Reputable breeders in my area?

[Bo Peep]

I usually stay out of these "political" ones. To the OP. I have had border collies since 1987. I am on my 9th dog. I have done recuse, but most of my dogs were out of working lines. Why?? Simply because they are the best bred dogs. Did they all herd? No- most of them did. Did any of these dogs take me to Open level? No. It was my fault- not the dogs.

Back then, breeding for sport wasn't even an issue. Now it has become one. It has produced border collies that simply do not have an off switch. Most of them end up in rescue and are hard to place. A well bred herding dog DOES have an off switch. He HAS to or he wouldn't make it on the farm or in trials. When breeding sport to sport dogs, it will bring down the border collie standard almost as fast as the AKC. You just won't have the same dogs anymore.

 

I purchased my last pup from the Sire's owner. I waited a year and a half for this dog. HE is a reputable breeder. You also have to remember when looking at the lines, that both parties are responsible for the litter. A responsible breeder isn't one that just takes stud fee's. He makes sure that, since his stud dog is going to be on the papers, it's a reflection of his breeding also. My dog was bred to a Nusrey dog. She mostly did farm work, but my Sire's owner saw potential in her and agreed to the breeding. When you've been around dogs for as long as I have, you have learned to trust certain breeders to do what is right. I did. I have a wonderful dog with great potential. I still don't know if I will trial him, but buying a dog from other than working lines has never been an option for me.

 

Other than that. I would go through rescue any day as they well match a dog for you and your situation. I'm sure you could find a suitable dog (probably returned from sports breeding) in rescue.

[Dal & Mad's Mom]

I agree. And the second family was also partly to blame for apparently not training the dog (or doing their research beforehand). We can all trot out good and bad examples of breeders of all sorts, but it doesn't change the fact that driving the genetics away from the work is going to be bad for the breed.

 

J.

 

 

I have to say that the buyer has to share fault in alot of cases. I have people ask me all the time for inappropriate dogs. Just this week I had to clearly explain that a dog in rescue that just becasue XYZ is the breeder wasnt going to make her magically good with their kids. I didnt like her family test one bit.

 

As far a socialization I have rescued pups in my kitchen that I know a few in the litter are pure and the rest are at least 1/2 they are being raised with all the dogs around we pick them up hug and kiss them. They have gone for a very long car ride. I can tell you all about moms fake story and what I guess is the real one. They are being trained to use pads and get lots of fresh air. They will be vet checked I cant afford an eye check but, I can direct you to a Vet who can.

 

I have people looking for sport dogs bring a vet and trainer to my place to supposedly looking for super dog only to ask me for the dog they rejected who was never going to do what they were telling me they wanted. I said rightfully no.

 

To be honest I'd rather only people whos hearts are into rescuing a dog stop by anyway as it expends my time to show pups or dogs only to have some really minor flaw or that dog that is exactly what they are telling me they are looking for is smooth coat and it makes them allergic.

 

Yes I was this same idiot a few years ago.

[2 Devils]

My acd was born and raised in a barn as a puppy. She was not under socialized and definitely not afraid of life off the farm.

 

Yes her breeder is a backyard breeder that owns a cattle ranch where my acds parents worked. The guy maybe has an 8th grade education (I am serious about that). My acds litter all came flying out of the barn to see who was visiting. ACDs are notorious for being anti-social and many people will even say aggressive. My acd has the typical anti-social mentality but not to the point of fear or anything - she just does not like being petted and such by anyone. She is NOT aggressive and is high drive with a great offswitch (for an acd). The breeder also will sell his litters to just about anyone but truthfully you don't see as many acds in shelters as BCs around here. I do think the breeder does try to be a little selective but not much.

 

Moral of the story is that not all dogs born and raised in a barn will be "freaky". A little time spent with the pups will go a long way. Then you have pups that are raised in a home, socialized but for whatever reason are "freaky"... you just never know.

 

Get a BC that is bred from good working parents and you will probably have the chance of a dog that has an offswitch but can turn on easily. If you buy from many of the sport bc breeders - you are more likely to end up with a dog with no offswitch, can't relax easily, not as much focus, etc... I know some breeders of sport bcs and I also know a lot of sport bred bcs and given a chance I will buy from a working bc breeder.

[kelpiegirl]

I never have liked the statement "off switch". In talking with some native Scotsmen, and shepherds, it is considered NORMAL for a dog to be relaxed when not being used to move the sheep. Basically, a good, out of the way dog, who turns it on when necessary- at the drop of a hat. My Kelpie who works sheep not nearly as much as we would both like is just absolutely great in the house, or off sheep. I would think Border Collies should be too- and if the dogs at the trial this weekend are any indication, they are. They were happy to lay at their owner's feet, maybe getting a pat here or there, but no fuss at all. I wouldn't want ANY dog who was always on the go go.

[Rebecca, Irena Farm]

It's not just a matter of what's considered normal or what the breeder wants. A dog that has to be constantly reminded not to work, or has to be restrained lest he harass the sheep, simply isn't useful. Again, the standard of usefulness produces something that is also desirable generally.

[Bo Peep]

It's not just a matter of what's considered normal or what the breeder wants. A dog that has to be constantly reminded not to work, or has to be restrained lest he harass the sheep, simply isn't useful. Again, the standard of usefulness produces something that is also desirable generally.

And I bet those type of dogs come out of sport dogs.

[SoloRiver]

I'm not a big fan of the term "off switch" either, although I still use it because it's in common usage. What seems to go first in sports breeding is more broadly impulse control. A sports dog usually has a handler directly at hand who can provide the impulse control for the dog; the dog does not need to control himself. Yes, yes, I know, I know, it's way easier to do sports with a dog that CAN control himself (I've done agility and flyball with my dogs) but it can be done even if the dog can't, and so many sports breeders select primarily for "drive" that it's easy for impulse control to get lost in the calculation. A talented agility handler can do a lot with a dog that is ON 24/7, even if that dog doesn't really come with brakes. I can see how it would be exciting to run a dog like that, but I can't imagine living with one.

[SoloRiver]

Here's something I wrote for the last issue of the USBCC newsletter. The USBCC is a club that welcomes the owners of all Border Collies, no matter what you do with yours -- work, agility, obedience, just a pet, etc. It's a bit out of date (I have three Border Collies now, not just two) but you get the point. (And yeah, I realize the next issue is late. It's coming, I swear.)

Letter from the Editor

 

The Border Collie: it’s not just another black and white dog.

 

“Those are Border Collies, right? They herd sheep.”

 

I live in San Francisco with two Border Collies, Solo and Fly. They are attractive dogs, and so we are often stopped and greeted by strangers on the street who want to meet my dogs. Over and over again, I am struck by the strong identity that Border Collies enjoy, even among the general public, as true working dogs - not just another breed that used to do something for a living, but doesn’t do it anymore. People are delighted to meet two dogs who can both be described as useful. It makes them seem more real. These days, authenticity means a lot to an American public becoming further and further divorced from practical, hands-on work and life experiences. I am always pleased to be able to answer, when asked, “Yes. Both of my dogs work sheep.”

 

What is a Border Collie? What is a breed? Many “fanciers” define a breed in terms of common ancestry: thus, you can have different “lines” within a breed (working, show, sport), but since they’re all part of the same studbook, they’re still all the same breed. An emphasis on common ancestry alone, however, ignores another crucial component, which is consistency of type: in other words, when you breed two Border Collies, they should produce offspring that are like themselves, and that are predictable for certain characteristics that are considered important for Border Collies. Consistency of type is the reason that breeds exist; if a random selection of doglike characteristics would do, no one would ever have bothered to begin a program of selective dog breeding in the first place. Different people favor different breeds because they consider different characteristics to be important, even definitive. If there were breeders out there specializing in giant Chihuahuas, most would argue that those breeders were missing the point of Chihuahuas.

 

What is a Border Collie? You can ask any ten strangers on the street that question, and more than likely they’ll all give you the same answer: “Border Collies are those dogs that herd sheep.”

 

This is not the same thing as “Border Collies are those dogs that have a conformation that is hypothetically consistent with what you might find in a dog meant to herd sheep,” and it is certainly not the same thing as “Border Collies are those dogs that are really good at running arbitrary courses over obstacles.” Now, this is not to say that a good Border Collie does not meet these criteria - any useful Border Collie has a conformation demonstrably consistent with success at stock work, and pretty much any random Border Collie will be good at running arbitrary obstacle courses. But when breeders select for these latter criteria, they are missing the point of Border Collies.

 

What is the Border Collie? It is a true working breed, not a faded facsimile of one. How can we keep it so? Consider this; enjoy your dogs.

 

- Melanie Lee Chang, Editor

[Bo Peep]

very well put, Melanie

[MrSnappy]

RDM,

I agree that plenty of folks breed who shouldn't be, and excuses abound, but the fact that people, even people on these boards, do it doesn't make it any more acceptable, does it?

 

No I agree completely that it doesn't. But I'm stressing that there are way more politics involved than some or even many people are willing to concede. And one of the biggest problems is that we in this community like to champion even the people who do it, right or wrong, because of the politics and rhetoric of the working dog argument. And that can appear hypocritical to many people, especially those who are not as invested in the 'morality' of the border collie as some of this community is. It's called closing ranks, and it happens here all the time. Some of the most highly regarded members of this community, IMO, are not very good dog owners much less good breeders.

 

I think the sticky part comes in when we try to come up with a collective understanding of what it means when we say "work at a high level."

 

This is also absolutely true, and muddies the waters even further. After a while, it's difficult for someone to understand what the heck y'all are talking about.

 

My viewpoint has always been a little different, coming from a place of rescue as I do - I have always toed the party line about "workability" etc. and bought into it, but it has always bugged me too. And I think the reason is that you all argue that you are trying to save a breed, and I'd argue that I'm trying to save a dog. And in the end, these goals end up being at cross purposes with one another. It's hard for me to admire what you all do when you keep putting litter after litter on the ground and selling to sport homes and pet homes because the "true" border collie "can do it all" and be that as it may - there's still too damn many of them. Every sport or pet home you sell to is a home a rescue dog doesn't get ... I think if the litters on the ground are so awesome they should be snapped up by working homes only. If they are getting bought up by agility people and pet people and weekend herding warriors, what difference are you really making in the overall scheme of The Border Collie Preservation Project? All you're doing is throwing good dogs out into the void, preserving nothing. And then shunning people who breed them to a different purpose than yours. Not to mention you can't even agree amongst yourselves what constitutes a good or responsible breeding, as Julie alluded to.

 

And I admit I'm burnt out, so maybe I'm a little more bitter these days, but holy crow - the high and mighty morality of this whole argument really makes me tired when I'm turning down a dog every other day because there are so many of them.

 

The whole damn thing makes me sad as hell. I'm super disillusioned, I guess.

 

RDM

[AllieMackie]

No, you want to buy from a sports breeder and apparently nothing else will do. I'm still not sure why - do you have plans for World Domination in agility or blowing the flyball scene wide open?

 

You assume that I want a sports breeder, and assume that the breeders I'm currently looking at are sports breeders. I merely asked why certain "sport" breeder's motivations are bad. You've all assumed that I'm hellbent on sports breeders, when in truth, I'm merely trying to see the problem with some of the breeders I linked earlier, who I still feel are breeding good, working border collies.

 

If you all must know, two of the three breeders I'm currently looking at are at local Ottawa sheep farms, and breed dogs that do pure sheep herding work. I'll be talking to them in a few weeks when they do demonstrations with their Open level dogs at the Ottawa Sheep Shearing Festival. Not because people are telling me "working breeder or GTFO", but because they are kind people who want to tell me more about their dogs and breeding plans.

 

I'll probably be meeting some sport breeders there as well, as the OVBCC will be doing agility and flyball demonstrations. I intend to get both ends of opinions for myself.

[mosstheboss2000]

You can take out of this story what you want...

I don't think Mr B would think himself a shady breeder. He has spent alot of time and money making sure he is breeding a proven pair and making sure his breeding is only in the best interest of the breed. In face one puppy was sold to someone who was going to work and breed it.

He actually unlike some breeders took this dog back 2 times ...

We could argue the fact that YES Mrs P was the one who failed here as she did not raise this puppy well..and clearly being from proven lines it's chance were pretty good at being a nice pup with good workability. But Mr B must of been thingking she could do the job if he sold the dog to her in the first place? Probably partially because he believed so strongly in his proven lines.

We then could question Mr B who after unsucessfully selling this dog twice starts to think HEY maybe something IS wrong with the dog? Maybe this is just one of those puppies that comes from a proven litter but doesn't meet the criteria of a good working dog with traits and temperament rather then take into account that perhaps he sold the dog inappropriately.

 

We could ask ourselves why in the first place Mr B ended up with these lovely dogs to breed in the first place. After all you would think that someone who put the time and effort into proving they are what they are would want to make sure that they were proven for good reason.... especially knowing who ever they were selling the dogs too was probably going to keep them intact and continue breeding them after spending the effort and money in getting them.

 

In saying that we could ask if it is so important to make sure the integrity of the breed is kept and only proven dogs are bred and all their off spring continues to be proven culling those that don't, how do these dogs end up being sold to other breeders who maybe don't have this intent OR purpose?

Does our intent to sell dogs over ride our intent to keep workability in the lines?

 

Clearly if I was breeding exceptional working dogs, maintaining clean and healthy lines wouldn't I want to make sure that I was backing this up but not just selling my dogs off without spay neuter contracts knowing full well that probably they are going to be bred without the intent that I have worked so hard to maintain.

 

From my experience with people who are working so hard to breed and keep the workability this is where it is falling apart.... because it doesn't matter if you are breeding with such great intent if you are then allowing others to break this down after buying puppies from you. Whether this be that you sold part of your litter as pets because there was not market OR you sold to someone breeding for another purpose other then just proving they have amazing working dogs(on livestock of course)

 

I have seen, sport breeders, back yard breeder, farmer, just the family down the street ALL that have gotten dogs, proven dogs or puppies from well known breeders but with no restriction ie breeding contracts ect... and some that claim they do, don't do their follow up. I have brought this to their attention at times with the response of... well I can't follow up on every puppy I breed.

 

YES we know it is important that we continue to bred dogs with workability, and there is no question this is being done on a 'large' scale but in doing so perhaps part of that is creating the down fall of the breed it self as we are not really taking into account the big picture of where these dogs are ending up and the dogs that are then being produced from them.

 

This blame does not just sit on the heads of those breeding dogs for agility or for pretty ears although they definitely contributing we need to really sit back and take a look at the big picture.

[Laurae]

You assume that I want a sports breeder, and assume that the breeders I'm currently looking at are sports breeders. I merely asked why certain "sport" breeder's motivations are bad. You've all assumed that I'm hellbent on sports breeders, when in truth, I'm merely trying to see the problem with some of the breeders I linked earlier, who I still feel are breeding good, working border collies.

 

Good for you to do your research AllieMackie. The reason people believe you are looking to a sports breeder is because you still feel the breeders you linked to are breeding good, working border collies. Many here have tried to explain why they are not, but you apparently are not understanding the explanations why these particular breeders are not producing what we would consider working border collies. They are primarily selecting for traits other than solid stockwork—an emphasis on color, producing "performance" dogs who are "versatile athletes," etc.; thus, many consider them sport breeders. Many of these breeders say their dogs work, but they define work as agility, flyball, or the ridiculously simple AKC "herding." Their breeding dogs do not work stock at a high level. That you don't see that distinction is the reason you're coming across as continuing to seek out sport collie breeders.

[PSmitty]

<snip> I'm merely trying to see the problem with some of the breeders I linked earlier, who I still feel are breeding good, working border collies.

 

All I know is, you originally stated you were trying to avoid sport breeders. I looked at the web sites and see sport/color breeders. I don't see where you get the impression these breeders are producing working border collies. I just don't see it.

 

From the various websites:

 

Cassie and Jed have had two litters, all of who are producing fantastic times in flyball.

 

Jed has a great attitude and work ethic, and is passing this ability to his offspring, who are excelling in flyball.

 

Many of our pups are now successfully enjoying various sports such as Flyball, Disc Dog, Obedience and Agility all across North America...but most of all they are beloved family companions.

 

Welcome to our web site about our Red Border Collies. Bob and I have owned, enjoyed and trained red Border Collies for 17 years.

 

Her offspring are proving to have tons of talent in all venues too. They are some of the fastest flyball dogs on the East Coast, and some are certainly turning heads in agility with their speed, accuracy and mental determination and others are just great loyal companions.

 

Her first litter of pups by “Stellar” are just now starting their agility careers and are proving to be the best of both dogs with amazing athletic abilities and talented minds to train. Her second litter by “Danger” will be making their debuts in agility this year and are looking to be just as talented mentally and athletically. Her third is in the planning stages now for late spring.

 

I'm not trying to give you a hard time, I'm just pointing out that I don't see any working dogs produced. Just sport dogs. So, why aren't these sport breeders? I'm not crucifying them, or bad mouthing them, just calling it like I see it.

 

As for the rest of the thread, I've found it very interesting and thought provoking. Made me think about quite a few things, and since I'm sure I'm not the only one, that's a good thing.

[mosstheboss2000]

Back then, breeding for sport wasn't even an issue. Now it has become one. It has produced border collies that simply do not have an off switch.

 

Other than that. I would go through rescue any day as they well match a dog for you and your situation. I'm sure you could find a suitable dog (probably returned from sports breeding) in rescue.

 

Hate to say it but sport dogs too need to have a 'off' switch and also impulse control. These things are not always hard wired even in a proven working dog... they are taught and nurtured also. In the wrong hands a dog with naturally good impulse control that will settle can become stark raving mad! You may not suppress drive when doing dog sports but you most certainly maintain control with that drive.

 

Hate to say it again BUT I rarely get a dog from a sports breeding. I have one dog currently on my courtosey list that is back with the breeder who does breed for sports. But she has the dog and asked for help finding suitable homes as she is having trouble.

 

Other then that ALL my foster dogs(single breed and mostly registered) are from working homes that either have or claim to have proven working dogs and are selling them as such.

 

In the case of Quincey he has a sister that does sports but the breeder works and sells her dogs as sheep herding dogs not sport dogs.

 

Most people who breed and promote puppies for sport 'usually' have strict breeding contracts and return policies. While they may be taking away from the breed but not working them to a level that is considered acceptable by breeders who would only breed a proven dog they certainly usually stand by and committ to the dogs they put on the ground...

[kajarrel]

Other then that ALL my foster dogs(single breed and mostly registered) are from working homes that either have or claim to have proven working dogs and are selling them as such.

 

This is really interesting because when I was (recently) looking for a puppy to work on my farm, there weren't that many of what I'd consider to be working breeders in my area (especially those with pups on the ground) . . . Hard to believe the handful around me (within several hours drive) could be the cause of the rescue crisis . . .

 

Kim

[Lenajo]

Hate to say it again BUT I rarely get a dog from a sports breeding.

 

You won't get many but not for the reasons you describe... more from...

 

#1 the people who buy them spend a lot of money on them (often over $1200 USD a pup) and plan to *make* it work out even if it takes much cash and work

 

#2 social pressure within the sport community that returning a "well bred" pup because it's "just being a normal Border Collie" also inhibits returns. You are expected to do what needs to be done to train the dog (after all, "all border collies are this way" - see #3, and "you need to learn to be a better handler and trainer, it couldn't possible be the dog")

 

#3 people who are sold on these sorts of kennels have no idea their dogs aren't normal when they act uncontrollably and/or bizarrely (I can't tell you how many sport homes thing obessive disorders are "normal" for this breed)

 

It'sa bad cycle that feeds itself. For each poor quality Border Collie put out by breeders of this ilk, dogs bred to mediocre standards of what the breed should be, then more poor quality dogs become the example of what is normal.

 

Having a contract of return, ofa/cerf numbers, a "socialization schedule" without a real breeding progrma of credit ot the breed is just putting a pink dress on a pig.

 

If you *choose* to look there are working breeders who do all those 3 as well, but also breed dogs that are of the highest standard for the breed.

 

Never mind giving me all the examples of the bad examples of each group. You've got Mr B, and I can show you multiple Mrs A's. You know the ones who bought th $1500 pup from the sport kennels and got a total freak they love but don't like, and who can't do *anything* at all. Never mind herding - it's too much a spook to even do flyball, too out of control to do agility, and too aggressive to even be a nice pet. But they won't return it...because its"wrong" and the breeder keeps on producing them because "its all the owners fault. They should go to better trainers".

[AllieMackie]

Maybe I'm stubborn. No, scratch that, I know I'm stubborn. I just don't see what the problem is with having sport breeders and working breeders. I don't see why sport breeders are "evil" by producing a dog more focused to dog sports than to herding. I understand fully that you all want the border collie to maintain true herding lines, and I value that importance, too. But it seems like there's a vile taste in all your mouths for anyone who breeds border collies designated for the sporting side. I keep hearing that the dogs are mediocre, that they are too high-drive, etc, but I've seen different. The local sport breeders have fantastic dogs. So do the local working breeders.

 

Why is this a problem? Is this just a matter of snobbishness that can't be brushed off?

 

Also, can we please stop bashing the breeders I linked earlier? Not only are all of them crossed off my list already, but I really didn't intend to give breeders a bad name by asking advice in a forum about them. I regret even linking them by name, as it is. I don't care if you dislike sport breeders, it's rude, and you should be contacting them personally to tell them you dislike them, if you really do.

[juliepoudrier]

I just don't see what the problem is with having sport breeders and working breeders. I don't see why sport breeders are "evil" by producing a dog more focused to dog sports than to herding.

 

Allie,

The why was answered a couple of pages ago very succinctly by Denise:

I'll add one more thing that's not often thought about, or said, but is a harsh reality. Every puppy bought from a breeder not truly breeding the border collie as it should be bred, takes a place from a puppy that *is* breed the way border collies should be bred. The more this happens, the less properly bred border collies are produced, and the less there are. Over time, the true working border collie gene pool becomes smaller and smaller. [emphasis added]

 

It's not about being snobbish; it's about protecting a gene pool that's not that large to begin with. As has been stated before, if more and more border collies are bred for something else, the larger the gene pool of those dogs will be compared to that of the working border collie. We've already explained the whole idea of genetic drift. That's why the folks who are working to restore the working ability in many of the other herding breeds find it so difficult. The working genetics just aren't there anymore, or at least not in significant enough numbers to really push those conformation-bred dogs back in the direction of their working roots. That variety of genes that provides for the traits that make great working dogs has largely been lost to those other breeds. Perhaps we're stubborn too, because we don't want to see that happen to the border collie.

 

Denise used to post a "target" analogy that explained the whole dilution thing really well, but I guess she stopped posting it as it really just seemed to fall on deaf ears.

 

J.

[AllieMackie]

The working genetics just aren't there anymore, or at least not in significant enough numbers to really push those conformation-bred dogs back in the direction of their working roots. That variety of genes that provides for the traits that make great working dogs has largely been lost to those other breeds. Perhaps we're stubborn too, because we don't want to see that happen to the border collie.

 

Please don't get me wrong. What you said right there? I understand that. I understand that the lines are falling thin, especially with the "addition" of breeders breeding for sport, or combination. I understand that combo herding/sport dogs dilute the herding mentality that makes the dog what it is. I also want to make it clear that, as I'm not looking for a top-level competitor, but a dog to participate in local competitions, I am primarily looking at herding-bred dogs (since I know people won't bash good working breeders... Amanda Milliken and Werner of workingbordercollies.ca are two that I'll be meeting with soon).

 

But, while the working lines are slimmer, I still don't really see the problem with sport breeders. They're filling their own niche, and it doesn't HARM the dogs.

[juliepoudrier]

We could argue the fact that YES Mrs P was the one who failed here as she did not raise this puppy well..and clearly being from proven lines it's chance were pretty good at being a nice pup with good workability. But Mr B must of been thingking she could do the job if he sold the dog to her in the first place? Probably partially because he believed so strongly in his proven lines.

 

Cindy,

I realize you have your own agenda here, but I feel the need to point out that no one I know who breeds proven working dogs (and since I'm involved with working dogs, I know more than a few folks who breed) would assume that the fact that the dogs are from proven working stock somehow abrogates the *owner* from raising the dog properly. Sure Mr. B thought she could do the job, but his thinking so is no more based on the fact of his proven working lines than a sport breeder thinking the same thing about one of the purchasers of his/her pups. You can't make these kinds of arguments by assigning motives you can't know to people you don't know. Who knows what Mr. B thought about Mrs. P? I know you've been on this forum long enough to know that the majority of folks here will tell any newbie that these dogs are not self-training--they don't come out of the box socialized and ready to do whatever it is you hope to do with them. The *owner* is responsible for turning the well-bred pup into a useful dog. Trying to argue that the breeder thought because his dogs were so well bred the owner wouldn't have to step up to the plate is just laughable. And it certainly doesn't help your argument for you to make such claims.

 

We then could question Mr B who after unsucessfully selling this dog twice starts to think HEY maybe something IS wrong with the dog? Maybe this is just one of those puppies that comes from a proven litter but doesn't meet the criteria of a good working dog with traits and temperament rather then take into account that perhaps he sold the dog inappropriately.

 

Again I don't think you can assign motives to Mr B. Maybe he didn't realize he sold the dog inappropriately. Maybe both Mrs P and the family with kids said all the right things (you're in rescue; you know people know how to give the right answers). The motives I've just assigned here are just as plausible as those you've assigned above.

 

We could ask ourselves why in the first place Mr B ended up with these lovely dogs to breed in the first place. After all you would think that someone who put the time and effort into proving they are what they are would want to make sure that they were proven for good reason.... especially knowing who ever they were selling the dogs too was probably going to keep them intact and continue breeding them after spending the effort and money in getting them.

 

Well, let's see. If you want to keep a breed in existence, you do have to breed, no? If all working pups were sold on spay/neuter contracts, where would all the working dogs go? Remove all breeding stock and what do you have but a dead end? I'm quite sure the folks that developed the working border collie sold intact dogs to other shepherds, who then developed their own lines. Some of those lines are the very ones that people like to name when they want to show what great dogs are behind their current dog. You argument here really makes no sense to me.

 

Clearly if I was breeding exceptional working dogs, maintaining clean and healthy lines wouldn't I want to make sure that I was backing this up but not just selling my dogs off without spay neuter contracts knowing full well that probably they are going to be bred without the intent that I have worked so hard to maintain.

 

How can you know what the owner's intent will be? If I were to breed a litter and sell into nonworking homes, then I'd want the dogs to be nonbreeders. But if I sell pups to working homes, I'd like the pups to be allowed to mature and perhaps prove themselves (or not) before any neutering was considered. I think that's a pretty reasonable stance, and I know that most of the folks I know feel the same way. I, for one, wouldn't sell a pup to just anyone, and I would expect to have a relationship with the buyer that would allow us to discuss the future of the dog and its suitability for breeding when the time comes. That's just me, though, and I wouldn't presume to say all breeders would do that, although most of the folks I know follow that sort of practice. And they seldom breed litters, so we're not talking about large numbers of pups here. I wouldn't presume as you are doing that all working breeders sell willy nilly to anyone without any regard for the integrity of their lines. Again you're making assumptions about motives and making generalizations for which you apparently don't have any data to back up--your arguments seem to be based entirely on emotion.

 

From my experience with people who are working so hard to breed and keep the workability this is where it is falling apart.... because it doesn't matter if you are breeding with such great intent if you are then allowing others to break this down after buying puppies from you. Whether this be that you sold part of your litter as pets because there was not market OR you sold to someone breeding for another purpose other then just proving they have amazing working dogs(on livestock of course)

 

Again, this is just your experience, colored by your emotions and assumptions. Trying to blame the breeders of working dogs for allowing their lines to be "bastardized" in subsequent generations appears to me to be a ploy to turn the argument away from sport breeders. Again it comes down to volume. People who breed for other than working ability vastly outnumber those who do. Even if every working breeder sold every pup to an irresponsible future breeder, those breedings couldn't possibly have the same effect on a gene pool as those who are selling and breeding dogs for some other purpose. See how generalizations can go both ways?

 

I have seen, sport breeders, back yard breeder, farmer, just the family down the street ALL that have gotten dogs, proven dogs or puppies from well known breeders but with no restriction ie breeding contracts ect... and some that claim they do, don't do their follow up. I have brought this to their attention at times with the response of... well I can't follow up on every puppy I breed.

 

And are you trying to say that this phenomenon is unique to working dog breeders? If so, I'd really love to see the statistics to support that. Do not the owners of the dogs bear some responsibility for doing the right thing? Are you saying that we could shut down the sport breeders simply by selling them working-bred dogs only on S/N contracts? How do you think such an action would affect breeding and the various gene pools?

 

YES we know it is important that we continue to bred dogs with workability, and there is no question this is being done on a 'large' scale but in doing so perhaps part of that is creating the down fall of the breed it self as we are not really taking into account the big picture of where these dogs are ending up and the dogs that are then being produced from them.

 

How do you know this is being done on a "large" scale? Do you have some actual numbers? Are you saying that the scale on which working bred border collies are produced is larger than that of sport or other types of border collies? How do you know this? I'm not saying there aren't working breeders who breed a lot of dogs; there are. I also tell people to steer clear of them. I can say for certain though that most of the working dog folks who post to this forum breed only rarely. And I think that the scale at which we breed is more the norm than what you're claiming here.

 

This blame does not just sit on the heads of those breeding dogs for agility or for pretty ears although they definitely contributing we need to really sit back and take a look at the big picture.

 

I agree that large-volume breeders of any sort are a problem. I disagree that working breeders are the largest part of the problem. Oh, and while I'm at it, weren't you arguing earlier that sport breeders who bred from working lines were in fact keeping the "work" in their dogs? If you truly believe that, then why would it make sense to argue now that the working breeders are the problem for selling their dogs w/o S/N contracts to folks like sport breeders? By the reasoning you presented in earlier arguments, those sport breeders are keeping the work in the lines and therefore would be just the sort of people you'd want to be breeding dogs, right?

 

J.

[Eileen Stein]

I'm stressing that there are way more politics involved than some or even many people are willing to concede. And one of the biggest problems is that we in this community like to champion even the people who do it, right or wrong, because of the politics and rhetoric of the working dog argument. And that can appear hypocritical to many people, especially those who are not as invested in the 'morality' of the border collie as some of this community is. It's called closing ranks, and it happens here all the time. Some of the most highly regarded members of this community, IMO, are not very good dog owners much less good breeders.

 

Well, that's a pretty poisonous comment, RDM, and I guess I should try to address it more constructively than just trying to figure out who the heck you could be talking about.

 

I still don't understand what you mean by the term "politics" in this context. Let's take a different example. If you're honest, I'm sure you would agree that there are bad rescues -- rescuers who powertrip, or hoard, or otherwise frequently don't act in the best interests of the dogs they take in. If you stick up for those rescues, or refrain from criticizing them, is that "politics"? If so, why is that an appropriate term for it? If not, why is "politics" an appropriate term for what I understand you to be accusing posters who believe in breeding dogs for working ability of doing? Would it be "politics" if I (who am not a rescuer but nevertheless believe that rescue -- taking in dogs in need and trying to find good homes for them -- is a good thing) refrained from criticizing them?

 

Aside from the term "politics," is it bad or wrong or immoral to stick up for the concept of rescue even though you know that there are bad rescuers? Suppose one acknowledges that there are bad rescuers, but nevertheless insists that rescue is praiseworthy, and something that ought to be done, and that good rescues should be supported? Is that hypocritical, embittering, tiresome? Because that seems to me to be exactly parallel to what you're charging those who argue in favor of breeding for work and supporting good working breeders with doing.

 

You can say that there are fewer bad rescuers than there are bad working breeders, and you'd probably be right, because there are probably fewer rescuers than there are working breeders. (There are WAY more working breeders if you accept mosstheboss's characterization of anyone who claims to be breeding for work as a working breeder. Richard Swafford, before he was kicked out by the ABCA, claimed to be a working breeder. I suspect you and moss would categorize him that way in totting up whose dogs you are rescuing, but he was no more breeding for work than the man in the moon. Now he is claiming to be a rescue -- does that make him a rescue?) You can say that we supporters of breeding for work don't all agree on what constitutes a good or responsible breeder, but it's equally true that not all rescues agree on what constitutes a good and responsible rescue. Why is that an indictment? What does that have to do with the principle involved?

 

You SEEM to be saying, if I understand you correctly, that those of us who advocate breeding for work are championing people we know to be bad dog owners and bad dog breeders because they breed for working ability. I categorically deny that. I would say such a person was doing one thing right (i.e., breeding for working ability), but that would not make me call him a good breeder or refer puppy buyers to him.

 

My viewpoint has always been a little different, coming from a place of rescue as I do - I have always toed the party line about "workability" etc. and bought into it, but it has always bugged me too. And I think the reason is that you all argue that you are trying to save a breed, and I'd argue that I'm trying to save a dog. And in the end, these goals end up being at cross purposes with one another.

 

We ARE trying to save a breed. You ARE trying to save a dog. There's no reason we should be at cross-purposes. If border collies were bred only by knowledgeable working breeders breeding for working ability (which is what we advocate), demand would exceed supply. Those breeders are a tiny fraction of people currently breeding border collies. They are the ones who should be breeding, the others should not.

 

It's hard for me to admire what you all do when you keep putting litter after litter on the ground and selling to sport homes and pet homes because the "true" border collie "can do it all" and be that as it may - there's still too damn many of them. Every sport or pet home you sell to is a home a rescue dog doesn't get ... I think if the litters on the ground are so awesome they should be snapped up by working homes only. If they are getting bought up by agility people and pet people and weekend herding warriors, what difference are you really making in the overall scheme of The Border Collie Preservation Project? All you're doing is throwing good dogs out into the void, preserving nothing.

 

I really can't understand why it's wrong to sell dogs to pet homes, when there are so many good homes wanting them. I always recommend that pet buyers (in which I include sport buyers) go to rescue, but some -- like AllieMackie -- just won't. I don't understand why it's wrong for a working breeder to sell them a good puppy. That isn't "throwing good dogs out into the void, preserving nothing." It's placing a working-bred dog in a good home. Not every dog bred for work has to end up working for the breed to be preserved -- a lot of them do, but not all.

[mjk05]

I think the OP needs to ask herself why she wants a border collie.

 

Why do any of us want border collies?

 

ETA:

I have border collies because I need and want them to work sheep. Its important to me that they stay working sheepdogs.

For that reason I'm not a big fan of sports breeding.

[vanillalove]

OP being me? Or AllieMackie?

[AllieMackie]

I think the OP needs to ask herself why she wants a border collie.

 

Why do any of us want border collies?

 

Assuming you mean me, and not vanillalove. I kind of stole this thread from her, oops. :X

 

I know why I want a border collie. What's the problem here?