Breeding Pets

[sea4th]

What would you do?

Make it mandatory for anyone wanting a pet to adopt? errode our diminshing rights even more?

 

Nothing much you can do, is there? --- only keep trying to educate, speak with your dollars and in some cases, your votes. There are some things you just can't legislate, nor would you want to.

 

But for every pup they produce --- and that appears to be a lot, there another pup who bites the dust. But then, why the H-LL should they care. They're making money, hand over fist. That overrides any politcal or moral opinion. And just because these sort of practices aren't legislated, neither makes them right nor makes them ethical breeders.

[JaderBug]

I have to say I agree with a lot of what IronHorse says. These people seem to be very responsible about what it is they're doing (although I too question repeated pregnancies). Some people love Border Collies but don't want the drive that sometimes goes with them. IMHO, there's nothing wrong with that, to each their own.

 

Someone mentioned that dogs should not be bred if they are not working dogs. What about toy dogs? Their sole purpose is to be a companion... that's about all they've ever been asked to do.

 

Now, I'll admit, I don't know their history all that accurately, but I have to argue the case of German Shepherds. Originally, by looking at their implied name of 'shepherd' they were herding dogs. Look how versatile they are today though. Guard dogs, SAR, police service dogs, guide dogs for the blind, etc, the list goes on. What if sometime back in their history the breeders said "no way are these dogs going to be bred for anything but livestock!" Look at all the missed opportunities and dog careers that could have been, that wouldn't exist for these dogs if that happened, people whose lives would not be better for it.

 

There are lots of breeds that have that same sort of history, and not just in the canine world either. Purposes for an animal change whether herbivore, carnivore, domesticated, wild, pet, or livestock. That's part of evolution, human-assisted or not.

 

I also think that people tend to forget Bullet #3 under "Read This First": Border collie owners who don't use their dogs to work livestock are not second-class citizens. That's how I feel, anyway.

[Laurae]

Hi Jaderbug,

I'm not trying to pick on you, but I would like to address your points.

I have to say I agree with a lot of what IronHorse says. These people seem to be very responsible about what it is they're doing (although I too question repeated pregnancies).

To me, that's an oxymoron. It is impossible to be a responsible breeder if you're putting all those puppies on the ground at every single opportunity you have. The sheer numbers of the puppies being pumped out make this breeder irresponsible, imo.

 

Some people love Border Collies but don't want the drive that sometimes goes with them. IMHO, there's nothing wrong with that, to each their own.

To love border collies is to love the drive. If you want a "border collie lite," perhaps an Australian shepherd or sheltie might be a better match. Breeding the border collie to fit a square peg into a round hole is not responsible, imo—done often enough, it changes the breed so that it doesn't fit its own square hole very well anymore.

 

Someone mentioned that dogs should not be bred if they are not working dogs. What about toy dogs? Their sole purpose is to be a companion... that's about all they've ever been asked to do.

But we're not talking about all dogs here—only border collies, which are specifically purpose-bred dogs. Once you take away the purpose part of bred, you're left with dogs similar to all the other breeds whose sole purpose is to be a companion. There are plenty (hundreds) of breeds meant to be good companions—if you wish to breed for companionship, why dismantle a breed whose entire basis is being bred with a unique purpose?

 

Now, I'll admit, I don't know their history all that accurately, but I have to argue the case of German Shepherds. Originally, by looking at their implied name of 'shepherd' they were herding dogs. Look how versatile they are today though. Guard dogs, SAR, police service dogs, guide dogs for the blind, etc, the list goes on. What if sometime back in their history the breeders said "no way are these dogs going to be bred for anything but livestock!" Look at all the missed opportunities and dog careers that could have been, that wouldn't exist for these dogs if that happened, people whose lives would not be better for it.

The GSD is one of the breeds most affected by no longer being bred for its original purpose. Poorly bred GSDs are rampant, and their structure and temperaments have suffered terribly in the past 20 years. As with border collies, there is nothing wrong with using GSDs for activities other than what they were originally bred for (so there's no lost opportunities for additional kinds of work or other activities). Being bred for a working purpose is what made the GSD so versatile that it can do all these things in the first place. (Sound familiar to the argument that breeding border collies to work stock is what creates the dogs that do agility and flyball so well?) The issue is that breeding for these alternative reasons has a detrimental effect on the breed as a whole, whether we are talking about border collies or GSDs.

 

There are lots of breeds that have that same sort of history, and not just in the canine world either. Purposes for an animal change whether herbivore, carnivore, domesticated, wild, pet, or livestock. That's part of evolution, human-assisted or not.

People have an awful lot to do with the devolution of dogs no longer able to do the activities they once excelled at. The benefits of turning so many purpose-bred dogs into mere companions are not worth the costs, imo, since there are already so many breeds whose original "purpose" was to be a pet in the first place.

 

I also think that people tend to forget Bullet #3 under "Read This First": Border collie owners who don't use their dogs to work livestock are not second-class citizens. That's how I feel, anyway.

Again, nobody said people who don't use their dogs to work livestock are doing anything wrong. No one here has a problem with that! The issue being discussed here is breeding without regard to working livestock.

[Rebecca, Irena Farm]

Anyway, correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm fairly certain that the German Shepherd we have today is the result of a guy who saw some general purpose farm dogs and said, "Wow, wouldn't those make great utility dogs!" In other words, they've pretty much always been bred as all-purpose dogs.

 

What makes Border Collies unique is how they've been bred for a specialized purpose. BUT, the result is a dog that is capable of a wide variety of functions, from stockdog all the way to full-time companion.

 

Ironically, breeding a Border Collie "for" a different set of characteristics than the one the breed comes with as a stockdog, is one of the fastest ways to end up with dogs that are completely unsuitable as companions, being unstable in personality and unsound in health. Breeding for work keeps all the extremes that make a Border Collie good at what it does, in balance. Ignore the work part of it and you never know whether your pups are too reactive, too impulsive, too extreme in some physical characteristic, have metabolic issues - until it's too late.

[Sue R]

Some people love Border Collies but don't want the drive that sometimes goes with them. IMHO, there's nothing wrong with that, to each their own.

But do they really love Border Collies, or just what their limited image of a Border Collie is?

 

Someone mentioned that dogs should not be bred if they are not working dogs. What about toy dogs? Their sole purpose is to be a companion... that's about all they've ever been asked to do.

 

That is their purpose. Breeding a toy dog to produce pet pups (regardless of dogs languishing in shelters, etc.) is breeding a toy dog for their purpose.

 

I also think that people tend to forget Bullet #3 under "Read This First": Border collie owners who don't use their dogs to work livestock are not second-class citizens. That's how I feel, anyway.

But people who breed "Border Collies" for other than working ability are not considered responsible breeders by the definitions espoused by these boards - that Border Collies should be bred for working ability. What is done with the dog, as long as it is humane and so forth, is not the issue.

[jdarling]

I believe that the Border Collie breed is at a point in its evolution that has sprouted branchs which makes your definition outdated.

 

Wow.

 

A person purchasing a pet Collie from this breeder is far more likely to get the pet they are looking for and not winding up with a wired up pup that came from a working class breeder who decides their rejects are better suited to pet or sport homes.

 

I am not really surprised that this gets said over and over ... but I am surprised that it was said by someone who has been here this long.

[SoloRiver]

If someone doesn't want a dog with drive, WHY THE HELL WOULD HE GET A BORDER COLLIE?

 

Sorry for shouting, but seriously. Why?

 

That's like saying, "I hate small dogs, but I really want a Chihuahua."

[JaderBug]

If someone doesn't want a dog with drive, WHY THE HELL WOULD HE GET A BORDER COLLIE?

 

I think maybe because Border Collies have other valuable attributes that people like, other than just their high drive, they're trying to pick and choose. I also think a lot of it is ignorance.

[Debbie Meier]

It's kinda unfortunate that folks think that lower drive means breeding away from working lines, for the most part the over the top high drive misdirected nut cases I've been in contact with were poorly bred border collies in some cases selected as pets or sport dogs and were not good working dogs. Seems like some are breeding high drive but the dog lacks the brain and common sense to control it or to figure out the proper use of that drive. Same holds true with the other working breeds, high drive aussies and ACD's are pretty much useless without stock sense, oh yeah, drive corgis are real entertaining...bark bark bark bark.

 

Deb

[jdarling]

I think people often mischaracterize "drive" ...

[juliepoudrier]

Yep, I truly love the comments that imply that working-bred dogs--even the working rejects--can't make suitable pets and so we must breed "pet" border collies. As I type this, I am sitting in front of the television with nine working-bred border collies laying quietly about the room, being very good pets (and in case you're wondering, several of these dogs are retired successful trial dogs, and five more are currently trialing successfully, so we're not talking about working rejects here but actual high-quality working dogs). And to think we have people on this forum who should know better stating (or should I say, repeating the fallacy) that working-bred dogs have just way too much drive and therefore we need to breed a dumbed-down version. Nice.

 

As Melanie so eloquently shouted, well, I think she said it well enough.

 

Rachel, I know you have been part of these discussions before and I can't believe you even brought up the whole thing about feeling like a second-class citizen. Where in this thread or any other thread on breeding has anyone stated that border collies shouldn't be used for anything but stockwork? Please, if you find any such reference from the working dog folks, please share it with us. This little red herring comes up like clockwork in every breeding discussion, and it makes no sense. Not one of us regulars has ever said you shouldn't own a border collie if you don't intend to work stock. We do say that you shouldn't breed a border collie if you don't want to work stock. I just don't understand why people insist on interpreting the latter as the former, especially when it is clearly stated otherwise in the "Read This First" thread, as you so kindly pointed out.

 

Ironhorse,

Even if you can accept that it's okay to breed pet border collies, I find it hard to believe you think it's acceptable to let's see, breed 8 females on every heat. Assuming they come in heat every six months (which is pretty typical), that's 16 litters a year. Let's say the litters average just 6 puppies. That's a conservative count of nearly 100 puppies a year. Sure they sell on a spay/neuter contract--they're pumping out enough puppies to supply every potential pet border collie owner in their province. I don't see how you can defend that practice, especially after your own experience with a puppy mill. Does anyone really think that if these folks have that many litters on the ground, nearly 1.5 litters a month, they have the necessary time to put a lot of effort into the raising and socializing of all of them? Surely the children aren't in charge of doing all that work? I've raised a litter of puppies. I can't imagine doing it x16 every year. It's disgusting. And you know what, I'd have the same thing to say about a working breeder who was pumping out that many puppies.

 

J.

[Laurae]

I think people often mischaracterize "drive" ...

 

Definitely. I think it's often code for intensity, particularly when people say they don't want a dog with a lot of drive.

[stockdogranch]

A person purchasing a pet Collie from this breeder is far more likely to get the pet they are looking for and not winding up with a wired up pup that came from a working class breeder [emphasis mine]

 

These "wired up" pups are more often than not the result of SPORTS BREEDINGS, not responsibly-bred working BCs. Those sports people are the folks who are only looking for "drive" and not the WHOLE PACKAGE. Like Julie, I have a houseful of working (and retired working, and future working) BCs--6 adults and 5 pups lounging around the house at the moment, ranging in age from 14 years to 7 months (and the 7 1/2 week old pups), and not a single one of them is "wired up"--not even the little baby pup who sleeps on the bed with me all night long. Quietly.

 

I had a gal come out a few weeks ago with a new puppy (sports bred big time--and the breeder specializes in red dogs) who talked on and on about "drive"--seems in the sports world, "drive" = craziness--"that psychotic mentality" as she put it. Sheesh!

 

 

A

[Ooky]

I have a problem with anyone breeding for the pet market. Period. To me, any one who breeds for a pet market is a backyard breeder or a puppy mill. This one looks like it's bordering on a mill situation.

 

If we are to believe shelter euthanasia statistics in this country, I'd say not all of those dogs who make up those stats are unadoptable. Until those statistics dramatically drop, anyone breeding for the pet market, no matter what lip service they give, is not a responsible breeder.

 

 

I have an issue with this statement. At first I disagreed with it, because I thought Vicki was saying you shouldn't breed animals just to be good pets and nothing more. Thinking of all the companion-only breeds (most of which -- for dogs at least-- I don't like or wish to ever have) I felt it was a little unkind to say the people who do like them shouldn't have the type of pet they want. And pretty much *all* the cat breeds are companion first and foremost, and I see great value in a lot of them in terms of health and intelligence (although the very smartest and best cat I've ever known and probably will ever know was a totally amorphous, misshapen mutt of a cat).

 

And then I thought about how it might mean that only serious people needing an animal for a specific purpose should be able to buy a purposefully bred, purebred animal, that the rest of us petowners should not be allowed to choose the relative predictability and distilled characteristics of a purebred animal. I also took issue with that. Beyond the impinging on personal choice thing, I do think there are other reasons besides working ability to want an animal. ---But in a working breed, to breed for any other reason is dumb. And idiots who want a driveless BC should pick another breed if they don't want "drive" and "energy" (sez the girl with the peacefully snoozing BC teen at her side!).

 

But now I think I understand it in a way (don't know if Vicki meant it this way) that I absolutely, 100% agree with. Which is that pet animals like cats and dogs, in the light of overpopulation, shouldn't be bred for a market at all. That's crazy, if you were responsible, to think you'd make any sort of significant money off of breeding. (And I might be a bit more lenient in my view of top working breeders on this, but still not completely lenient.) I still think that all breeding of pet animals at this point should be to maintain, enhance, and improve upon the breed's original purpose, or to breed purposefully with a mind to create a new breed/purpose if there is a need for one (dubious in dogs). Serious attempts at breed restoration/preservation, as well. I do believe there is a need for continued artificial selection for certain traits in our companion animals (by that meaning cats, dogs, rats, rabbits, and other tame animals of any kind), which requires companion animal breeding as a necessary "evil". But that should be life's work, and isn't for money! The breeders we're using as an example here are people who are running a puppy ponzi scheme. 8 bitches!!! Every heat! You wouldn't even know if you were coming or going, let alone stay on top of your dogs' supposed "natural" good health and ability to keep cranking them out, or whether your crosses made any sort of sense to make on any grounds. Nicer looking website slapped on the same old deal.

[IronHorse]

Ironhorse,

Even if you can accept that it's okay to breed pet border collies, I find it hard to believe you think it's acceptable to let's see, breed 8 females on every heat. Assuming they come in heat every six months (which is pretty typical), that's 16 litters a year. Let's say the litters average just 6 puppies. That's a conservative count of nearly 100 puppies a year. Sure they sell on a spay/neuter contract--they're pumping out enough puppies to supply every potential pet border collie owner in their province. I don't see how you can defend that practice, especially after your own experience with a puppy mill. Does anyone really think that if these folks have that many litters on the ground, nearly 1.5 litters a month, they have the necessary time to put a lot of effort into the raising and socializing of all of them? Surely the children aren't in charge of doing all that work? I've raised a litter of puppies. I can't imagine doing it x16 every year. It's disgusting. And you know what, I'd have the same thing to say about a working breeder who was pumping out that many puppies.

 

Julie,

I'm not saying that I am defending this breeder,what I am saying is I am not willing to condemn them.

All I know about them is what is given out for public consumption on their website.

I would have to have alot more information about them in paticular to actually form anything other then a neutral stance toward them as it pertains to this thread.

Now do I think that dogs can be raised and maintained at a level of quality that would make them a profitable livestock, even if its for the pet market? My answer would be yes and if what this breeder is showing on the surface is true it would appear to me that their are succeeding.

Breeding every heat sounds excessive to me but then I don't know enough about breeding dogs to make that call.

We don't know what prices they sell their pups for, we're not being shown their kennel facilities nor are we being told the number of manhours committed.

Do I believe a sizable family could handle 1.5 or 2 litters per month and do a good job of it? My answer would be yes providing their facilities are set up well.

Has anyone stepped in with hands on knowledge that this breeder is doing less then what they state? so far I haven't seen any.

The term "ethical" has popped up but in my mind what might be deemed ethical by one group may be deemed unethical by another.

 

Is it,for example, ethical to work for caterpillar tractor building machines that are used to destroy acres upon acres of rainforest and animal habitate per hour and destroying numerous animal species in the process? some would say its unethical but I bet not the family drawing the paycheck from caterpillar.

Ethics have a way of becoming very distorted when one looks at the way humanity conducts itself.

Is this breeder putting quality Border Collies on the ground? On the surface it sure appears that they are and the rate that their dogs appear to sell would indicate that alot of customers think so.

My point is that IMHO the Border Collie breed may be approaching a point of division with the originating breed purpose diminishing while new purposes are pursued and cultivated.

Does this mean a dumbed down version of the original? perhaps down some paths and perhaps not down other paths.

Only time will tell IMO what will become of the Breed as we know it at present.

One thing is certain,pandora's box is opened on this breed and changes are occurring like it or not.

Do I play the devils advocate? when I feel doing so will elicite intelligent thought on a pertinent issue.

[Kathy Chittenden]

Pretty pictures

Very appealing to the "non-informed" looking for a border collie.

 

I'd love to see the place now though - this is a snapshot in time.

 

You cannot possibly have that many intact dogs and puppies all together without things going to h*** quickly.

 

They are a "color" breeder, trying to breed to give people what they want, however, the economy/market is not going to be perpetually good for these people.

 

It will fall in on them and sadly their dogs will suffer.

 

I've seen these places - websites can make anything look good....

 

It is an addiction with thes people as I've said before - "ooh, what colors will we have with these two!"

 

They probably have several leftover adolescents now, untrained, unhandled, they will be a mess when they try to integrate into a real household - there is no way all of these dogs are living as family dogs - no way.

 

There is also no way they *know* they are breeding no drive in their dogs. I've seen some of the wildest misplaced drive in some of these breedings (through rescue where they end up)

 

I think we should just put all of these puppymills on ignore rather than wasting bandwith and getting them website hits - and yes I said puppymill.

 

Kathy

[stockdogranch]

Is this breeder putting quality Border Collies on the ground? On the surface it sure appears that they are

A Border Collie is by definition a WORKING DOG, a dog that has intentionally been bred to do a high level of livestock work. So, NO, this person is not putting "quality Border Collies on the ground." That's even before we get to the issue of too many breedings.

 

A

[jdarling]

Anna,

 

Here is Iron Horse's logic when I told him that earlier in the thread ...

 

The course of animal husbandry is an ongoing human endeavor.

As any breed of animal evolves due to human manipulation its purpose/purposes shall expand and or contract according to desirability.

I believe that the Border Collie breed is at a point in its evolution that has sprouted branchs which makes your definition outdated.

 

So the notion of the working dog is outdated ... you might as well quit breeding for it. The Border Collie has expanded now into branches of many things and should be bred accordingly -- just the way these honest people are doing it. We need to tell Shannahan, Helsley, Glen, and all those guys. Quick! Spread the word! I am sure once all of them hear about it, they will be knocking this woman's door down for puppies, so you'd better get yours before they're all gone!

[Sue R]

That's right - I guess I'd better just get a pet, and resolve to work the cattle on the farm myself, or sell the farm and just have whatever is the popular pet dog at the moment. I could still have as many "Border Collies" as I want, and they wouldn't even have to get their little paws dirty. Heck, I could even take the extra time (providing I sell the farm) to take my dogs around on the show circuit and maybe even run them in the "herding ring" if they have the ability to chase around after trained sheep.

 

Times change but that doesn't make it right to contribute to the decline or demise of something special, useful, and needed. If folks need to play around or make money breeding pets, let them breed pet breeds and not contribute to the ruin of a useful breed.

[stockdogranch]

I believe that the Border Collie breed is at a point in its evolution that has sprouted branchs which makes your definition outdated.

Yeah, well, tell that to all the numerous people who really need these dogs to do real work on their ranches. Tell ya what, Ironhorse, take away the dog I just sold to a guy, and instead give him one of these POSs to work his 2500 pairs and 1000 goats and see what he has to say about outdated!

 

Where is that head-banging emoticon when ya need it?

A

 

ETA: just because many folks live in places where you may not see the NEED for these dogs, they are out there in more numbers than you think!!

[jdarling]

My point is that IMHO the Border Collie breed may be approaching a point of division with the originating breed purpose diminishing while new purposes are pursued and cultivated.

 

Iron Horse, what are you basing this on?

[Debbie Meier]

If the focus was about making sure that there was work for the dog instead of getting all upset about those that are breeding against others ideals we would be way further ahead. As long as there is work there will be a working dog, the demise of good working border collies will be due to agriculture evolving to the point of not needing dogs not due to breeders breeding for sport or show. It's quite annoying when a person that has work to do ends up with a below standard dog just because no one is out there presenting good working dogs to them.

 

Really that is the problem, how many border collies are going to none working homes? I bet more then that which are going into working situations. It's only going to be a matter or time before the dogs that are being placed and bred to go into none working trial homes are demonized compared to the dogs that are being placed and bred for specific livestock related work, btw it's not a new concept to look away from those that trial when looking to purchase a working border collie.

 

It's kinda interesting, just recently I've seen two tv segments on Livestock Guardian dogs, the dogs are making a comeback in other countries due to being needed for the tasks they were originally bred for. In one case Anatolian Shephards are being imported to Africa and the other I think was where another breed was being sent to Brazil, a new demand for the working dogs and so now the breeds will be preserved for a few more generations as the working dog it was originally developed to be.

 

It is where the contraction is happening that Iron Horse is talking about, agriculture and the need for a working dog is contracting, fight that contraction and the need for the right quality of dog will be preserved and maybe expand. To me it's the elephant in the room, we can point fingers at breeders the are not doing the right thing all we want, but as the demand for the quality of dog that we strive for decreases so will the number of breeders breeding that quailty, no market no dog. That does not mean give up, that means deal with the elephant, get dogs back doing the work they should be doing, not just token work of trialing or hobby herding. I don't mean to offend anyone or discredit the great dogs that are trialing, there are some great ones that are great using dogs, but trialing should be a demonstration of what is possible to help encourage people to require more of their using dogs, not a substitute for real work, ask yourself, is it turning into just a "Show Pen" in a different form.

 

Deb

[JLP]

You hit the nail on the head Debbie Meier!! Excellent Post and one that should be taken seriously!

[IronHorse]

Pretty pictures

Very appealing to the "non-informed" looking for a border collie.

 

I'd love to see the place now though - this is a snapshot in time.

 

You cannot possibly have that many intact dogs and puppies all together without things going to h*** quickly.

 

They are a "color" breeder, trying to breed to give people what they want, however, the economy/market is not going to be perpetually good for these people.

 

It will fall in on them and sadly their dogs will suffer.

 

I've seen these places - websites can make anything look good....

 

It is an addiction with thes people as I've said before - "ooh, what colors will we have with these two!"

 

They probably have several leftover adolescents now, untrained, unhandled, they will be a mess when they try to integrate into a real household - there is no way all of these dogs are living as family dogs - no way.

 

There is also no way they *know* they are breeding no drive in their dogs. I've seen some of the wildest misplaced drive in some of these breedings (through rescue where they end up)

 

All speculation and judgement on your part without further investigation you really can't make these statements with certainty.

Have you contacted and spoken with this breeder?

You may find them quite willing to speak with you and address your concerns.

Personally I believe that would be step one before I begin to formulate judgements.

 

I think we should just put all of these puppymills on ignore rather than wasting bandwith and getting them website hits - and yes I said puppymill.

 

Is this addressing the issue with the breed?

Sounds more like just sticking one's head in the sand and pretenting changes to the breed aren't happening.

[IronHorse]

A Border Collie is by definition a WORKING DOG, a dog that has intentionally been bred to do a high level of livestock work. So, NO, this person is not putting "quality Border Collies on the ground." That's even before we get to the issue of too many breedings.

 

A

 

All a perception of what a person chooses to qualify as quality.

I believe a Border Collie by definition is a HERDING DOG

Now if your going to label the breed as a WORKING DOG what all consitutes Work?

Are you suggesting that SAR and various services other then livestock are not work?

Again I point out my opinion that at this point in history the tight perameters that you suggest are simply not suitable to define this breed any longer.