AKC vs. Other Herding (Working) Breeds

[JaderBug]

I was just wondering how prevalent the AKC problem is with other breeds? I know that Aussies have suffered from it, and I understand that ACDs have as well. How hard is it to find working lines of breeds affected by the AKC standards? I don't find that it's hard to find working BCs, but in my random dog searches I've had a hard time finding true working lines of other herding breeds. Are there some AKC breeds that still work well and haven't been terribly affected from being AKC? Is the AKC problem common with breeds in other groups, like hounds, sporting, and working groups? I imagine it is, but was wondering just how prevalent it was.

[Debbie Meier]

You kinda have to be careful with "Working Lines", there are many working lines that do not produce good working dogs, the breeders have not put the right parents together based on the ability to work, the right match can give you great talent and ability, the wrong match can give you nothing.

 

Did that make sense, it's not really AKC, it's breeders that breed for other then work, unfortunately AKC rewards that, so it is a problem attributed to AKC, but also any other kennel club or breed club that rewards people that breed for other traits. I know that ASCA people would disagree, but there are folks that compete ASCA that don't have or breed working dogs, so it could be considered that ASCA could further hurt Aussies.

 

When you think about, if associations required that a dog displays a certain level of herding ability before they compete in their other classes, or require that the dog is spayed or neutered in order to compete in those classes, it may change things. Just a thought.

 

Deb

[JaderBug]

Yeah, I wondered if I was going to get that worded how I wanted to...

 

Let me try again...

 

Are there any other breeds that have the same sort of ongoing battle with AKC like Border Collies do? I've never seen or heard of any other breed that so actively disapproves of their acceptance/participation in AKC than BCs...

[nancy]

In England we have met a number of dogs who did not look as we expected from the name: Labrador retriever, golden retriever, cocker spaniel come to mind. When we noted that, we were told, in each case, that,"This is a working dog. Of course you wouldn't recognize it. It's not one of your AKC dogs."

 

We have always told them that the AKC sure isn't "ours". And we have found the working version way more attractive than the AKC version. The cocker spaniels were the most unlike what we call that. The head is small and way more rounded. The whole body is smaller and tighter. And they couldn't step on their ears if they tried. But they can work well with hunters and wardens.

[Debbie Meier]

I don't believe so, there are small groups that realize that breeding for show has been at the expense of their dogs, some will breed a bench line for confirmation, while others will breed a field line, many breeds actually present themselves as two seperate breed. Because AKC is there only registry they just give and breed for their own purpose. Breeds I can think of, German Shephard, Golden Retriever, Lab, Pointers, Cattle Dog and Border Collies also. I get a kick out of the ACD people, some of them are so brainwashed that they try to say registering their dogs with AKC saved their breed, but they no longer consider herding ability as the main goal to breed, I've had breeders tell me that they will sacrafice herding instinct to health or temperment in a heart beat. It makes sense to a degree, except that ACD's have a large number of genetic defects, there was one report that indicated that 50% were either affected or carriers of PRA, so by breeding for total health you lose 1/2 the gene pool. These breeders feel they are saving the breed, yeah we will always have a dog that is built and marked like a cattle dog, but what happened to it's ability to work, flushed down the toilet in an attempt to stop out genetic problems, that manifested after the breeders stopped selecting for work. I believe the only way to get the breed back to a true working dog would be to breed for herding ability first then breed for health, granted you will have some dogs initially with health problems, but over time as you increase your gene pool you can breed that into recession. If things keep going the only way to breed out genetic defects would be to outcross to a totally different breed that does not carry the defect, I have read reports from breed clubs asking for AKC's endorsement, their breed is dying, as far as I know AKC is not allowing the cross.

 

So I guess, the picture is bigger, it's not just a road to the loss of herding ability, it's a road to death of a breed. Breed for genetic perfection, mother nature throws a wrench in your plan, you can only stay near perfection for so long, before you drop to the bottom of the bone pile. Another issue I see are breeders selecting based on pedigree, it's a tool, but many are breeding two lines together so they can advertise they have this or that champion doubled up on paper, the paper is good for starting fires.

 

Deb

[Lenajo]

Are there any other breeds that have the same sort of ongoing battle with AKC like Border Collies do? I've never seen or heard of any other breed that so actively disapproves of their acceptance/participation in AKC than BCs...

 

yes, the Jack Russell fought it tought and nail, even going to court over the right to the name. Hence the AKC has the "Parson Russell".

 

The Aussie fought it before the BC- and lost

 

The Cavalier King Charles Spanial also fought it and lost

 

The Kelpie is the only breed that was able to fight it and win. They were removed from the AKC "holding tank" (aka the "miscillaneous class") and have their own registry only. Part of what helped the Kelpie is the lack of public "want" for the breed. AKC really can't make money of something isn't cute and flashy. (and I think a good working Kelpie is plenty flashy, but lets face it, standing around it looks like an ACD/Dobie cross)

 

I wish BCs were ugly. Maybe they would have left us alone.

[Debbie Meier]

That's funny, just had a thought, if they tell you your top ranch working, trial winning dog don't look like a border collie your doing something right...

 

 

Deb

[kelpiegirl]

I have never heard that description... Hmmm. 'Course, we know you aren't calling the Kelpie ugly... right?

 

AKC really can't make money of something isn't cute and flashy. (and I think a good working Kelpie is plenty flashy, but lets face it, standing around it looks like an ACD/Dobie cross)

 

I wish BCs were ugly. Maybe they would have left us alone.

[Debbie Meier]

If you ever get a chance to see Janet Covington's female Kelpie Caret work, not only is she a joy to watch, but a pretty little dog....or was it that she looked so pretty to me because she worked so great...

 

Deb

[JaderBug]

yes, the Jack Russell fought it tought and nail, even going to court over the right to the name. Hence the AKC has the "Parson Russell".

 

I always did wonder where the heck 'Parson' came from...

[Guest SweetJordan]

I was just wondering how prevalent the AKC problem is with other breeds? I know that Aussies have suffered from it, and I understand that ACDs have as well. How hard is it to find working lines of breeds affected by the AKC standards? I don't find that it's hard to find working BCs, but in my random dog searches I've had a hard time finding true working lines of other herding breeds. Are there some AKC breeds that still work well and haven't been terribly affected from being AKC? Is the AKC problem common with breeds in other groups, like hounds, sporting, and working groups? I imagine it is, but was wondering just how prevalent it was.

Reminds me of the time that I was at a dog show and my dad looked at the labs and said with a very funny look on his face, "these are labs, they don't even look like labs." I actually snickered a little because there is a good chance that he was overheard though it wasn't on purpose.

I go sometimes to watch the performance events. The one I've been at has a BC rescue and they always say that they are going to do demonstrations, but they spend the entire time talking, and I end up walking away. But last time I did give a donation.

 

 

To add to this there is an AKC "BC" in my neighborhood. I was talking to it's owner one day, and not only did the dog fail at herding, but the guy said that she's afraid of sheep. There is also this trainer and AKC judge in the area. She adopted a BC from working lines. Admitted that in the first year she was either going to kill the dog or the dog was going to kill her. Well she made it through and the dog does agility, obedience and I don't know what else. Then she went out and bought a "BC" but g from AKC lines and yet claims to love the breed. I just thought that was terrible. The reason I know this is because one of my dogs had a class with her years back.

[Tranquilis]

It's all about focus, and resources. AKC focuses on conformation, because that's easy to judge fairly objectively - You have a standard, and anyone with a little experience can tell if a dog meets, or doesn't meet, the standard. The problem with judging *working* dogs is that you need judges that understand and know the work the dog is supposed to be doing. And that, frankly, is harder to find and afford. Also, running field trials requires a LOT more organization, and can accomodate a lot fewer dogs, than a colloseum-sized tradtional conformation show. More compact venue==fewer expenses; More dogs==more income. The AKC is money-making body - They exist to rake in cash. In exchange, they provide numerous services and priveledges. Running sheep trials simply won't do it for them - it's too expensive, too arcane, and too complicated for their business model.

 

There is a mindset that simply fails to understand that a working dog is bred to work first, second, and last. They simply can't wrap their heads around the concept "a Border Collie is, as a Border Collie does." This is similar to the Alaskan Husky, which is very simply a mutt by AKC standards. But they're mutts to a purpose, and the major mushers have more purpose, more care, and more breeding in their dogs than most AKC breeders can ever imagine - many mushers will know sires and dams going back four, five generations or more, off the tops of their heads, and will know each line's strengths and weaknesses to a fine detail. To a musher, a Husky is as a Husky does, and all else is secondary. Curiously, after a while, some distinct lines are emerging anyway - Due to the consistent purposeful breeding. A typical Martin dog, for instance, is instantly recognizable to a knowlegeable lay person, just as the BC is obvious to anyone who knows herding breeds.

[Debbie Meier]

"A typical Martin dog, for instance, is instantly recognizable to a knowlegeable lay person, just as the BC is obvious to anyone who knows herding breeds."

 

We need to get back to that with our dogs, instead of the dogs all conforming to a standard. Dogs should all look a little different based on the individual breeders likes and dislikes, with working ability in common, breeding to a physical standard makes the level of working ability the variable instead of the physical standard. I've read where once upon a time border collies looked different, you could not tell that it was a border collie until it worked, the breed was not based on look but working style. When we all change our views and are willing to accept that a breed does not have to conform to a physical standard or fit into a cookie cutter, working ability will begin to come back to forefront. But for some reason people have a hard time owning an Aussie, for example that does not fit the breed charecteristics, it's like having a dog that fits into a certain class makes us feel accepted. If you think about it, until we breed for ourselves, for our own work, our own likes and dislikes we are going to add to the problem, the problem just accelerates when a kennel club gets involved.

 

There is another problem with a physical standard, the breeder breeds for a defined look or appearance, perfection is based on given criteria, it's like there is a ceiling you are trying to get up to, where do you go after you achieve the standard? When you breed for work there is no ceiling, there is no perfect, win this year means go home and see if you can get even better so that you can win again next year. You can always get better performance or breed for more athleticness, style and grace or find a better way to do it. Breeding for performance gives you a whole dog, breeding for breed standard only gives you a shell.

 

Deb

[blackNwhite]

It's all about focus, and resources. AKC focuses on conformation, because that's easy to judge fairly objectively -

The biggest complaint about AKC conformation is that it is not objective - it is not only subjective (not every judge likes a particular look ina dog) but it's also highly political. There is far more focus put on who is holding the leash (meaning a professional handler) than there is on the dog itself. In fact, there are breeds that can only be finished to their championship with a professional handler (or is exceedingly difficult to do so without one). In fact, I've had breeders complain about going to their yearly specialty because they already knew who was going to win - it's all politics. I see working events as much more objective. While you do need to know something about the work, there are truly objective standards - you don't hit the panels, you don't get the points, etc. Aside from not wanting to spend my time fluffing, I'd say the political nature of conformation is a huge reason it's never interested me.

[Debbie Meier]

Well, if all the breeders are breeding to the same physical standard what else is there to let the judge place the winners, politics or personal preferences that fall within the standard.

 

Deb

[Tranquilis]

The biggest complaint about AKC conformation is that it is not objective - it is not only subjective (not every judge likes a particular look ina dog) but it's also highly political.

Well, that's the reality.

In theory, at least, anyone ought be able to look at a standard and judge based upon it, and come up with roughly similar results as the next judge.

 

Debbie hits it squarely... When all the dogs are pretty similar, small subjective differences and politics become overriding. And isn't that the trap of conformation breeding, anyway? Everyone aims to the breed standard, and once they've reached that, they then chase the fad du jour, or the current percieved trend and bias... always trying to be in line with the next judge's whims. Do that long enough, and you wind up with some hock-walking horror like some of the AKC 'show' GSDs I've seen.

[blackNwhite]

Well, that's the reality.

Everyone aims to the breed standard, and once they've reached that, they then chase the fad du jour, or the current percieved trend and bias... always trying to be in line with the next judge's whims. Do that long enough, and you wind up with some hock-walking horror like some of the AKC 'show' GSDs I've seen.

 

I think the real problem is that they have a standard (and judging) based on what the dog should look like because of the work they are supposed to do. But the dogs (in most cases) have never done the work, nor any dog in their pedigree, the owner has never done it or even seen it, the judge has never done it or seen it so how would they know how important a dog's conformation is if it never does relate to work? If the dogs were really required to work as part of their standard and acheive a certain level of competence then we might see dogs that had conformation that actually helped them rather than hindered them.

[Debbie Meier]

There is another way of looking at, could the problem be in the papers. So non-working world champion confirmation biscuit eating black and white dog wins best of breed again, what makes him a border collie or aussie? His papers. I keep thinking that there has to be a way to put working ability ahead of everything else, in reality it should be ahead of pedigree to, shouldn't it?

 

But then again when you look at it from that direction, who is putting all the merit on the papers, the people entering the show, but why can they enter based on pedigree only, because no one makes working ability as a prerequisite to showing confirmation and other events. Ugly circle it is, the only cure I can see it to get more people to need and appreciate the dog for work, not only does the work define the dog, but the dog defines the work available.

 

Deb

[Tranquilis]

I think the real problem is that they have a standard (and judging) based on what the dog should look like because of the work they are supposed to do.

 

... the judge has never done it or seen it so how would they know how important a dog's conformation is if it never does relate to work? If the dogs were really required to work as part of their standard and acheive a certain level of competence then we might see dogs that had conformation that actually helped them rather than hindered them.

This gets back that resources thing I mentioned - Find the judges that know the work, and require the work as part of the championship process and the working dog comes back in short order. The top AKC breeders would find a way to get their dogs on stock, in order to retain their status. But the AKC doesn't have all that many judges who know the work, and couldn't afford to hire very many, even if they did have them. It doesn't suit the AKC's business model. The AKC wants hundred of dogs in a relatively compact venue, so they can be judged quickly and efficiently. They don't want events scattered across acres and acres of farmland, with relatively few dogs competing at once - That would limit their ability to quickly and efficiently process large numbers.

[Eileen Stein]

Are there any other breeds that have the same sort of ongoing battle with AKC like Border Collies do? I've never seen or heard of any other breed that so actively disapproves of their acceptance/participation in AKC than BCs...

 

As Lenajo said, the Jack Russell Terrier people do, and then some. I admire them very much -- they handled the AKC threat a lot better than we did.

 

Like the border collie, the Jack Russell Terrier was recognized by the AKC against the wishes of most JRT breeders and owners. This occurred in 1997. The JRTCA, the Jack Russell registry, had the same concerns as we do about deterioration of their breed's working ability as a result of AKC registration, and moved aggressively to protect their dogs by invoking what's called their "conflicting organization rule." Under that rule, no one could join or continue as a member of the JRTCA if they registered a JRT with the AKC. That meant that they could no longer register dogs with the JRTCA, and could not compete in or judge JRTCA events.

 

A lawsuit was filed against the JRTCA by one of its affiliate clubs, which did not wish to enforce the conflicting organization rule, and by a couple of JRT breeders who dual registered and whose JRTCA membership was cancelled because they registered with the AKC. Several of the plaintiffs' claims were thrown out before trial as being clearly without legal merit. The case went to trial on the remaining claims, and the judge ruled in favor of the JRTCA. The Court held that there was no legal basis for requiring the JRTCA to change its policy, and that it was free to continue enforcing its conflicting organization rule with respect to its members and activities under its auspices. That decision was affirmed on appeal.

 

The name change of the AKC breed from Jack Russell Terrier to Parson Russell Terrier had no connection with the lawsuit. The change was proposed by the AKC parent club (the JRTAA, which soon thereafter became the PRTAA), so that the name would be consistent with the British Kennel Club, which is now using the name Parson Russell Terrier. Some of the other overseas Kennel Clubs (e.g. Australia, Ireland) recognize two sizes of the dogs, terming the smaller one "Jack Russell Terrier" and the taller one "Parson Russell Terrier." The breed standard of the AKC JRT specifies the taller size, so there too the name change contributed to international consistency. The AKC went along with the parent club's request. So the JRTCA was just lucky there. But even aside from that stroke of luck, their strong resistance paid off bigtime -- by forcing members to choose between them and the AKC immediately upon recognition they kept nearly all of their members and their good dogs, their gene pool is now entirely separate from the AKC's, the AKC had no incentive to keep their studbook open so they promptly closed it, and the JRTCA remains a strong, vibrant organization which defines their breed. I went to their national specialty a few years ago -- there were more than 2,000 JRTs there (if you can picture such a thing ), engaged in a multitude of events. My hat is off to them.

[Laurae]

So is it just too late now to rescind ABC registration upon registering a dog with the AKC as a policy going forward?

[Lenajo]

I have never heard that description... Hmmm. 'Course, we know you aren't calling the Kelpie ugly... right?

 

Sure I am. Put in in a show/AKC set up and they'd be ignored at best. Put them in the petstore as pups and nobody would look twice. No white, no fluff, no infantile characteristics for pet people. No white, no fluff, no extended reach and drive in the gait, or hyper alert behaviors to show "fire" for the show people. But what does that matter? It's the work that counts. If they work right, then they become beautiful.

 

I don't care what the dog looks like standing around. If I did I'd probably not have most of my own dogs.

 

Thanks Eileen for the correction on the Parson name change part. Now its sounding a lot like the Belgium (Shepherd, Tervuran, Malinios) thing. How far can they split out a genepool before they bottleneck?

[Sue R]

If you ever get a chance to see Janet Covington's female Kelpie Caret work, not only is she a joy to watch, but a pretty little dog....or was it that she looked so pretty to me because she worked so great...Deb

 

I have met Janet and Caret, and watched them both work. They are a terrific team and a real partnership. I was most impressed by both, a good-working dog and a nice, quiet handler.

[Sue R]

As Lenajo said, the Jack Russell Terrier people do, and then some. I admire them very much -- they handled the AKC threat a lot better than we did.

 

Like the border collie, the Jack Russell Terrier was recognized by the AKC against the wishes of most JRT breeders and owners. This occurred in 1997. The JRTCA, the Jack Russell registry, had the same concerns as we do about deterioration of their breed's working ability as a result of AKC registration, and moved aggressively to protect their dogs by invoking what's called their "conflicting organization rule." Under that rule, no one could join or continue as a member of the JRTCA if they registered a JRT with the AKC. That meant that they could no longer register dogs with the JRTCA, and could not compete in or judge JRTCA events.

 

Why couldn't ABCA refuse to allow any registrations and memberships by anyone who also registered AKC (or UKC or whatever other KC registries or "fake and fly-by-night" so-called registries are out there) as well as USBCHA not allow competition by folks who register AKC or dogs who are registered AKC?

 

The point of this would not be exclude dogs that are registered AKC from the registry or competition per se (but it would actually do that) but to make people take a stand - for ABCA/USBCHA or against (as indicated by AKC or other KC affiliation).

 

Of course, to be successful, it would also require ISDS to honor this as well, as they have agreements honoring registrations with ABCA.

 

Maybe this is just wishful thinking on my part... How would ABCA/USBCHA even be able to know who among their members did also register with a KC unless it was advertised on their website or other media?

[kelpiegirl]

It isn't hard to be impressed by that. I have neither met, not heard of this team. Does anyone know where they hail from, and what level they compete in/stock?

 

 

I have met Janet and Caret, and watched them both work. They are a terrific team and a real partnership. I was most impressed by both, a good-working dog and a nice, quiet handler.