Putnam KC photos by Eugene Zaphiris and Matthew Stander
I seem to recall it was some time ago that “a Board” established a committee to look into the buying of real estate property for dog shows to hold their sites at due primarily to the loss of space in suburban and urban areas. This project went the way of many a project—nowhere—either due to being before its time or after its time. Now comes Putnam County dog show in what was, or is, the Stormville Airport locale located in Dutchess County. It is, to my mind, a venue which could be developed into an ideal place for a continuing series of shows held throughout most of the year. Seeing Joy Brewster on the panel only reinforced my thinking about this, since she had a similar, if not more advanced site to be developed near Danbury, I think it was. This, too, did not get too far, and I can't help but wonder, particularly as sites become harder and harder to come by, why this thinking is not redeveloped. I mean, don't we have enough shows in Springfield?
As for Putnam, it was good to see Peg and Bert Tormey there, both of whom I remember as longtime members of “old Putnam.” The big new Hound Show was to be held on Sunday, north of the site, so that a goodly number of hounds were in attendance. First day, BIS was Coady Sickle's homebred Bulldog, while Saturday, Zane Smith's Staffie (handled by Kim Rudzik) was the victor. The day was warm but not unmercifully so, and while there was only one food vendor, it was the chap from Hatboro with that good Greek food. Made for a tasty time.
Speaking of a tasty time, if you are in the City and looking for 90 minutes of light entertainment, try “Xanadu.” It's good fun, with two of the funniest and zaniest singing performers you'll ever see—Mary Testa and Jackie Hoffman. Absolutely hilarious! We ate at Babbo afterward, which is better than ever and easier to get into after the theatre than before.
I just received the latest press release—this one from Eukanuba—about the World Challenge Show. Forty contestants—one from the U.S., one from England, including Scotland and Wales, but not Ireland (I think because Ireland is FCI), and one from Canada. All dogs represented must be AKC-recognized. Which the other 37 countries may be is not stated, butit may be on a Web site or two. It is divided into three geographical sections: Europe & Africa, Asia & Australia (does this exclude New Zealand?) and the Americas. One judge from each section will select one dog and then the three dogs will be judged by another officiating judge. Who is selecting those judges, one must wonder! What happens if one of the 37 countries has a dog win that is not AKC-recognized? It is also confusing as to whether in fact the dog from England has the sanction of the Kennel Club. Personally, I think not, since the point system devised was done so, as I understand it, without Kennel Club approval. Alternatively, TKC could have elected a show, i.e. Crufts, the way AKC selected the Invitational winner, but I know this did not happen. I certainly would question how “harmoniously,” to quote the press release, all the selections may, in fact, have been with regard to the individual kennel clubs. Or if, indeed, all kennel clubs were, in fact, contacted, or contact was by FCI alone. Oops, I forgot to mention this is a “special event” held in conjuntion with the Invitational in Long Beach.
For the first time of which I am aware, the CHF has come out with a statement involving a non-health research topic. Certainly the printed letter in this issue about being opposed to dog fighting was a welcomed one from them, but how come no stand whatsoever on AB 1634? Similarly, I can't help but smile at some of those jumping in about 1634 way after the fact. I mean, two DOG NEWS writers who held off until two weeks before the Senate Committee vote without writing anything on the topic at all really surprised me. Just as one writer who writes about virtually anything pertaining to AKC still has not mentioned it either. But that's just me being me, I guess. •
