06/17/2026
Have We Traded Standards for Ribbons?
This has been heavy on my mind, and I feel like it needs to be said. I’m disappointed in what parts of the show and breeding world have become. I’m disappointed in the direction I see our breed taking.
I do believe there is a place for the show ring. I believe there is value in evaluating structure, movement, breed type, balance, correctness, and how closely a dog represents the Labrador Retriever standard. I will be signing some of mine up for upcoming shows, and many of my friends are wonderful breeders who are very involved in the show world and are doing beautiful things for the breed. So this is not coming from a place of being against showing or against show breeders. But I do think we need to ask ourselves an honest question. When did show ribbons become more important than bettering the Labrador Retriever breed? Somewhere along the way, I think too many people confused winning with improvement of the breed, and those two things are not always the same. A ribbon does not automatically make a dog worthy of being bred. A big name behind a dog does not automatically mean that dog is healthy, stable, or producing well. A handler, a campaign, a magazine ad, or a well-known kennel name should never carry more weight than the dog standing in front of us, the temperament that dog carries, the health behind that dog, and the history behind that pedigree. A ribbon should never dictate an entire breeding program.
Some of the worst lines I have personally dealt with in my own program, as far as aggression, dysplasia, and serious health and temperament issues, came from “top show breeders.” These were dogs with beautiful structure. Dogs that could have done well in a show ring. Dogs that looked the part. But they were lacking in ways that mattered far more, and they ultimately had to be placed as pets. That does not mean every show breeder is bad. There are wonderful show breeders doing things the right way, and I have a lot of respect for them. But it does mean we need to stop acting like a show record is the final stamp of quality. So much more goes into making a good Labrador than whether that dog is winning in the ring. What is the temperament like? Is the dog sweet? Is the dog biddable? Is the dog confident without being sharp? Is the dog stable in different environments? Is the dog safe, kind, and trustworthy? Does the dog have the true Labrador temperament we all claim to love? And what about health? Do we know the family history? Are there heart issues behind the line? Seizures? Allergies? Autoimmune issues? Dysplasia showing up in siblings? Poor fertility? Difficult births? Mothers who hate being mothers? Tiny litters over and over again? Because those things matter too.
You can have a litter of seven puppies where six are dysplastic and one passes testing, then someone breeds the one that passed and calls that “clear.” But is that really the full picture? Not to me. Passing health testing matters. But family history matters too. Siblings matter. Production records matter. Patterns matter. We have to stop looking at dogs in isolation and start looking at the whole picture. I have also noticed a growing divide in the dog world between breeders who show and breeders who do not. One phrase I see used far too often is “breed and feed,” usually aimed at breeders who are not actively showing. The implication is that if a breeder is not in the ring, hiring handlers, traveling, campaigning dogs, advertising, and spending thousands of dollars chasing titles, then their program must not have purpose. That they are just breeding out of greed. And I do not think that is fair or accurate. Showing can be valuable. Titles can be meaningful. The show ring can help evaluate structure, movement, balance, and breed type. But showing is not the only way to be intentional, ethical, or serious about a program. Some of the best lines I have ever had, producing amazing puppies for me, came from breeders who never stepped foot in the ring, but were fully committed to producing healthy Labradors with temperaments that thrived in family homes, service work, and therapy roles. There are breeders raising beautiful, healthy, loved, well cared for Labradors in their homes. Their dogs are part of their families. They are health testing. They are studying pedigrees. They are making thoughtful breeding decisions. They are raising puppies with intention and producing dogs with sound temperaments who go on to become beloved family companions, therapy dogs, service prospects, hunting partners, obedience dogs, and heart dogs. That matters too.
A dog does not only have purpose if it wins ribbons. A breeder does not only have value if they are playing the show game. Not every good breeder has the desire, money, access, time, or lifestyle to live in the show world. Some breeders are not spending $10,000 to $30,000 per dog to title them, hiring the right handlers, advertising in the right places, and chasing the right judges. That does not automatically mean they are careless. It does not mean they are not serious. And it does not mean they are not bettering the breed. At what point did we decide that winning a show was the goal in raising a Labrador? The goal should be better Labradors. Healthier Labradors. Sounder Labradors. Kinder Labradors. More stable Labradors. Dogs who can live full, happy lives in family homes. Dogs who can do therapy work, service work, hunting, obedience, showing, or simply be someone’s heart dog. That is what matters. Right now, I know of studs being heavily campaigned and used often that have serious issues being passed on. And people know. Breeders know. But because the dogs are winning, because they are popular, because they are making money and getting noticed, people keep using them. That should bother all of us. When did we start hiding major health issues because a stud was winning so well? When did we decide that a ribbon, a campaign, or a popular name was worth more than the long-term health of the breed? How is knowingly passing on life-threatening issues bettering the breed?
It is not. It is worsening it.
It is spreading major problems that can quietly move through pedigrees until suddenly those issues are everywhere. And then the next generation of breeders and puppy families are left dealing with the consequences. That is not preservation. That is not integrity. That is not bettering the breed. We have to do better.
What bothers me just as much is how often transparency is frowned upon. Instead of encouraging honesty, some breeders advise others to hide things. “If you’re going to do that, at least don’t share about it.” That kind of thinking is exactly how problems get buried and passed forward. Another phrase I hear far too often is, “Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.” In other words, if a dog is incredible enough, winning enough, or important enough, do not cut it from a program just because it failed health testing or has a serious concern behind it. But at what point do we stop making excuses? If we are truly trying to better the breed, then health testing cannot just be a box we check when it benefits us. Temperament cannot just be something we mention in captions. Whelping ability, mothering instinct, fertility, and consistency matter too.
If a female hates being a mother, has terrible births, produces one to three puppies repeatedly, or struggles every time she is bred, why are we breeding her again and again? If we care about carrying the breed forward well, we have to think about whether our dogs are actually capable of doing that in a healthy, natural, and sound way.
And then there is the culture itself. The show world should be a place where people who love the breed can come together, learn, grow, and celebrate good dogs. It should be a place where experienced breeders educate newer breeders. Where people are encouraged to learn the standard, understand structure, study pedigrees, improve their program, and do better with each generation. But too often, that is not what it feels like anymore. It has become cliquey. It has become a mean girls club in far too many spaces. Breeders do not always want to educate anymore. They want to pick apart. They want to compete. They want to gossip, trash talk, and tear others down, all while calling it “ethics.” And honestly, it is disheartening. And the truth is, the sport cannot afford that attitude. Conformation entries have already been trending down for years. One article on the future of the conformation sport showed average conformation entries declining every year from 2010 to 2017, from 996 average entries per show in 2010 to 858 in 2017. It also talked about the “greying effect,” where the young breeders of past generations have now become the seniors of the sport, making it harder for clubs to attract and retain new people. Another article reported that total conformation entries declined 28% over a 20-year period, and entries per capita declined 39%.
So when people say the sport is shrinking, that is not just drama. The numbers show that fewer people are participating, and if the older generation retires, steps back, or passes on without new people being welcomed in, the sport will not survive the way people think it will.
That should matter to everyone who loves purebred dogs. If we want people to care about showing, structure, movement, breed type, and the Labrador standard, then we have to stop making the environment so hostile that good people walk away before they even get started. We cannot complain that nobody wants to show anymore while mocking, dismissing, or tearing apart the very people who are trying to learn.
Ethics should not be used as a weapon to make yourself feel superior. Ethics should not be an excuse to humiliate people, bully newer breeders, or destroy someone publicly because they do things differently. True ethics should be rooted in honesty, education, accountability, humility, and a genuine desire to protect and improve the breed. We should want new people to learn. We should want more breeders to care about structure and standard. We should want people to ask questions, grow, improve, and do better. If we want the sport to continue, we have to be more welcoming. We have to be kinder. We have to educate more and attack less. Because if something does not change, the sport will continue to shrink. And that would be a loss for the dogs, the breeders, and the future of the Labrador Retriever. We have lost some of the love of the sport, and in its place we have allowed politics, tricks, favoritism, and social climbing to take over. Everyone knows it happens. If you want certain dogs noticed, you campaign them, advertise them, hire the right handler, get them in front of the right people, and make sure the judges recognize them. But why should the dog’s name, owner, breeder, or handler matter more than the dog itself?
The question should be simple. Which dog best represents the Labrador Retriever standard on that day? And even then, winning that day should still only be one piece of the puzzle.
A beautiful dog with poor health is not the goal. A beautiful dog with an unstable temperament is not the goal. A beautiful dog who consistently produces issues is not the goal. A beautiful dog who cannot contribute positively to the future of the breed is not the goal. We need to get back to caring about the whole Labrador. Structure matters. Health matters. Temperament matters. Pedigree history matters. Production matters. Biddability matters. Soundness matters. Honesty matters. Kindness matters. Education matters.
Winning is wonderful, but winning should never matter more than the actual dog.
So maybe it is time we stop choosing studs only because they are popular, advertised, or winning. Maybe it is time we stop worshiping kennel names and start asking harder questions. Maybe it is time we stop punishing transparency and start respecting breeders who are honest about the good and the bad. And maybe it is time we remember that being ethical is not about tearing everyone else down.
It is about doing right by the dogs.
Because if the goal is truly to better the breed, then we have to be brave enough to look beyond the ribbon.
The Labrador deserves that.
