The Chase Magazine
January, 1962 Page three
Bench Show—Endurance
E. E. Riley
The Directors of the National Foxhunters Association met Friday, April 7, at the Lafayette Hotel,
Lexington, Kentucky. The President appointed a three-man committee to study the National Running
Rules. These rules are to be voted on from the floor by the members at Starkville, Mississippi, in
November 1961.
We all knew when this rule was adopted against the show hound that it was unfair to the show hound.
This rule was no opinion of The Chase Publishing Company as they have nothing to do with the rules
that are adopted at the National. When each rule is adopted they have always gone along with the rule.
Nor was this the idea of the officers of the National. It was voted by the members of the National from
the floor to adopt the rules as they see fit.
The National Rule is one of the greatest rules that we have ever had to conduct our field trials by. You
know we must have some type of strong rule to go by or our field trials are going to be in much worse
condition than they are now and I am sure that when these rules are adopted they are adopted for a
good cause.
There is no one who loves a show hound any better than I do. I also love a field hound, but now as the
rule stands the show hound does not have equal rights as a field hound; according to the rule that now
stands he must finish in the field to obtain his winnings on the bench, therefore, you ask him to do two
jobs. It is unfair. That would be the same thing as saying a field hound that couldn’t place on the bench
couldn’t run in the field. I think that would be unfair to the field hounds as it is unfair to the bench
hounds. All hounds that are duly entered in the field may show in corresponding classes without any
extra charge. So this, I think, would be fair to both field and bench hound, that he must be cast in the
field and if he is eliminated by the majority of the field judges then he should have his bench show
winnings.
I hope I never see the day when a bench show hound can win the show and don’t have to be cast in the
field to get his winnings. If that ever happens it will also hurt the breeders as they will no longer breed
for a hound with good type as well as a good nose.
In November of 1956, as you recall, we had the same thing approaching us as we have this fall. As the
old rule stood in 1956, page 23, paragraph O it was and I quote “No hound can be withdrawn without the
express permission of the Master of Hounds. Any hound withdrawn or crated without his permission
forfeits his score in the field and his winnings on the bench.”
That rule, I think, has always been a fair rule to all. Some time we may think the National Rules are unfair
but we think the same thing about our children when they go to school or the rules of the communities
across the land, but without these rules where would we be today?
In the past thirty years our highest general average sheet has grown from four places to ten places and
the hound entries in field trials have grown 75 percent and the field trial associations have increased
200 percent. Seventy-five percent of these field trials try to operate under National Rules so until we
get better rules to prove themselves better, let’s operate under the National Rule.
The big question is on the scoring of an Endurance hound. There are a few foxhunters who would like
to see endurance eliminated. You don’t give a hound endurance, but he earns his endurance and if he
has earned it he should have it. I will agree a hound should not have endurance the first day, but why
take something away that he has earned and give it to some hound who has only speed and driving
score, simply because a field judge can be in only one place at a time? Therefore, when you take away
endurance you hurt a good all around hound. So let’s keep this endurance in the National Rules.
We are now finishing up the last year of the bench show and the running rules which were adopted five
years ago by all affiliated associations. They still conduct their shows and field trials under the rules
and regulations as now stand, but in 1962 if the rule is changed I am sure that all the hunters and
associations will be glad.
As Mr. Sam Wooldridge always said “if a hound is too valuable to run in the field he is too valuable to be
shown on the bench with the foxhounds.” If we take the show hound away from the field it will hurt our
breeders who always breed for a good show hound a good field hound with a good nose. They will only
breed a hound for show. The show hound has his place in the field with the field hound. We are asking
the show hound to do too much. If the show hound is cast in the field and if he is eliminated by the field
judges then he should be entitled to his bench winnings. That doesn’t mean that he isn’t a good hound,
nor does it mean that if a field hound is scratched in the field he isn’t a good hound, too.
As you all know the best hound does not always win the field trial. It is a hound that gets the good
breaks. Sometimes the good hound will get a bad break. The judges can only score them on what they
see. I will also agree that a bench show hound is not as good as a field hound because the show hound
has been pampered, shown and had the greatest care a hound could have but a show hound should be
able to play a certain part in the field and be able to run a fox. He may not run as long or as hard as a
field hound, but he should be able to smell and run a fox. If this new rule was left up to the foxhunters
and the associations in the United States it would be voted down one hundred to one. Why should this
rule be adopted just to satisfy a handful of so-called foxhunters, so they might show their hounds and
go on home? They are not interested in the field trails and the running of a foxhound, but only
interested in producing a show hound. There is no one who loves the show hound any better than I,
but also love a field hound. It has always been my belief that if a hound shown on the bench couldn’t
compete in the field, he shouldn’t be entitled to his winnings on the bench.
There are many foxhunters who can remember years ago when there were numbers of cases presented
in court to prevent foxhunting and charging it was cruelty to animals. These accusations were defeated
because of our good foxhunting sportsmen.
The conduct of our field trials has improved, foxhunters have become more familiar with the laws of the
land because they are better organized. The bench show foxhound belongs to the field and let’s keep it
in the field where it belongs.
This has always been my thought on foxhunting: “In America may the fox live and prosper; may the
hounds long cry the trail, and may our country never want stronger arms or truer hearts than those of
our own foxhunters.”
Should We Keep Endurance
Howard G. Tilson
Should we keep endurance as one of the four equally important phases of judging foxhound work in the
field? My answer to this question is “Yes”. There are some fox hunters who would answer “No.” It is
my firm belief that this difference of opinion arises from our differences in definition of the term
“endurance” and why it should be considered as important as Hunting, Trailing, or Speed and Driving.
The competitive nature of field trials and our desire to win has led some of us away from the original
reason for their beginning. The improvement of the breed has been the aim of foxhound breeders as
well as the breeders of all other pure-bred and registered animals. By setting forth the ideal type we
can select those hounds which most nearly approach that ideal when judged on the bench. It is not so
easy to select those hounds which most nearly approach the ideal when judged working in the field.
One of the many problems in field judging is the necessity of using several judges who, by nature and
experience, will have difference of opinion as to the relative value of each type and class of hound
work.
To select the hounds which would be most suitable to use for breeding in order to improve the breed
was the reason for starting bench shows and field trials. This is based on the assumption that the
hounds with the most desirable characteristics would be more likely to produce improved offspring.
Again if we assume, and it certainly is reasonable to think so, that the endurance ability of a hound is
inherited in the same general manner as ins his color, nose, cry, speed, and many other characteristics;
then we should try to select those hounds with endurance on the same basis as we do Trailing, Hunting,
and Speed and Driving.
If my reasoning is sound thus far, we should try to agree on what is endurance in order to be able to
follow the rules in its judging. A simple definition of the word, as related to hound judging, could be
stated: “Endurance is the ability to withstand hard work with little or no noticeable damage to the
body.” By this definition we would mean that endurance is a physical ability based on the toughness of
fiber as well as the physical balance of the hound. There is no doubt that the spirit, desire or “heart” of
a hound will have considerable influence on whether that hound will continue to work when he is tired
or sore. However, when a hound is limping or is showing signs of being in distress, regardless of how
much he is trying to work these signs of distress are indications of a lack of endurance and so should
be considered as a physical weakness which we do not wish to breed on into our hounds of the future.
Those hunters who have drawn up the National rules apparently had this reasoning in mind when they
defined endurance and set forth the rules by which it should be judged and scored. Much has been
said and written regarding the scoring of endurance, so we will pass over that part of the subject here.
My thoughts could be summed up as follows:
1. Endurance in foxhounds is inherited.
2. Endurance can be judged and evaluated with as much accuracy as Hunting, Trailing, or Speed
and Driving.
3. The ability to endure hard work for long periods of time is a physical ability and should not be
confused with gameness, desire or “heart.”
4. In order to continue to improve the breeds of foxhounds as we use them today, their inherent
ability to endure should not be overlooked.