Above: Best of Breed Airdale Ch Stirling Cool Hand Luke’s handler was dismissed by dog show judge Peter Green because of a conflict of interest.

Over at the Pet Connection, Kim brings up the question burning on many people’s brains–why were the two handlers dismissed from the ring of dog show judge Peter Green?

The two handlers dismissed were:

• Cairn Terrier Ch Dogwood Love Affair (breeder/owner Pam Davis)
• Airedale Terrier Ch Stirling Cool Hand Luke (breeders Shirley Good & Susan Rodgers, owner Frank Pulice)

The action irritated me and created the same discussion in my household but below is the excerpt from Kim’s side:

We discuss the fact that judge Peter Green has dismissed two dogs from the ring because their handlers used to work for him. Wouldn’t you know that ahead of time and send in a different handler? Maybe it’s against the rules to change handlers. Stupid rules, if that’s the case. What’s the point of winning your breed if you know your dog is going to be excused from the ring because he has the wrong handler? Maybe someone can clear this up for me. Read more from Kim about the Westminster Dog Show

If you clear it up for her, clear it up for me too!

2-13-2009:

Here is the clarification on the Westminster Dog Show Excusal by Peter Green:

The dogs were excused from the ring–which is different from being dismissed.

According to the AKC conflict rules:

D. Situations that require you to excuse a dog entered under you.

1. A dog you or a member of your family has owned, co-owned, sold, boarded, etc. within one year (In Guidelines, with the excusal requirement added, but also in Chapter 11, Section 13).

2. A person who has handled for you within four months prior to the show date (In Guidelines also elsewhere with the excusal requirement added in the “CONFLICT OF INTEREST” section).

3. A person with whom you have a business relationship (In Guidelines).

If you are interested you can read the American Kennel Club dog show rule guidelines and you can also view the AKC Code of Sportsmanship.

Now for a brief discussion and thanks to those who commented or clarified.

The big disconcerting thing for those involved in the breeds that were excused is that the Cairn and Airedale terriers lost representation at that top level of the show.

The handlers and breeders knew who the judges would be in advance.

Changing handlers could pose problems in showing the dog but handing them off to another handler would still leave the dogs as clients and the conflict of interest would remain.

Changing judges is not something that is apparently done…also there was no guarantee that the dogs would have won and qualified to enter Peter Green’s ring.

The owners could have requested a bench committee hearing or pulled their dogs but they instead seemed to opt for the prestigious (albeit brief) appearance.

It may be that that could have worked in their favor as they managed to get huge exposure from the public outrage over this excusal.

So, you might not like it but this is what I have found as the answer to the burning question surrounding the Westminster Dog Show conflict of interest excusal.