I do feel having another set of eyes looking over your dog for structural correctness is, and should always be, a set standard for breeders but I worry about what judges actually see. I see over and over dogs put up for the wrong reasons leading to the wrong dogs being bred and ruining the breed.
The man the Parsons Russell is named for Reverend John Russell, judged one show late in his life, and never went back to judging after seeing what entered the show ring. Now judges have the right to not award any dogs if they feel none are worthy but its very rare a judge will but I personally think judges should be urged to, especially in working dogs. But it is hard to prove a dog can work in the show ring, its also not very important for many potential owners who are looking for puppies to have a working dog. Many working dog traits are hard to live with I will admit and to save breeds many groups have changed whole breeds. Like bulldogs, once trained for bull baiting and fighting could no longer be bred to fight after bull baiting and fighting became illegal so the whole breed switched directions and breeders bred those traits out.
I recently have been talking to breeders about buying a girl russell and have been shocked. I was told by one breeder that she doesn't expect one girl to ever special (show dog term used to describe higher level awards) because she doesn't have enough facial hair. Sense when did facial hair ever become a requirement for a hunting dog? So why should a judge not put up a dog without facial hair? How will we ever determine what dogs are good enough to breed if we rely on judges who judge like that.
It seems to me I live in a world filled with show dogs or working dogs and never the two shall meet... I hope this changes.
