Sheep as Training "Toys"

[topnotchdog]

Julie wrote:

"The distinction I'm making is between pet dogs who are being trained for hobby herding (trials) and pet dogs who are being brought out by their owners for their weekly "fun on stock" sessions."

 

I am guessing I've not seen any of the "fun on stock" version, so I am not sure what that looks like. What is the distinction between these two?

 

As to the original question, my understanding is the improved well-being of the sheep is the whole point of training dogs on how to move them, so it would be a huge shame if this were not the priority in lessons, whether or not one intends to trial or not. I am fortunate in that both my instructors (Julie, Robin) have always modeled this.

 

Pearse wrote:

"The question we all need to be asking ourselves is; why are we doing this? Are we really all concerned about keeping the Border Collie as a stock dog and preserving the craft of moving stock calmly and humanely in partnership with dogs, or is that just the rationalization we use to justify entertaining ourselves at sheepdog trials?"

 

I would be very interested to hear what more experienced folks have to say about these two questions. I have been thinking about these sorts of issues since I started watching lessons about a year ago. (Since I don't have stock, it was only after much reflection and seeking out opinions of others that I even thought it was right for me to own a border collie.) I am still trying to figure out whether my participation means I am using sheep for my entertainment; so far the answers (and more questions) are revealing themselves as I learn more over time, and I have accepted that I am not going to figure it out over night. I would not be trying to figure it out at all (and enjoying the heck out of the process) if I didn't have people I can trust to have the well-being of the sheep (and dogs, and people) foremost in their minds.

 

Barbara

[Sue R]

Julie wrote:

"The distinction I'm making is between pet dogs who are being trained for hobby herding (trials) and pet dogs who are being brought out by their owners for their weekly "fun on stock" sessions."

 

I am guessing I've not seen any of the "fun on stock" version, so I am not sure what that looks like. What is the distinction between these two?

I *think* the distinction would be this - for people who are into serious livestock handling or "serious" hobby herding, the goal is to improve their skills with regards to livestock and dog handling, and their dog's skill with working stock in a calm and reduced-stress manner, whether it's oriented towards a commercial/farm/ranch application and/or on the trial field.

 

For those who are simply into "fun on stock" or "my dog doing what it was bred to do" (even if that breed or line of dogs has not been bred with an eye toward stockwork for generations), there is little or no genuine consideration for the stock or for the improved skills aimed at useful handling of stock in a more humane, reduced-stress manner.

 

In other words, what interest comes first and foremost - good stockmanship, or that of the handler/dog having a "good time"?

[Shetlander]

In other words, what interest comes first and foremost - good stockmanship, or that of the handler/dog having a "good time"?

 

Not sure where I fall in. I don't have the money, time or interest to pursue even "serious hobby herding." Quinn only goes to the occasional lesson because it is clearly what he loves most in the world. But I still would not want to see sheep injured by my dog. And I think Quinn learning and building on skills is part of what makes it so rewarding for both of us.

[Maralynn]

Not sure where I fall in. I don't have the money, time or interest to pursue even "serious hobby herding." Quinn only goes to the occasional lesson because it is clearly what he loves most in the world. But I still would not want to see sheep injured by my dog. And I think Quinn learning and building on skills is part of what makes it so rewarding for both of us.

 

I think a persons attitude makes a difference as well. A conscientious person who wants to learn and understand is usually not the type who views the stock as "toys". A willing dog with a bit of talent can progress even with sporadic lessons. I believe there is a huge difference between those owners and the owners who want to herd because it's the next thing on their list of dog activities to check off.

[kajarrel]

I do have a problem with people with pet dogs coming out once or twice to see if their dog "has what it takes," "to have some fun", or "to fulfill their herding instinct (read: their own needs)." I feel this regardless of the trainer's competency.

 

As several other people have mentioned (I'll use Julie's post as an example),

 

". . . trained stockdogs don't spring from the womb that way, so the unfortunate side effect of that is that stock will need to be used to train dogs. "

 

And as Pearse noted:

 

"Training young dogs is not always pretty, but with proper training, the rough stuff doesn't last long and people who know what they are doing can train young dogs without having their sheep routinely abused. "

 

The risk to the stock makes sense if there's some long-term expectation that the dog is going to work sheep (in some capacity) properly. If they aren't, I think that people should find some other venue to entertain themselves and their dogs.

 

Kim

[Debbie Meier]

I was just speaking to someone else about this thread that uses border collies but does not trial, the comment was "If we don't govern ourselves someone will do it for us". Also a comment was made that "dog toy" perspective is not much different then the dog fighting or luring type of sports which in so many cases have been banned or reduced to the use of literal toys. It would not be good if this type of training was considered luring just for the sake of getting a dog to display their instincts for our entertainment.

 

As far as getting people to change, I don't think peer pressure is going to cut it. Many of the offenders are not within the "Community" and don't feel that they are doing anything wrong, the bad offenders have created their own community. Though I hate the we vs. them attitude it may get to the point where there is no other choice but to clearly define a line, maybe something like those using stock dogs and those that have a breed of dog that belong to the Herding Group, really does not matter what breed it is.

 

Kinda depressing way to enter into 2010.

[Laurelin]

How common is it to use Rottweilers for herding?

 

I know some people that dabble with their show rotts, but it's usually just AKC style HIC and not much more. However I did want to mention that I knew a true working rottweiler that was used to work cattle on my uncle's ranch. She has since passed away but she was an amazing animal.

 

Anyway, sorry for going off topic.

[Ooky]

The risk to the stock makes sense if there's some long-term expectation that the dog is going to work sheep (in some capacity) properly. If they aren't, I think that people should find some other venue to entertain themselves and their dogs.

 

Kim

 

I very much agree with this, although I can't be sure I will end up with my own farm. However, it is certainly what I am working towards and really, really want to happen. At a minimum, I would like Odin to be useful in moving sheep on grazing rotations for mitigation and monitoring plan instructions - in other words, real work. Trialing would be nice, but I see it as a learning experience to train for handling my dog in more and more challenging real world situations. The sheep are, have been, and should continue to be the reason for these dogs, not the other way around.

 

That being said, I am such a complete novice take this opinion as what it is - just that. I'm sure there are many handlers and dogs out there who are just "hobbyists" (as in never intending to do more than take lessons/trial) that are better than Odin and I will ever be, and also sure the sheep would prefer to have them, regardless of my long-term intentions! I.e. these people may not be doing "real work" but they are working properly, if that makes sense.

 

Luckily for me, Odin so far is respectful and does not grip or split, and only chases if he is getting in over his head - and he does have a stop (although step 2 is to get a stop that would last rock solid indefinitely until I said ok again - we are working on it but since I make so little sense I am a hard handler for him to always trust).

[geonni banner]

I am very interested in the subject of whether dogs that have no foreseeable future as working stockdogs should recieve training at all.

 

If I am honest with myself, I must admit that there is very little chance that I will ever be in a position to own even a few head of livestock. I am living on disability, and it will be hard for me to come up with the money for even monthly sessions with a good trainer. I have felt up to now that that was all right, that learning herding would be a way to strengthen my bond with my dog, and provide us both with a means of learning the discipline of sheep herding.

 

I have nothing but respect for all living things, and would certainly not wish to be involved in the mistreatment of the animals I would come in contact with in our lessons together.

 

In deciding to find out if my dog has a talent for herding, I took several things into consideration.

 

First, I know that traditional methods of animal husbandry are in danger of vanishing. I feel that the skills needed to effectively and humanely carry on a pastoral life must be transmitted to as many people as are serious about them as possible. The contribution that I can make is to help create a way for people that posses the knowledge of these things to transmit it to others. And in taking me as a paying student, I can help enable them to pursue their livelihood as husbandmen or women, thus preserving their knowledge and skills for future generations. I am very unlikely to become a shepherd myself. But if a qualified trainer is to make a living at training sheepdogs, I suspect that they will require more students to support themselves than will actually be needed to carry on the work available.

 

Secondly, although it is quite true, (as one poster has said already,) "The sheep are, have been, and should continue to be the reason for these dogs, not the other way around," it is also true that as with most livestock breeds, the genetic diversity of sheep is also endangered. It is hard enough as it is for a shepherd to make a living with the handful of breeds that are commercially raised. If the herding trainer makes a living training dogs, I would think that it would put him or her in the position of keeping whatever varieties of sheep that he/ she chooses, without being having to be overly concerned with whether they are "commercially viable" in the way that flocks kept to earn money from meat, milk or wool production are. A trainer of sheepdogs must keep sheep. What better person to preserve reservoirs of endangered breeds and types?

 

If, as has been suggested in some literature that I have read, sheepdog trialing is the proving-ground for breeding stock in the Border Collie, then trial-dogs must be trained. I personally have no ambition at this point in my life to trial. And my dog is spayed, so even if she were to become a National Champion, she has zero value as a breeding prospect. But others who do not have livestock may have very successful, well-bred and intact trial dogs. And those dogs must be trained as well.

 

Alright. These are my thoughts, now you who know more than a rank beginner like myself, set me straight. Do I have any business getting my spayed bitch of unknown ancestry, who will probably never be a working sheepdog trained to herd sheep? Are my suppositions naive and erroneous? With respect, I really want to know.

[juliepoudrier]

The question we all need to be asking ourselves is; why are we doing this? Are we really all concerned about keeping the Border Collie as a stock dog and preserving the craft of moving stock calmly and humanely in partnership with dogs, or is that just the rationalization we use to justify entertaining ourselves at sheepdog trials? If the former, then it is incumbent upon us, as a community, to bring what ever peer pressure we can to bear on eliminating situations where stock is being ill-used. If we don't, others will and we will not like the results.

I assume you're posing this question for the people who are *not* the clueless teaching the even-more-clueless types that you describe in the rest of your post as being the main problem. But the question you pose here also implies that people who train dogs simply to trial are part of the problem too? Or are you saying that it's okay to train dogs just to trial (hobby herders; people who don't own stock but train their dogs to trial) *as long as* the real reason for doing so is always kept in mind? I'm just a little confused because you spent a lot of time explaining the type of people that are trouble, and those types aren't in your words the folks who generally would run in USBCHA trials, but as I said, my interpretation of your question above is that if your goal is just to train a dog for trials then perhaps you (the general you) should find something else to do?

 

J.

[Tea]

Here is my perspective.

 

The reason I have the dogs is because without them I cannot forage my sheep loose. I started my ag program for a specific reason. To utilize forage that cannot be fenced. My Grandpa also had some old ideas about breeding back regional livestock.

 

You could not do this work without the dogs. I cannot feed the sheep without the forage.

 

When I did the youtube video at the end I put a thank you to all the folks that have bred and worked these dogs. Because if they had not, I could not do this program.

 

Perhaps I've been lucky, maybe its where I live. Most of the handlers and trainers I know trial at the open level. And have sheep. There sheep are well cared for. The people are considerate of them, and the dogs and the people. They have helped me.

I have not met many other people who do different things with their dogs, except that one time. Which I wrote about previously.

 

I am doing this because I am raising sheep. But If the handlers were not there,if the folks that breed working dogs were not there. I could not do this.

 

I have two dogs from rescue. Two that were bred by handlers. These handlers make their living training and trialing. Most have sheep that they sell as locker lambs on the side, One does raise cattle as a buisness.

 

The slow food movement is a big thing in my area. (My Butcher is doing better by the way.) And Right now I have a list of four farmers that need working dogs. Where do I send them? To the handlers I know. One is having problems with his dog. Where do I send him? To the handlers I know. These folks will never trial. It is a balance.

 

So is it cool for you to work your dog with a good, compassionate, serious trainer? I think sure, because you are helping make sure I will have the dogs in the future by keeping these handlers and trainers in buisness.

 

But I guess you should remember if you ever meet up with someone who is not compassionate to the dogs or sheep or people. Then just walk.

 

I have been asked to use my sheep for a new trial that is trying to be set up. And I will probably do so because it will help continue the dogs. And I and the folks involved will watch carefully.

 

I was asked to score at the last trial I was at. And that judge was a very skilled and compassionate person. I told her that I had never trialed and Sweep was young.

 

And she told me. "Just train the dog, leave the post."

 

My motivation tells me what the deal is.

 

I left the post because what my deal is; training the dog to help me forage my sheep loose.

 

I wish everyone could farm. I wish the world was like when I was a child. But its not. So I work with what I have and think positive.

I will also tell you this. I love the sheep, and my dogs and my little horses. It is an old partnership and I am lucky to participate in it.

[kelpiegirl]

Tea hit the nail on the head- wishing everyone could farm. Yep, it's great if you can do it, but economics just prevents all tbe those who have been handed down a farm, or perhaps are renting (and very fortunate to find a place) or are just plain wealthy. It isn't the cost of the land, it's feeding you family with that farm, it's being able to afford veterinary care, and it's the lack of pension, health care, etc., that prevents many folks from doing it.

 

I cannot argue the merits of working dogs unless you need to, as I am a bit emotionally wrecked right now, but I will say, that people who farm put their animals at a higher level than themselves- and that should be. True farmers generally have a nicer barn than their house. True farmers don't wax poetic about the day in day out stuff, they simply live the working life. But, the bottom line, is that no farmer worth his salt would allow anyone, or any dog to do damage to his livestock, without a darn good reason.

 

Bottom line, anyone who keeps livestock, for whatever reason, best be looking at their welfare ahead of any personal gain- no matter what it is. It only makes sense.

[Tea]

Oh Heck...Can't I wax poetic.......

 

[kelpiegirl]

Just after I hit send, I remembered Tea! Of course you can, sorry, I am just not with it.

Oh Heck...Can't I wax poetic.......

 

[juliepoudrier]

Julie wrote:

"The distinction I'm making is between pet dogs who are being trained for hobby herding (trials) and pet dogs who are being brought out by their owners for their weekly "fun on stock" sessions."

 

I am guessing I've not seen any of the "fun on stock" version, so I am not sure what that looks like. What is the distinction between these two?

 

When I think of the distinction, I think of the place in CA that's been in the news where the affluent city dwellers can take their dogs out for a day working stock. But the caveat here is that if the dogs are actually receiving proper training on their "fun day in the country" then it's not as evil as some would make it out to be. I'm of two minds on this whole subject of whether a dog should recieve training if it's never actually going to live and work on a farm or trial. Part of me thinks that if done properly, training such dogs can be a good thing largely because it exposes the *owner* to livestock. If, as I noted above, the trainer takes the opportunity to teach the human about livestock in general, and specifically how to read them, how they react, how they should be handled for stress-free management and so on, then the human is being exposed to a rural lifestyle and may perhaps gain a greater understanding of *why* the dogs are important for management *as well as* gaining some sort of empathy for livestock and farming in general. So many people in this country are so far removed from a rural lifestyle, the sources of the foods they buy in the grocery stores, etc., that I sometimes think if they get a border collie and then decide they want to try to train it on stock, *if* they get themselves into the right training situation, they can learn so much *more* than just "letting their dog play."

 

The key to this, of course, is as Pearse points out, that often the people doing the training are either clueless themselves or don't care much about the livestock (a means to an end: $$ for dog training vs. sentient beings that need to be cared for and considered), which in turn would do nothing toward enlightening people about livestock and the rural/farming life. But in my pollyanna outlook, I would like to think that a person who maybe has had little exposure to country life and who decides they'd like to try to train their dog to work stock could gain *a great deal* of knowledge, empathy, and insight into livestock and livestock raising (not to mention dog training) just by having made a simple, perhaps even unfocused (with no set goal in mind) decision to try their dog on stock. The contrast to this would be the person who simply wants to take the dog out and spend a little money letting the trainer run some sheep around a round pen with said dog, without any desire whatsoever to learn about training a dog itself or whether the dog makes progress, why such dogs are needed, proper management of livestock and so on. These people see taking their dog to sheep simply as an alternate fun activity like going to the dog park or similar. This latter sort is what I consider the "fun on stock" version. I think it's perfectly possible for this latter type of person to be converted to my pollyanna version, but it takes effort on the part of the trainer to try to make that happen, and if the human is not amenable to that, then it's up to the trainer to say "not on my sheep."

 

As to the original question, my understanding is the improved well-being of the sheep is the whole point of training dogs on how to move them, so it would be a huge shame if this were not the priority in lessons, whether or not one intends to trial or not. I am fortunate in that both my instructors (Julie, Robin) have always modeled this.

 

I don't think trialing needs to be a priority. It is for some, but not for everyone. If we accept that trials are a good test of breeding stock (current and future) then someone is going to have to want to trial. I don't think it makes sense to somehow paint as evil or misguided people who don't own livestock but who want to trial (I'm not pointing fingers here, just noting that being an actual farmer shouldn't be a prerequisite for trialing). Again, the key is in who is doing the training of the handler and the dog so sight is not lost of the real reason for the training (calm, efficient management of stock). Speaking for myself, as I have gotten more involved with my sheep and what I want to do with them (rare breed conservation as well as implementing a three-tier system to provide market lambs), I have also become less interested in trialing. Certainly this is not the path everyone who trials and has sheep takes, but often I think of limited resources and when the decision to spend money is made, I decide to put the money back into my sheep instead of into trials. But if I were never to trial again and (theoretically) kept breeding working dogs how could I ever say to a potential puppy buyer that my dogs are proven if I don't ever trial any of the dogs I breed from or their offspring?

 

If I breed a litter and sell some pups into pet homes and then those owners decide they might like to try their dogs on livestock I think it behooves me to encourage that since it's a way of proving the breeding. Such owners may never own livestock themselves, but if they train their dogs and trial them, is that a bad thing?

 

Pearse wrote:

"The question we all need to be asking ourselves is; why are we doing this? Are we really all concerned about keeping the Border Collie as a stock dog and preserving the craft of moving stock calmly and humanely in partnership with dogs, or is that just the rationalization we use to justify entertaining ourselves at sheepdog trials?"

 

I would be very interested to hear what more experienced folks have to say about these two questions. I have been thinking about these sorts of issues since I started watching lessons about a year ago. (Since I don't have stock, it was only after much reflection and seeking out opinions of others that I even thought it was right for me to own a border collie.) I am still trying to figure out whether my participation means I am using sheep for my entertainment; so far the answers (and more questions) are revealing themselves as I learn more over time, and I have accepted that I am not going to figure it out over night. I would not be trying to figure it out at all (and enjoying the heck out of the process) if I didn't have people I can trust to have the well-being of the sheep (and dogs, and people) foremost in their minds.

 

Barbara

 

Speaking for myself, I got into training and trialing because of a rescue dog whose pedigree said he might make a working dog (he didn't). I didn't own sheep to start with, although I was raised on a farm and we kept dairy goats and horses (and poultry). I found that I liked working with my dog to control livestock, and more important, I found that I like sheep. I also liked trialing my dogs. At one place I found that my presence there could actually make life better for the stock, because I would make sure they were fed, had water, and weren't mistreated (of course I have my mother to thank for instilling this attitude of concern for animals in me--it didn't come from my trainer, but I try to make sure that I pass on the animal welfare aspects of keeping or training on livestock to anyone who comes here). It was only a matter of time before I got my own flock, and since I had had a desire since childhood to do rare breed conservation, that's the initial track I took with my sheep. So the breeds I have may not be the most suitable for training dogs for trialing, but that's only one purpose they have here. I would be lying if I said I didn't enjoy (most of the time) trialing as well, and I don't consider my enjoyment of trialing as something I need to apologize for, nor do I think that raising livestock and using dogs for that purpose and enjoying training dogs for trialing (and actually trialing) are mutually exclusive.

 

As has been stated in this thread by me and others, if the reason for training and trialing dogs is always kept in mind, and the moneymaking side of things doesn't lead one to objectify livestock, then I don't personally have a problem with using livestock to train dogs, even those dogs who may never trial. That said, I won't take someone's money if the dog has no talent or no real desire to work. I will give them a few tries and then let the owner know that the dog isn't suitable for training. Here's where the money comes in. There are some who would let such dogs continue to come out and pocket the money, but even as much as I might need the money right now, I just can't see doing that to my sheep (or myself for that matter). Unfortunately, there are plenty of others (and some of them are indeed USBCHA open handlers) who will happily take the money and not give a rip about the livestock.

 

I agree with Pearse that peer pressure is one way of trying to stop the abuses. For myself, I will steer students away from situations that I think are not good ones (for the stock or the dogs) and I simply don't run my dogs in trials at places where I think the stock are abused or not properly cared for. I extend this further and also don't attend trials held by handlers whom I suspect of being abusive in training their dogs. But I have been around this community long enough to know that the "you're not the boss of me attitude" has a corollary, which is, "don't rock the boat." For peer pressure to work, people would actually have to be willing to speak out about abuses they see, organizations (local, mainly) would have to be willing to actually enforce humane rules (assuming they can even apply rules to stock not being used for a trial), and handlers would have to be willing to give up that all-important quest for points (i.e., not attend a trial) in situations where the livestock care/management is questionable.

 

J.

[Tea]

LOL! Not a problem, actually I sometimes do wax a bit TOO poetic!

 

I had a sheep come into the project yersterday. She was one I sold. A great milking ewe. Doset...lady I sold her to was getting out of sheep. Could not stand to have her culled. She had three years worth of fleece, really bad feet, and an abcess that had to be cut out!

 

I am writing a poem about that........

[kelpiegirl]

It's that kind of treatment/lack of care, that galls me to no end. I cannot understand this. How about LOOKING at your SHEEP once in a while, heck, maybe even have a routine, where when you shear (apparently that was too much), you trim feet? I remember as a kid in grade school, I spent the night at my friend's house who had sheep, and a horse, which, I would have DIED to own. The horse's stall was two to three feet deep in manure and urine. I spent the whole next day cleaning out that stall. It bothered me that much. Then, the rest of the family got in on taking care of business. I was certainly not doing it to guilt anyone, I just could not see any animal living in that filth.

 

My grandparents and my father are the ones who instilled this mentality into my psyche, and I am grateful. I am the person who will go to someone's house, even someone I don't know that well, and clean cat litter boxes, dog yards, wash buckets, you name it. Good free labor- maybe that's why I am so poor.

 

LOL! Not a problem, actually I sometimes do wax a bit TOO poetic!

 

I had a sheep come into the project yersterday. She was one I sold. A great milking ewe. Doset...lady I sold her to was getting out of sheep. Could stand having her culled. She had three years worth of fleece, really bad feet, and an abcess that had to be cut out!

 

I am writing a poem about that........

[Tea]

yes, you were taught well, Kelpiegirl!

 

I also went by a pasture where I was going to put a few ewe lambs. And walked by the peoples barn and in there was so wet, so bad......that my intern and I were gagging. The poor sheep in there were covered in LICE.

and looked like they had coccidea as well.

I went to the house and told them. They said.....oh they'd call the Vet in the next couple of days. I said politely they needed to act now.

 

Guy just stared at me funny.

 

Of course we didn't put our ewe lambs there.

 

 

So what did their children learn.

 

Not what your good Father and Grandparents taught you!

[Smokjbc]

I'm of two minds on this whole subject of whether a dog should recieve training if it's never actually going to live and work on a farm or trial. Part of me thinks that if done properly, training such dogs can be a good thing largely because it exposes the *owner* to livestock. If, as I noted above, the trainer takes the opportunity to teach the human about livestock in general, and specifically how to read them, how they react, how they should be handled for stress-free management and so on, then the human is being exposed to a rural lifestyle and may perhaps gain a greater understanding of *why* the dogs are important for management *as well as* gaining some sort of empathy for livestock and farming in general. So many people in this country are so far removed from a rural lifestyle, the sources of the foods they buy in the grocery stores, etc., that I sometimes think if they get a border collie and then decide they want to try to train it on stock, *if* they get themselves into the right training situation, they can learn so much *more* than just "letting their dog play.">> JuliePoudrier

 

This I agree with. When I think about how wrong-headed I was at the beginning- and although I was a horse person, I never owned any other livestock until I had dogs. If the people I worked with at the beginning had rejected me because my dogs were not serious ranching dogs or trial prospects, I would have never learned anything about livestock, ranching, and especially sheep. Most of my horse friends are more cattle/buckaroo oriented, and it took me a long time to accept the fact that I really like sheep ALOT better than cows . I think some of them think I need an intervention.

[Smokjbc]

It's that kind of treatment/lack of care, that galls me to no end. I cannot understand this. How about LOOKING at your SHEEP once in a while

 

I used to work dogs with someone like this- although I don't believe it was neglect as much as ignorance. I couldn't figure out why, invariably, when we worked dogs that at least one sheep would lay down and refuse to move. Our dogs were well trained (this person as well as mine) and nothing was ever stressed or run around. It was at the beginning of my working life and I was not that educated yet as too body condition on hair sheep. This person would have various sheep diseases, would tell me on a couple of years that almost all the lambs died that year, etc. It was a mystery for awhile, especially compared to my own flock who are easy to maintain and almost offensively healthy, until the light bulb moment when I realized the cause of the problem was simple malnutrition and crowding (small pen sheep keeping). Eventually, the numbers of this person's flock were reduced and the problems resolved themselves, amazing how enough hay can do that!

[juliepoudrier]

I was not that educated yet as too body condition on hair sheep.

 

Well and it's also amazing how many people don't know (or somehow forget) that you can't look at your average wool sheep (unless recently shorn) and determine body condition. With wool sheep in full fleece, you've got to put your hands on them to know what sort of condition they're in.

 

J.

[topnotchdog]

In reading these posts it is really striking to me how different the various approaches to stock are, and how different the reasons for working one's dog on stock are, and yet how interconnected they all (potentially) are. Very interesting...must ponder more in between whistling practice.

 

B.

[The Good Shepherd]

I fully agree with protecting the stock! My sheep and goats eat better then I do sometimes!!

 

I am a novice when it comes to herding. Even I do not let any of my own dogs in with the sheep because I am not comftable, nor do I know what I am doing. I have an instructor out when I work my dogs, who in exchange for lessons works her dogs with my woolies!! Its a win-win situation!!

 

As for other breeds, I fully intend to get titles on my German Shepherds!

 

I firmly believe however that a novice dog and a novice handler MUST have an instructor!!

 

I would never allow anyone to bring their dog to play with my woolies!!

[Donald McCaig]

Dear Fellow Handlers,

We had sheep before we had dogs and now that we no longer have a commercial flock, we keep a few sheep so our guard dogs are gainfully employed.

 

Julie wondered: "I'm of two minds on this whole subject of whether a dog should recieve training if it's never actually going to live and work on a farm or trial."

 

Last month 9 year old June and I visited a kindergarden where she lay on her back, belly exposed so, one-by-one each child could pat her. June has never been among so many tiny children in her life. She was never trained to accept pats and won't roll over for me unless I made a federal case out of it. June could not pass the most basic AKC obedience test - The "Canine Good Citizen" test. She doesn't sit on command, nor heel.

 

But she has been trained to read sheep's minds while accepting nearly inaudible commands,one atop another at 1000 yards. Because of her traveling, training and trialing, June has vast experience of all sorts of human/natural gestalts.

 

Mostly, the world makes sense to June - as it mostly does to my other sheepdogs. And because it makes sense they can deal with novel (Huhhhh????) situations about as sensibly as we humans can.

 

I believe that training a sheepdog to stockwork, even though it may never be a farmdog or trial dog, helps that dog make sense of the world and can help make it a better companion.

 

Donald McCaig

[kelpiegirl]

Well said Donald, and echoing my thoughts as well.

 

Dear Fellow Handlers,

We had sheep before we had dogs and now that we no longer have a commercial flock, we keep a few sheep so our guard dogs are gainfully employed.

 

Julie wondered: "I'm of two minds on this whole subject of whether a dog should recieve training if it's never actually going to live and work on a farm or trial."

 

Last month 9 year old June and I visited a kindergarden where she lay on her back, belly exposed so, one-by-one each child could pat her. June has never been among so many tiny children in her life. She was never trained to accept pats and won't roll over for me unless I made a federal case out of it. June could not pass the most basic AKC obedience test - The "Canine Good Citizen" test. She doesn't sit on command, nor heel.

 

But she has been trained to read sheep's minds while accepting nearly inaudible commands,one atop another at 1000 yards. Because of her traveling, training and trialing, June has vast experience of all sorts of human/natural gestalts.

 

Mostly, the world makes sense to June - as it mostly does to my other sheepdogs. And because it makes sense they can deal with novel (Huhhhh????) situations about as sensibly as we humans can.

 

I believe that training a sheepdog to stockwork, even though it may never be a farmdog or trial dog, helps that dog make sense of the world and can help make it a better companion.

 

Donald McCaig