issue, 1989, Philip Burrows made a powerful point: "Let us never forget that although shows are wonderfully happy occasions in the summer, as regards conformation they probably do more harm than good. Shows of sheep, pigs and cattle may well be helpful for the butcher and the breeder can see in the animals the qualities he wants. Not so with hounds; all the most desirable qualities – nose, constitution, voice and brain – are totally invisible.” He went on to state that he had tried to show only his very best working hounds, but (because the hound shows had become purely ‘beauty shows’), he had been ‘laughed out of court and had to give up’. When breeding for function is relegated and breeding for show - with a show type hound a consideration of importance, then we really are getting lost. Construction can only truly be judged in the hunting field, but the show ring judge must at least try to respect function in anatomy; every judge seems to dwell on shoulders but must know what sound ones are! 

     For me, the first point of real quality in a dog lies in clean sloping shoulders. Well-placed shoulders give a perfect base for a proud head carriage. They provide too the balance between the length of the neck and the length of the back, preventing those disagreeable dips in topline which mar the whole appearance of a dog. I learned, over the years, to start any judgement of the shoulders by considering the position of the elbow. If the elbow is too far forward, then the dog is pulling itself along, not pushing itself along, capitalising on the drive from the hocks and thighs, through the loins. The great foxhound expert, Capt Ronnie Wallace, in his video on the packhounds, states that the shoulders are controlled by the elbow. He knows his stuff; he bred superbly constructed hounds.

  It is only when the scapula and the humerus are of the right length and correctly placed that a dog can achieve the desired length of stride and freedom in his front action. Sighthounds can have their upper arms 20% longer than their scapulae. In smaller breeds they tend to be equal in length. Dogs that step short in front are nearly always handicapped by upright shoulders and short steep upper arms. A dog of quality must have sloping shoulders and compatible upper arms to produce a good length of neck, a firm topline without dips, the right length of back and free movement on the forehand. The upper arm determines, with its length, the placement of the elbow on the chest wall. Many dogs that are loose at elbow are tight at the shoulder joint and the forelegs tend to be thrown sideways in a circular movement. If the dog is tight at elbow the whole leg inclines outwards, causing the dog to 'paddle'. I have seen this in Beagles, Bloodhounds and even Ridgebacks at conformation shows – and one or two have actually won their class! Had their judges ever seen a hunt? They need to! 

   In his valuable book Hounds and Hunting of 1937, Joseph B Thomas, a respected American MFH, wrote: "The British are the greatest breeders of livestock the world has ever seen or probably will see. They breed their mares to the winner of the Derby; they breed their greyhound bitches to the Winner of the Waterloo Cup; and yet they often breed their foxhound bitches to the Winner of the Peterborough Show, which winner is judged ...without regard to what this same animal can do in accounting for foxes, or whether he has cry or nose." Hound show judges can hardly be expected to judge cry or nose, but they are perfectly capable of spotting anatomical flaws that handicap a hunting dog and should be penalised not be rewarded. The immaculate turn-out of judges and hounds is very much part of the cosmetic appeal of such a show, but a rosette won after a wholly visual examination of noble hounds, mostly whilst there is an unseemly and rather degrading scrabbling for bits of biscuit is not going to earn real respect. We must be careful unless we pass on these precious hounds to future generations with inbred faults; judges at hound-shows can shape the future by settling on designs, rather like architects - who didn't become qualified by only 'staring at walls'! Jaw construction matters! A hard muscular loin is essential. Judge them both by examination not assumption!   

    The significance and the value of hound shows like Honiton, Rydal and Peterborough have long caused debate in the hunting world. A pack like the Berkeley elected not to show hounds. One Master in France is alleged to have bred two packs, one for showing and one for hunting, after finding disappointment when showing the hunting hounds. Some state that the racehorse has triumphed without the need for conformation shows, whilst others want to breed a pack rather than the odd outstanding hound. It has been pointed out to Hunts that the economy obtained from not showing does not lead to the sport suffering. The great hound expert Sir Newton Rycroft, in his Rycroft on Hounds, Hunting and Country of 2001, published by The Derrydale Press, writes that “If a successful and experienced Master arranges his matings without even thinking of Peterborough, he will, because he realizes how important foxhound conformation is for the essential virtues of pace, stamina and long hunting life, breed good-looking hounds. If such hounds are shown, it seems much more likely they will do good rather than harm, because they will have been bred for work only.” Hounds of the pack are tested in the field for soundness, hounds shown at KC shows rarely are. Judges of hounds must always rate the exhibit's hunting potential and capability - way ahead of its physical beauty.