Need a class for oversize dogs?

[S.R.Patch]

I must have misunderstood. I thought it was said the FULL standard must be met to be eligible for registry.
Nice to hear from you again Rowdy, Still got that burr under your saddle I see...lol

[S.R.Patch]

The registry establishes THEIR rules and if THEIR rule is 13" to 15" then it matters NOT if taller hounds have a place in the hunting world because that registry has made the determination they have none in theirs. That then means one that wants, likes and has dogs over 15" has to go to a registry that allows that size dog, just as they do when they trial different styles of running. I am of the opinion that if a registry's breed standard is no taller than 15" then they should not even register those that do not meet that standard. It makes no sense to me for a registry to say they have an established breed "standard" of no greater than 15" but yet allow 16" dogs to be registered in THEIR registry which then allows them to be bred NOT meeting THEIR own standards. Not saying bigger dogs have no hunting worth as I'm sure they do but that has nothing to do with what a registry's conformation standard is. If a registry states that any dog over 15" is disqualified from their registry's hunting trials and or shows then their standard for height must be a ZERO deviation from that upper limit w3hich must be met first and foremost.

Ok Ken,....I'll give you your inch in height back if you'll kill all these do nothing champeen hounds in the AKC registery. No show hounds that don't hunt. no hounds that don't pursue with the intent to over take their game. Yes, that would be worth giving back an inch...lol

[S.R.Patch]

This issue only pertains to trialing, it has nothing to do with fear, weakness or closed mindedness at all.
If the oversized hounds are not allowed in the trials, the breeding of over sized hounds will follow suit.
You can attempt to justify anyway you please, but in the end, rules are rules and they are meant for everyone participating in trials.
Personally, I give a rats azz what England allows, this is AMERICA and AKC stands for AMERICAN Kennel Club.
IMHO, it all boils down to character and integrity and whether you have it or lack it.

This has all been hashed before. I have no problem following rules. I remember there was no 13" class at one time but the little fellows felt there was an unfair advantage to their bigger brothers, and more classes means more champeens.

Imho, to ignore the English standards, is to ignore the history and family tree of our beagles. I like your "character and integrity" statement...

[Swampman]

No burr, just tired of the rest of the world constantly telling the U.S. how we should run our country.
Again, I don't care what the U.K. has for standards, and yes, I know the hounds originally came from there many years ago.
Our forefathers earned the right to make our own rules and standards when we won the revolutionary war.

The character and integrity comment was not directed at you, I know that you do not trial.
It was directed at individuals that knowingly enter and/or measure in oversize hounds in trials.
I really believe that if the AKC continues to monitor the size issue closely at the trial level, the breeding will naturally follow.

[warddog]

The registry establishes THEIR rules and if THEIR rule is 13" to 15" then it matters NOT if taller hounds have a place in the hunting world because that registry has made the determination they have none in theirs. That then means one that wants, likes and has dogs over 15" has to go to a registry that allows that size dog, just as they do when they trial different styles of running. I am of the opinion that if a registry's breed standard is no taller than 15" then they should not even register those that do not meet that standard. It makes no sense to me for a registry to say they have an established breed "standard" of no greater than 15" but yet allow 16" dogs to be registered in THEIR registry which then allows them to be bred NOT meeting THEIR own standards. Not saying bigger dogs have no hunting worth as I'm sure they do but that has nothing to do with what a registry's conformation standard is. If a registry states that any dog over 15" is disqualified from their registry's hunting trials and or shows then their standard for height must be a ZERO deviation from that upper limit w3hich must be met first and foremost.

Ok Ken,....I'll give you your inch in height back if you'll kill all these do nothing champeen hounds in the AKC registery. No show hounds that don't hunt. no hounds that don't pursue with the intent to over take their game. Yes, that would be worth giving back an inch...lol

You won't give me anything back as nothing was taken from me. You are contesting a rule established by a registry and those requirments are just as any law, rule or regulation. We may not like them but if we are going to be involved in whatever those laws, rules or regulations are a part of then we must adhere to them. What I find interesting is that I know of NOT a single registry in the U.S. that has a breed standard for a beagle that exceeds 15".

[BMBeagles]

Im surprised this post aint 20 pages long. Wheres all them guys that bragged about akc trials over the last few years ?

[randy hicks]

a perfect 13 inch hound is that class- run both big and small and if its a great hound it can win both titles.

[Pine Lakes]

Form follows function.... The fear of these 16" English standard beagles must be real due to the responses I've read.
I've had big hounds and little hounds, some of each at the same time. There are places where each has some advantage according to the habitat they're ran in and the type rabbit hunted. I think there is room for all and a disdain for any only shows weakness and closed mindedness. jmho
Stay Cool...

Good post Patch. I've been guilty of running an oversized dog for sure. I did so not because I thought an advantage came with being 1/4"-1/2" over 15", but because they were very good dogs. I also own a male that never measured over 14 3/4"(usually 14 1/2") except for the single time he measured 15 1/2". He's nowhere near that. One of the judges that measured him 15 1/2" that day, measured him 14 1/2" the weekend before. I don't recall ever being concerned with an oversized dog beating him, just a good dog, and they range in size. This isn't saying that the standards shouldn't be adhered to, but if we're going to have to adhere to them then they darn well need to be true and consistent. At this point you can have your dog measured by 10 different judges and get 7 different measurements. This problem doesn't just fall at the feet of the breeders and owners.

[kwolf]

Thanks for all the comments on this topic, I too have run dogs in trials that may be oversize thru out the years, but never at the most a 1/4 inch over . Just like the previous post stated you can have 10 judges measure a hound and get 7 differant readings in size, I had a male measure 15 1/4 at a trial and the very next week measure 14 3/8 , one of the judges looked at me and said was this the same hound I measured out last week, I told him yes .I took 2nd that day and was beat by a really nice dog that measured 13 1/4. The first NKC I ever went to there were 60 hounds entered, males and females combined all differant sizes ran against each other and at the end of the day a little female that was not even 13 inches won the whole thing, she just flat out scored the rest of the dogs that day and took the gold! In 2017 I went to a derby trial and entered a nice young male, he made the winners pack , when the judges measured him they both went WOW and tilted the stand back for all to see and called out 15 inches even, I ended up winning that trial. I would rather run against a good hound that is oversize than one that is 14 1/2 and back tracks , ghost trails, barks in the check, won't hunt, and can't keep up in a hard drive! Yes people do put these kind of hounds in and makes me wonder what are they thinking.

[Shady Grove Beagles]

Went to run dogs for a week with my good friend Jonah Staten in Ohio about a year ago.While there I pointed to one of my females and asked "what do you think she measures?"
He said" let's see I've got a measuring stand right here". Stand looked professionally built and when I asked how accurate it was Jonah said "within a 1/16", go ahead and check it."
I took a yardstick and a tape measure and it measured exactly what it said. My female with multiple measurements was 15 3/8"
Took her to a A.K.C. Large Pack on Hare Trial this Spring. Two judges measured her and said "she's good". I asked "what did she measure?" He answered "14 1/2". I said "really?' and he responded "she's 14 1/2" all day long.
If there's that much discrepancy in measuring a dog why wouldn't I enter her in trials? The judges are the "official" measureres at the event and if they say she's 14 1/2" then by gosh that's what she is that day.
So who's to blame?

[warddog]

The registry is to blame because they mandate a breed conformation standard with a zero tolerance on being over 15" but no standard method for assuring that standard is met. Of course if they had a standardized method of measuring such as setting them up on a bench like in a bench show that too would be violated. By the way that very same size standard applies even when showing on the bench. It's about like the speed limits, if it's 55 then the traffic goes 65+ and if 70 it goes 80+. The thing is that when you get caught by a person with authority you pay the price.

[LR Patch]

I understand people love to debate issue's of any / every kind ... it's human nature ! But the bottom line here is that these registries have set guidelines , They are in black & white and have been in place for several years . Either abide by them or pay the price JMHO . Really seems to bother those that try to push the limits ... to me that says a lot about that small group of folks .

[Bowguy]

I understand people love to debate issue's of any / every kind ... it's human nature ! But the bottom line here is that these registries have set guidelines , They are in black & white and have been in place for several years . Either abide by them or pay the price JMHO . Really seems to bother those that try to push the limits ... to me that says a lot about that small group of folks .

Good post!

[warddog]

I understand people love to debate issue's of any / every kind ... it's human nature ! But the bottom line here is that these registries have set guidelines , They are in black & white and have been in place for several years . Either abide by them or pay the price JMHO . Really seems to bother those that try to push the limits ... to me that says a lot about that small group of folks .

Good post!

+2

[mybeagles]

Shady Grove,

At large pack trials the club loses $20 entry fee for every dog they measure out.

The NMHA has been exposed for their complete disregard for proper measuring. Now an AKC representative shows up every couple trials and measures 1/2 the dogs out.

Measuring isn’t that much of a crap shoot if done correctly. Judges that don’t know what their doing or don’t give a crap give all judges a bad name and make it look terribly inconsistent.