A stylin' poodle at Crufts. Contadini, Flickr
"Although competition rules do not specifically ban the use of cosmetics and other beauty treatments on dogs, they do forbid anything that alters an animal's appearance during dog shows, to gain extra marks from judges, who award prizes for entries that best match the 'ideal' characteristics of each breed," reports the Telegraph. Dog owners who show hairless Chinese crested dogs have been suspected of using "female depilatory creams" to rid their champion canines of excess hair. Owners of other breeds have been suspected of using lipstick, eyeliner and Clearasil acne cream.
The notion of using makeup on dogs is so strange that it's led one British veterinarian, Peter Wedderburn, to wonder, "What's next, dope testing?" "It seems bizarre to me that it happens at all: if showing dogs is about celebrating the health and vigor of animals, what does it matter if there's an occasional tuft of hair in the wrong place?" Wedderburn asks.
It's admittedly a "grey area" according to the British Kennel Club. At the Westminster Dog Show, the most prestigious canine competition in America, this reporter witnessed a Chinese crested dog getting a last minute shave and having the rims of her eyes touched up with white powder to "get the red out." Not too far away, corn starch was being used to brighten the legs on a gray-and-white schnauzer and all around, dogs were being shampooed, blown dry with hair dryers and coiffed with hair spray. None of it was done in secret.
Caroline Kisko of the British Kennel Club, tells the Telegraph that they are trying to be "particularly vigilant this year" about dogs in makeup. But with nearly 28,000 dogs anticipated to participate in this year's event, the task can be daunting, if not impossible. "We do carry out spot checks, including hair samples, but while it is easy to find colour dye it can be very hard to prove that removal cream has been used on a hairless dog," Kisko admitted to the Telegraph.
The Crufts dog show began yesterday in Birmingham, England, and continues through Sunday.
Related Videos
More Cute Stuff
- Lion Love (Daily Squee)
- This Cat Means Business (I Can Has Cheezburger)
- Zebra Tan! (I Has a Hotdog)
- Cat Guys or Dog Guys? (Petside)
- Reducing your Carbon Paw-Print (Discovery)
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
Why Vets Can't Always Smell What You Smell
Ya know, this isn't a "new" pratice. I have SEEN handlers mask and ADD things to dogs using dyes, shoe polish, human make up, and other stuff. I have been in the dog show world since I was 5 yrs old, i am 38 now. the strangest thing i have seen was a couple of ladies ADDING spots to a Dalmatian with SHOE POLISH!
so, its not unusual.
So true. Nothing wrong with the dogs being super clean and groomed, but makeup, corn starch, etc. is a common practice. I also know of spayed females shown and winning, and "everyone" knows they're spayed. I can't comment on Crufts, but Westminster is a bit of a joke: the judges are very aware of the big-time handlers, big-time owners and their dogs. Before the herding, working, toy and non-sporting group dogs even enter the arena, you know which dogs are contenders by breed. Once in a while there's a surprise rare breed pulled out, but they never win the group.
No Lisa, this is nothing new. Personally, I don't see a problem in fixing this either. They said in the article that there is no rule that tells people they can't put things on their dogs, they say it's a grey area. Well, make it a black and white area! Make a rule that nothing at all can be added to animals and leave it at that. It ALL comes down to money and those who win do end up making sosme very big money in the future. I guess it's alot like politics, whoever is willing to pay the ones who make the rules will end up having rules to fit their needs and wants. Rules seldom are put into effect today for the "good of the sport" That's to bad to becuase seems to me this would be one very easy thing to correct.
I have a solution. Eliminate these competitions which are just a hairs breathaway from being child beauty contests. Not to mention the hundreds of genetic abnormalities that have been caused by breeders looking for stardom. And I bet if dogs could talk 90% of them would tell their owners to take a chill pill. There are tons of perfectly adorable and loving dogs waiting to be adopted. They just didn't go to "Harvard". Dog breeders are no different from Gucci stores.
The author seems perplexed by why dog owners would do cosmetically enhance their dogs at shows, and states that, "showing dogs is about celebrating the health and vigor of the animals...."
These shows are about much more than "celebrating" dogs. They are about establishing and maintaining a pedigree, and winning will be of financial benefit to the owner when breeding the dog.
Winning means that the dog shows all the best traits of a breed, and therefore is an excellent breeding specimen. If judges are duped into thinking an animal is closer to the breed's ideal because of depilatory creams, dyes, cornstarch, and make-up, then they've put their stamp of approval on an animal who is not as close to the breed's ideal as it should be to maintain a breed's integrity.
The dog should be shown as is, anything else is cheating!!!!!
I agree with you 100% PatrickPain, show the dog without any additional add-ons, its only fair. Those who use makeup should be disqualified on the spot, for a dog to win a show, we should see the dog as a dog, not a makeup of what they want the dog to look like, it should be in its natural state.
Crufts keeps at all times; the very highest of standards. On the other hand this years Westminster Dog Show began with a pre-determined Best in Show winner, "Sadie" the Scottish Terrier with 111 Best in Show wins in 2009 and best dog in the nation. After "Sadie" won the Westminster, I emailed Westminster VP of Judges and complained that it was an unfair dog show and requested International Judges for Best in Show. Telling us that the Best in Show Judge is "sequestered" is a bunch of bull. Please don't insult our intelligence. It concerns me that American dog shows have lots of judges sitting in the audience and they all talk about the dogs. Now we know they do and they have favorite handlers and owners. The VP of Judges emailed me back and said the "AKC is having problems with anti-dog legislation." When I asked why, this guy starts crying about the states who are going to put puppy mills out of business. I say great!! People buy these dogs who are inbred and if they can't afford their medical treatment then they wind up in shelters or wose, left down a long dark empty road. How many times have we heard about puppy mills being raided by authorities for dispicable conditions and dead dogs? Reputable breeders are easy to find in magazines like Dog Fancy. I used to think that a little guy could take a great dog to infinite stardom but it's all political now. What a shame!!
Actually, the judge IS sequestered.
However, that being said most judges know or possibly have even examined the dogs on other occassions. It probably is no surprise to see his line up.
However, each dog HAS to perform and not a move a foot wrong.
They already know that once they are in that Best In Show line up they are the best of the best. At that point it comes down to showmanship and Sadie is a beautiful, beautiful bitch.
She deserved that win....but I am glad I am not that judge! They were all deserving at that level!
Actually Dogfancy is not a reputable way to find a breeder- if u look, u will see tons of ads for Waconda-in different breed listings- they are a well known puppy mill breeder- they used to send me fliers offering to sell me puppies of some 30 different breeds, with special instructions about how the pups can be shipped by plane or trucked, and what to do if the pups arrived dead or diseased-nice. Dogfancy, as well as the AKC gazette states they do not police thier classifides for puppy mills.
The best bet for finding a reputable breeder for a better quality dog is using breed chat boards, going to shows and talking to people.
dogfancy is NOT a rep. dog mag. try the Gazette, its the ONLY one without puppy mills in the ads.
Joe said: "I guess it's alot like politics..."
YA THINK!?!?!?!
I was "in dogs" many years ago and got out of it because I saw that not only the best dogs won. There is too much glad-handing and back-patting amongst the judges, who are former handlers/trainers as well as being breeders and the competing handlers/trainers who are also breeders...it's a good ol' boys club (women ARE included no discrimination in that way).
It's the same in horses. Arabians, in particular, are shaved and greased all over the face AND made-up...yes, make-up is slathered around the eyes. I'm sure this happens in other horse breeds as well.
If find these practices repulsive and disgusting...anything to win and the animals be damned.
So what's next? Someone doing plastic surgery on their dog?
Ridiculous.
They already do plastic surgery on dogs. I saw a 60 Minutes episode a while back. Male dogs that have been neutered have cosmetic testicles added! Hilarious, huh! It is not to win any competition, but maybe he walks taller in the neighborhood.
They do and have for years. I used to show Bulldogs. The dog who frequently was put up in the southeast cuircut had the worst wry jaw I've ever seen. The bitch who was put up had eye surgery done. Both of these are genetic defects that are passed on to their young. The breeder was not shy about telling me this and said if I ever needed work done, she had a vet who would do it off the record. I showed for 2 years and gave up realizing honest people don't win. Of coarse, also worth noting is a lot of the judges and the winning breeders were all friends. What a disapointing experience but goes to show corruption is everywhere.
They already do lots of plastic surgery on dogs. Many wrinkled breeds get their eye's fixed, others tails are docked, ears are trimmed. This is not limited to show dogs. Dog shows are a way of judging the quality of the breed standard. Dog shows are just a game that breeders play. To many the Dog Shows are just a hobby or game. Better than people who ignore or abuse their dogs with neglect.
This doesn't surprise me! I don't know about around the world, but here in the states, it's nothing for these owners to apply "braces" to their dogs teeth....
If you don't like the idea of "politics" in conformation (breed ring) showing, then by all means do agility, obedience, lure coursing, rally or tracking. I have succeeded in all of those (and have finished a breed champion myself, owner-handled all the way, 3 5-pt. majors plus AND over professional handlers as well). I also judge obedience & rally for both AKC and UKC. I judge according to the performance of dog and handler on the day - no "politics" involved. But even if you don't compete, if you have a dog, please go to obedience training classes.
Awesome!
thank u for being a GOOD judge the good compeitiors thank u.
What breeds do u judge?
Why any of this is shocking to anyone even remotely involved with the dog world is beyond me. All you have to do Is look around the grooming area before the dogs go on. You will see all types of "beauty enhancements" being done to show dogs. Painting,staining,coloring,dusting,"creative clipping" and on and on it goes to hide faults and promote the dog in a skewed manner. Sunlight with outdoor shows bring out various hues of color from bad dye jobs. So if this goes on in front of people what do you think goes on behind the scenes?
Westminster is one big con job to the dog world. All the judges know all the handlers and top dogs! They see them week in week out on the circuit and they also see them in the various publications with full page color spreads that breeders use to "sell" their kennel name,dog and wins, and thank the judges that gave them the win!
If anyone thinks dog showing isn't political and is purely subjective they must be from Mars!