History of the current
Sable Cockers
At
one time, sable cockers
competed in the American show
ring with all other
colors. Many achieved their
AKC championships.
In
the
late 70's things started to
change, and a 12 year fight
ensued over
the sable issue.
It
wasn't
until the 1990's that due
apparently to Parent Club
politics and
some disgruntled breeders in a
private war with each
other,sables were
thrown out of the show ring
and so far have never been
allowed back in.
Many
have
tried to get it voted back in,
but politics and unethical
practices
during that time by the ASC
board has managed to either
get the voted count
counted
against
the sable, and has since
refused to allow the club to
vote on this
matter.
(*See the
link to the Sable Time Line
below, for more detailed
information about
this matter)
One
of
the problems were that the
parent club didn't know where
to put the
sables in the show ring,
because of the overlay,
according to ASC, they
weren't considered a solid
color. The parti sables were
shown with the
partis.
In
todays
world, the parti sables should
be shown with the partis, the
black
sables in the black variety
and brown sables shown in the
ASCOB ring.
But
some
still feel that solid sable
isn't actually a solid and
since it has
no white, the solid sables
shouldn't be shown with the
parti.
Several years
ago, the question was asked to
why sables weren't allowed in
the AKC ring
and it was answered quite
accurately by Evelyn Bravo,
Chantrel Cockers
I'll take a stab at an
answer.
First off, sables were
never
really accepted. The
former versions of the standard
were simply
not very specific with regards
to color.
It is only the
current
version (approved in 1992) that
has specific colors listed in
each variety
and the any color other than
listed disqualification.
Sables first began to
appear
in the show ring in the '70's
(before my time). There
were many who
did not like the color. A
few, I believe 3, solid sable
champions
were finished before a clause
about the hair shaft being of
uniform color
was added to the ASCOB variety
section of the standard (I think
in the
early '80's - again before my
time). Since the parti
section was
left untouched, and did not
actually list all of the
acceptable colors,
it was left to the judges
interpretation as to what were
allowed colors.
So in the '80's you had the
situation where sable &
whites were shown;
some judges put them up, some
judges ignored them, and other
judges disqualified
them.
At the end of the
'80's,
the AKC Board of Directors
wanted to make all of the breed
standards follow
a similar format.
This set the stage for
the
open discussion of the standard
and the proposed changes that
occurred
at the 1990 Summer National in
Atlanta. (This was NOT
before my time.
I was there and sitting in the
front row.) One of the
changes proposed
by the standards committee,
chaired by Dr. Al Grossman, was
to specifically
list the allowed colors in each
variety and add the
disqualification clause
for any other color. In
the new version proposed by the
committee,
neither the solid sable or the
sable & white color were
listed in the
colors for the ASCOB or Parti
variety.
It was the position of
the
committee and the ASC board that
the then current version of the
standard did not allow
sable
& whites and judges that did
not disqualify them were in
error. The
membership in attendance
expressed an overwhelming
support of including
sable and sable & white as
allowed colors.
To compromise, the
ballot
that was sent out at the end of
the year had two options, A
& B, to
vote on for varieties and colors
(I can't remember which option
had what).
*Note
check out The Sable Timeline
link at the end of this post
One choice had sable
listed
in ASCOB and sable & white
in Parti and the other did not.
Here is controversy
point
#1: the ASC constitution
specifically states that changes
to the
standard are to be presented
where you check a vote "for" or
"against",
not check "A" or "B" as was
done.
Controversy point
#2:
(Keep in mind that a 2/3
majority of the number of votes
cast is needed
to approve a standard
change.) There were
several ballots returned
with neither the "A" or the "B"
box checked, in essence,
abstentions.
According to Robert's
Rules
of Order, abstentions are not
counted when calculating the
total number
of votes cast.
If the ballots
with
neither box checked are regarded
as abstentions and not used in
determining
the total number of votes cast,
then the option with the sable
and sable
& white color had the 2/3
majority votes cast for
approval. The
ASC board counted the blank
ballots in determining the total
number of
votes cast and the allow sable
option just missed having the
2/3 majority
to pass. Since neither option
had the required 2/3 majority to
pass (according
to how the ASC did the
counting), the section on
varieties was left unchanged.
However, the new
disqualification
section, which had the any color
other than those listed clause,
did pass.
The AKC board refused to approve
the standard with the new
revisions because
it now had an "any color other
than those listed"
disqualification clause,
but the color variety section
did not specifically list the
colors.
In late 1991, the ASC
board
sent out another standard change
for approval. The
accompanying letter
(and I wished I had saved it)
said things like the AKC board
insists we
have this vote before they will
approve the standard change, it
is a mere
formality, etc. The letter
never mention sables. The
standard
section that was sent to be
voted on with a "for" and an
"against" boxes
to be checked was the color
variety section from the first
ballot that
did not list sables or sable
& white.
The ASC board did not
send
out the section that has just
barely not passed (or really
passed if you
go by Robert's), but the section
that had what they felt was the
correct
interpretation of the colors
allowed by the then current
standard, ie,
no sables. Busy with the
holidays, many ASC members just
checked
the "for" box and mailed it back
in, never realizing until
told later
that they had just voted to
exclude sables.
The vote passed
with an overwhelming majority,
the AKC board approved the new
standard
and it went into effect the
spring of 1992. Five years
later, a petition
to change the standard to allow
sables had enough signatures to
cause a
vote. The 1997 vote had a
majority, but not a 2/3 majority
and did
not pass.
"Rumors"
With regards to why
the
color sable is not accepted by
many, a
persistent
rumor is that it got into
the cocker gene pool via a
beagle. A
black bitch named Jolee
Buttons, owned by Ed
McCauley of Birchwood
cockers, produced the first
modern sable offspring.
Ed's father,
with whom he lived, had a
hunting pack of beagles, which
was what started
the rumor that Jolee got with a
beagle to make the sables.
There
are two things that make this
rumor ridiculous:
(1) the beagle
pack
was all female.
(2) the gene
that
makes the sable color in cockers
is a different gene than the
gene that
gives the beagle it's color and
saddle pattern.
There was some
evidence that
the board was trying to keep
pro-sable people from joining
ASC just before
the 1997 vote. When the
board was not allowed to discuss
the membership
candidates behind closed doors,
they tabled everyone's
application to the
next meeting.
As to what it will
take to
get sables voted in, my answer
dead bodies. Too many high
mucky-mucks
within ASC have in effect (if
not in actuality) said "sables
will be admitted
over my dead body." In all
seriousness, until these people
are out
of the picture I do not see
sables being allowed.
Now please, don't
anybody
take this as direction to go out
and kill anyone!!
Fortunately, most of
these
people are already senior
citizens. I'm sorry if this
seems negative and
down. As scarce as majors
are, I sure wish sables were
being shown!
Hope this answers your
questions.
Evelyn Bravo
Evelyn with a little
rescue
sable
For more
information about the "vote" on sables
over the years, see The
Sable Timeline
|