Archive for January 2020

Understanding proportions

January 31, 2020

The idea of freedom has more to do with my freedom to do what I want than your freedom to do what you want – Douglas Adams

In a recent post on Facebook Our Dogs’ Breed Feature Editor, Helen Davenport Willis, posted this picture of a Bernese Mountain Dog

and wrote ‘Proportions here are incorrect on this Bernese Mountain Dog which is too long in the back and too short on the leg. The whole picture is totally unbalanced; the top line is clearly sagging. Worryingly, there are many like this in the show ring. Bernese proportions should be 9 to 10. That is 9 high to 10 long. Essential to excellence in breed type has to be the correct proportions.’

I replied , I am afraid rather pessimistically, ‘I established the Judging Diploma in 1980 and have been a Kennel Club Accredited Trainer since 2000 so, along with many other thoughtful and knowledgeable columnists and commentators from the UK and North America (Robert Cole in Canada and Curtis Brown in the USA), I have spent 40 years of making exactly this and other comments on structure in seminars, articles, presentations on the Internet and for the last 25 years, in Speakers’ Corner in Our Dogs. Unfortunately, despite all our efforts (and this includes the Kennel Club’s welcome and increasing emphasis on judges’ education) they do not appear to have made a scrap of difference and although some breeds have maintained their standards and there have been improvements in in head structure in Chows and some of the brachycephalic breeds, the conformation and overall shape of many others breeds is simply wrong and totally at odds with their standards.’  I indicated I would try again despite my experience of brick walls and heads and shortly afterwards my mood was lifted with a further post from Nancy P Melone, a retired university professor and Bernese Mountain Dog enthusiast from the States who replied, ‘Intelligence and (most importantly) motivation are not uniformly distributed throughout the population … but there are pockets scattered here and there. We can and do teach the pockets … and for our efforts, those students are deeply appreciative’.

Of course, what she says is quite true and she reminded me of two important points: that the joy of teaching is that you make a difference in the long term (as a student I remember a discussion I initiated on the basis that we were educating for 100 years hence and not tomorrow) and, as I know from my own correspondence, there are many who are as frustrated as I am by the often narrow-minded focus of some breeders and judges who continue to ignore the fundamental conformation of a dog because they like its head, its coat or its tail set.

To begin at the beginning

I should begin by saying that there are many wonderful show dogs and it is one of the great pleasures judging when you see their grace, style and appeal: so, as with the brachycephalic breeds, we know that excellence is achievable.  Unfortunately, the terms ‘breeder’ and ‘high profile’ when applied to breeders do not necessarily correspond: one would wish that they did for it is the high profile breeders who all too often have the greatest influence with judges and novices coming in to a breed. A friend, who had a high profile until 20 years ago when they stood back from the pressures of the show ring, was studying the Our Dogs Annual in January and told me they were horrified at the number of dogs which were distinctly way out of kilter from what their breed standards demanded.

As Helen makes clear, the proportions of her breed is the key element of the criticism of so many dogs in the ring today and this applies to far too many: you do not have to spend very many minutes on canine, show related social media to see evidence of this fundamental distortion. I have no problem in people showing pictures of their dogs but it does concern me that so many people then pile in with their congratulations and confident comments about the quality of dogs which are too often genuinely awful examples of their breed.

But back to the thread – I would like to discuss what in my opinion are the two major problems from which many breeds continue to suffer.  If they could be resolved we could focus on soundness and breed characteristics – the other aspects of excellence.

As noted by Helen the first is ‘proportion’: if a breed is described in the standard as ’square’ then if it is not square it cannot be typical however closely it conforms to its other breed characteristics.  If, as with Bernese Mountain Dogs, the proportions are 10:9, so it is slightly longer than tall, however good the rest is  I would suggest that this is a fundamental flaw.  Of course, the judge must balance the good features against those that are less good but ‘proportion’ is central to whether the dog looks like its breed. In passing I would mention that a note for prospective puppy buyers has been added to all breed standards on the Kennel Club webpages which I had not noticed before.  It says, ‘Size – the Kennel Club Breed Standard is a guide and description of the ideal of the breed; the Size as described does not imply that the dog will match the measurements given (height or weight). A dog might be larger or smaller than the Size measurements stated in the Breed Standard’.  I mention this because I think it proves my point for although we can, I think, comfortably accept that dogs may be slightly smaller than desirable or up to size, it is highly unlikely that there will ever be such a note which says that it could be expected that the proportions of any given breed might not be the same as that described in the breed standard.

Structural balance compromised

The next is the question of ‘structural balance’.  We have seen the damage that can be inflicted on a breed when its structural balance is compromised as in the German Shepherd Dog and, should you be interested, I refer you to my Web Log at http://www.davidcavill.wordpress.com for my series of articles on this subject.  We continue to see structural balance being compromised by the fashion for the hind-quarter strength of some breeds being bred (consciously or unconsciously), with very long second thighs taking the back feet significantly behind the point of maximum stability as seen even in the Kennel Club videos for judges describing conformation and movement.  Now, there are some breeds where a little greater hind angulation is acceptable (not longer second thighs) because they are designed to move most efficiently at the double suspension gallop. Breeds such as Greyhounds, Whippets and Salukis will have this tendency although one would not want to see it taken to the extremes we see all too often. But why such outlines are considered elegant in some guarding, shepherding, mastiff, and gundog breeds (which include poodles) I have no idea but many believe such an outline to be not just acceptable but desirable.

All suggestions as to how to get these vital concepts over to breeds and exhibitors effectively would be very welcome.  Do not hesitate to contact me at mail@davidcavill.co.uk.

 

Do not panic about the General Data Protection Regulations

January 16, 2020

Data is a precious thing – Tim Berners-Lee (creator of the Internet)

On 26th February 2018 the Kennel Club published a press release about the new General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) which come into effect on the 28th of May.  One paragraph states, ‘It is important for clubs and societies to be aware of the way in which data must be handled in line with the requirements under the GDPR. Whilst it may seem complex, there are some relatively straightforward immediate steps which will help clubs to get in shape for GDPR’.  This release was clear and accurate as far as it went but it would appear that Clarges Street has had a number of queries from secretaries of canine associations since then for there has been a further press release designed to ‘clarify’ what clubs need to do and a further ‘guidance sheet’ both of which, it has to be said, has done little more than provide a layer of confusion.  May I bring some clarity to the situation?

But to begin at the beginning: few associations will still have a formal hand written members register or card index.  Occasionally snail mail might be used but the vast majority of communications between secretaries, committees and members is likely to be via email using easily readable/printable attached files and records of members will be on a spreadsheet.  However, the details held have usually been simple and practical.  The original Data Protection Act was not much interested in small organisations that just held names, addresses, phone numbers and email addresses on a database for most of the information was in the public domain but as from May 28th, 2018 this is no longer the case and any data held in whatever form (even on a card index) is subject to the new General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR).  You will no doubt have received many letters over the last few weeks from almost every government and commercial organisation which holds data about you explaining what data they hold and why they hold it and given the pages of small print it is is not surprising that those who are responsible for the data held by canine societies might be beginning to worry that they may fall foul of the bureaucratic nightmare which appears to be approaching.  The Kennel Club’s intervention will not have helped ease their minds.

Don’t Panic

Do not panic: although everyone responsible for data held on behalf of any organisation is subject to the act the vast majority if not all breed or general canine societies do not even have to register.  The reason is that data held for a not-for-profit organisation is exempt.  If you need evidence then you only need to go to https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/register/self-assessment/ and complete the short and simple questionnaire.  It is a simple survey at the end of which you are informed whether or not you need to register – and if you do, you can go directly to the registration page.  Even when you get there it only takes about 15 minutes to complete so it is quick and certainly not complicated.   However it is unlikely you will be required to register and you will be presented with information:

‘If your organisation was established for not-for-profit making purposes and does not make a profit or your organisation makes a profit for its own purposes, as long as the profit is not used to enrich others. You must:

  • only process information necessary to establish or maintain membership or support; 
  • only process information necessary to provide or administer activities for people who are members of the organisation or have regular contact with it; 
  • only share the information with people and organisations necessary to carry out the organisation’s activities. Important – if individuals give you permission to share their information, this is OK (you can still answer ‘yes’); and
  • only keep the information while the individual is a member or supporter or as long as necessary for member/supporter administration.

If you can answer yes to all those questions you do not need to register but you are informed that you may voluntarily register if you prefer.

Voluntary registration

If you think about it, data protection is all perfectly straightforward and reasonable and the aim is sensible: it is to allow individuals to stay in control of their personal information and to ensure that those organisations that hold personal data protect it, use it responsibly and do not sell it or distribute it without your permission.  As I have explained, registration will not apply to your club under normal circumstances but if, say, an insurance company suggests perfectly reasonably that they pay your club a fee to circulate all the members with a special offer, and you accept you would immediately find yourself in the data protection minefield so it would be wise to refuse such requests whether you are registered or not.

Your committee may feel they should register voluntarily even though your society fulfils all the criteria above but either way your organisation has a duty under the regulations to keep your data safe and the following summarises what you need to do.

Your committee should first identify one person within your society that is going to be responsible for data protection.  This does not automatically have to be the secretary.  It will not be an onerous role and it would make life easier for secretaries if they had someone on the committee (it could be the chairman, treasurer or any other member) to whom they could refer when they were communicating with members if it was not in the normal course of the society’s activity.  This is likely to happen very seldom for the circulation of minutes, AGM notices, newsletters and the like would carry on exactly as usual.  However, it is important to ensure whoever it is thoroughly understands what is required of them.  There are fines for not fulfilling the role properly but again there is no need to worry.  The director of the DGPR has made it quite clear that all monitoring activity will be proportional, registration is voluntary in any case and the likelihood of any canine society seriously misusing the data of its members is pretty remote.

What you need to do

The next stage is for you to list all the data about your members which you actually need.  I totally approve of this requirement because I get extremely irritated with those intrusive requests for information such as my age, education and ethnicity, whether it is from government or any other source.  You may find that you are, without realising it already asking for more detail than you need.   Name, address, telephone numbers, email address and contact details is all the personal information you should need about members. What you do not need and must not keep, are details of their peccadillos: in fact you are now not allowed to keep personal notes about anyone on a database for which you are responsible (‘always “picky”- handle with care’ or ‘hates X with a vengeance’ are not acceptable however useful they may be as a memo for you or a future secretary) and as you are duty bound to provide all the information you hold about a member on request it is probably not wise in any case!

Many societies now may include details of judges, litters, potential puppy owners and extensive databases regarding health which also requires the asking of legitimate questions but this is all still within the bandwidth of a ‘not-for-profit’ organisation so falls within the definition of ‘normal activity for a not for profit organisation’.

Safety and security

All data must be held securely so your computer must have a password, filing cabinets or card indexes holding data must be locked and keys kept safely and, registered or not, you should also be very careful about allowing others access to your database.  It may well be that your treasurer or newsletter editor has a perfectly good reason to have a copy but they, too, must understand that it may only be used for the precise reason they need it and the same security and safety measures that you, as the holder of the data, should be in place.

The fact that someone has ‘joined’ your association means that by definition, they are happy to receive information from you about it and its activities but if you want to circulate your members with commercial advertising, charitable or other material then you should make arrangements for any of your members who do not wish to receive such information to opt out.  This is not likely to be a very common occurrence and is easy to do if you are going to email them all: you simply include an ‘opt out’ clause and you should make sure that anyone who does so does not receive such emails in the future.

You should inform your members about what data you are storing and why.  There is nothing complicated about this you can just send them an email.  To help I have put form together which should be sufficient to fulfil the requirements of the Act.  I have tried to include all the points demanded by the legislation so you do not have to keep any other records of what you do and how you do it.  ‘Keep it Simple’ has always been my mantra and just because the legislation seems complicated does not mean we have to do any more than absolutely necessary. I have included ‘marketing activates’ for completeness but if you are not going to do this you can simply delete the italicised lines.

Data Protection Notice and Permission to hold contact details for all members of (insert association’s name)

To comply with the current legislation on data protection we must tell you what personal data we hold about you, why we hold it and have your permission to retain it.  We securely store data about members to ensure we can contact them by mail, telephone or email:

  • in an emergency
  • about the activities and meetings of the club, reminders of closing dates for shows and events, requests for assistance at club events
  • our regular newsletter
  • any special offers we believe will be of interest to you

You can opt-out of any marketing contacts if you wish by informing the secretary.

Any data we hold will not be provided to any other person or business except as required by law.

  • You may request to see all the personal data we hold on you (we are allowed 30 days to provide it)
  • We only keep your data for the reasons outlined above
  • We destroy your data if we have had no contact with you for (x) years
  • For the smooth and efficient running of our association we need to keep a record of
    • Your name
    • Your Address
    • Your landline and mobile telephone numbers
    • Your email address
    • Contact details of another responsible person in case of emergency

______________________________ (Insert name, telephone number and email address of the person responsible for data protection within the Association)

PS: I have researched this article thoroughly  and I will be taking my own advice but please note I am not a lawyer and the information should not be regarded as a formal legal opinion.