OVER a period of time I have commented, through the pages of Cage & Aviary Birds, on various aspects of the exhibition Border Canary and the politics of our branch of the hobby. This was done in an effort to draw grass roots fanciers into the process of determining the future of the Border canary. In some areas there has been little apparent response, which suggests that either there is a complete lack of interest or an abject acceptance of the way that major decisions are being taken and pursued. It might be suggested that there is a third possibility - that everyone is happy with the state of the Border Fancy and the way it is run. I have to say that from the feedback I receive, that suggestion is a non-starter.

One of my articles did attract a good deal of attention. It was the one published in the Millennium Edition of Cage and Aviary Birds, in which the main thrust was that Border canary judges are not judging to the Model specified by the Border Convention. Since then, I have been observing - sometimes with amusement, but often with despair - the twists and turns that my contribution – at least in part – has provoked. It appears that the whole point of the article has been completely missed by many Border Fanciers. So let me state it again. Border judges should be judging to the Model that is in force at this time and not to some unauthorized Model that may, or may not be, accepted in the future. I was NOT making a case for changing the Model.

Everyone who has contributed to the debate appears to accept the basic premise - that the Border Model and the Standard of Excellence are being ignored, practically to the point of extinction, by the very people who should be promoting and maintaining its integrity - Border canary panel judges. Judges are forsaking the approved Model and are judging according to their own personal preferences, thereby prejudicing the chances of the many exhibitors who accept that the shape, size and position of the exhibition Border should be in line with specification laid down by the Convention.

So what was the Border Convention’s reaction to this general feeling that judges were not doing their jobs properly?  It decided that the solution to this particular problem is to instigate proceedings for a new Model – presumably to bring it into line with judges’ preferences. If ever there was a case of the tail wagging the dog, this must be it. How representative of the views of the fancy is this approach? We are told that, of the 36 affiliated specialist Border clubs; representatives of only 18 attended the Convention AGM at which the decision was made. I am sure that Border fanciers would be interested to know how many and which clubs put forward the mandate to change the Model. A recent letter in Cage and Aviary Birds from Andy Iles, secretary of the Green, Cinnamon and White BFCC, revealed that his club has asked for there to be no change to the existing model until the year 2005. Before going on, let us examine two problem areas of the Border fancy today. How did we come to be in the present mess with the Model? And what constitutes a Border Judge?

The Model
Back in the Sixties there was a craving for size in the Exhibition Border. That craving has continued to this day. It is my belief that, as a direct consequence of this, there has been a drift away from the essential attributes of ‘position’ and ‘movement’ with a resultant change in type.

Forty years ago, fanciers used to remark on the fact that many of the winning Borders were ‘across the perch’ and condemned the judges who were putting them up. However the trend was permitted to continue, the judges perpetrating the offence continued to judge, and the die was cast.  A trend was set in motion that has all but brought to an end the delightful Border canary that excelled in the virtues of type, position and movement.

Judges
It is apparent that certain judges are very highly rated by those who administer our branch of the fancy – yet these ‘competent’ judges are the very people who are as guilty as anyone of creating so much of the discontent by judging away from the accepted show standards.

It is interesting to note, from studying the yearbooks of several Border specialist clubs, that more than 50 per cent of their members are also listed as judges. If that is the case, why is it, year on year, the same judges are appointed to judge the majority of specialist club shows?  Is the implication that the many who are not invited are not capable of doing the job properly? If this is the case, why are they accepted on to the various judges panels - including that of the Border Convention?

If we compare border judges with football referees it can be seen that the qualification requirements are very different. At all levels, referees study and sit examinations on the laws of the game. A pass is required in order to officiate at even the lowest level. Then they are assessed on a regular basis and must demonstrate a high level of ability if they are to make progress to higher levels.

By contrast, getting on to the Border judges’ panel is all too often a matter of:
  “I’ll scratch your back if you scratch mine”.
When the time comes to vote on acceptance of applicants for the judges panel, trade-offs might well be made with the delegates from one club voting for another club’s candidate as long as the compliment is returned. Is it this lack of training that results in so many Border judges making their selections based on their own personal preferences rather than the Model?

A well-known fancier recently made much of the fact that he had been winning Best Border awards at variuos shows over a period spanning three different Models. He went on to suggest that the people who complain would never win regardless of which Model was in force. But in my view - the number of Models under which he has won, is irrelevant – as long as judges are not judging to any defined Model.  Indeed, it could be argued that, had the judges been using the approved Model as their guideline, he may not have notched up so many wins.

If you want proof that many winning Borders do not conform to the Model you need only consider a statement from a respected commentator on the Border scene. He wrote: “ The present day Border Canary has surpassed the accepted model”.  As I remember it, he described one exhibit as being “ahead of its time”.

The logical conclusion to all this is that a new Model will be a waste of time unless the Convention gets a grip on the situation. I firmly believe, that if the current trend is to be reversed, the Border Convention needs to support its own existing Model and Standard of Excellence. It should instruct judges to adhere to this standard - or resign. If they continue to ignore the Model and refuse to resign, they should be dismissed.

As far as the judges themselves are concerned, it is their reputations that are on the line. When an exhibitor pays an entry fee, he has every right to expect his birds to be judged in accordance with the current Standard Model, both pictorial and written. Anything less is a betrayal of the trust that should exist between fellow fanciers. Until all judges have the courage, integrity and, above all, the ability to adjudicate as directed and in accordance with the universally accepted Standard of Excellence and Ideal Model, the rot will continue to pervade the exhibiting of Border Canaries.

                                                                                    Jim Laverick

Home

UK Contacts

Web Links