sometimes I feel like giving up...

[Laurae]

Um, you may not mean this to sound offensive but it DOES sound offensive. AGAIN, I can't travel due to WORK, not due to laziness. As for "surfing the web sitting on my butt" i'm sure for some of you its an anomoly for finding information, but for a majority of us- we are taught in school/college to USE IT TO FIND information, with emphasis on using it for valid and accurate information. We weren't raised on the library system, we are aware of libraries- but our research is journals (online), valid websites (online), and massive libraries/volumes (online). This isn't just our slack a*s lazy selves looking for instant gratification, but honest research done AS WE WERE TAUGHT!

Either understand what is being said - as its being repeated several times, that YOUR VERSION OF THE BORDER COLLIE IS RELATIVELY UNKNOWN TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC. Either you can resent the high profile of the sport home, and argue about how *we* should find information, or you can realize something needs to change (getting the info out there) to better the breed. Explaining that all your pups are sold word of mouth IS NOT PROMOTING the working breed at all. if anything, it explains why NO ONE OUTSIDE YOUR CIRCLE HAS HEARD OF YOU.

 

EDIT: hmm I sound a little abrupt.... I mean this in a good way- I really really want to see the working breed BE the future of the breed, instead of overlooked and forgotten by everyone BUT a working home.

 

But Shaneen, you found trials to go to so you could make contact with working breeders--you just didn't follow up and go. (Not sure what the heck you're talking about with libraries--who on earth would go to the library to find a breeder? That makes no sense at all.) As to not being able to get away from work, I gather you work every weekend? How do you attend your agility trials? You aren't allowed any vacation days at all? That sounds highly unusual, but I guess if you say so...

[Donald McCaig]

Dear Sheepdoggers and wouldbe Sheepdoggers,

 

Several friends have berated me for suggesting that a newbie could buy their first pup from a Novice/novice handler.

 

Several years ago, I visited the ABCA offices and glanced through their registration files. I was surprised at how thin were the Big Hats' breeding files. Those I examined were the people whose performance and breeding so powerfully influence the genetic future of our dog. A wall of floor to ceiling files. Here and there a thin Big Hat file. One Big Hat pup per hundred?

 

Some have suggested that if one can't find an open handler's pups, one can always go to a working stockman. In Virginia, where I live, I know exactly five stockmen who have (useful) dogs but don't trial. Some may say that's because of my trialing interest but I started with sheep, no dogs, and showed sheep. I know most of the big commercial flocks in Virginia.

 

Let's see - how many Virginia open handlers? Suffice it that they are a multiple of stockmen with useful dogs and occasional pups. In my experience, most Virginia stockmen get their pups from trial people.

 

This may not be the case elsewhere, but it's true in the biggest sheep state in the east.

 

My friends who would abjure novice/novice breedings are being, I think, purer than they need to be.

 

Whenever possible, I watch novice trial runs. At clinics I'm much more interested in the not-quite-ready-for-prime-time dogs than open dogs whose handlers are trying to work out a glitch.

 

Often I see novice dogs I'd buy if their owners were less sentimental. To be sure, they aren't as proven as open dogs but one can see the dogs' natural talent. If one can judge a nursery dog's talent, one can judge a novice dog. While its possible novice (or nursery) dogs could have problems later, its hard to think where, given skilled training, the problems might be. Tight outrun? Maturity. Inability to run out 1000 yards? Experience. Inability to drive? Training. Inability to shed? Maybe. Some dogs are naturally better shedders and I don't know how to spot that ability absent shedding In any case, many not-so-good shedders do qualify for the Finals and even reach the Semi-Finals (I won't say they reach the Double Lift because my not-so-good shedder hasn't got that far.)

 

The fact is: Novice handlers usually get their dogs as pups from open handlers. Yes, a few are rescues and a few may even be AKC registered (though probably not AKC bred), but most novice/novice dogs are well bred. You cannot train up a talentless dog to compete successfully in a novice/novice sheepdog trial. You can, and many novices do, mishandle and mistrain a novice dog but that says nothing about the dog's genetics.

 

Would I buy a novice/novice pup? Probably not. Would I buy a pup from an open dam or sire I particularly admire? Probably not. If I had the money, I might be interested in buying the dam or sire. I am disinclined to buck the puppy odds which are exaggerated in my case because I am sentimental and reluctant to sell/give away a dog once it joins my pack.

 

I do not think there is a significant difference between the novice/novice gene pool and the open gene pool and it may be easier to find a pup.

 

 

 

Donald McCaig

[alligande]

Is there a big difference between the American TV viewing audience and the British TV viewing audience? I ask because I've gotten the impression (second hand) that you can't swing a dead cat on the BBC without hitting a sheepdog trial.

Short Answer yes..... Like on American telly there is a lot of dross and cheaply made programs, BUT an example of a show that would never would be shown here would be something likeNature Watch which very slowly and gently follows the natural activities of the season another example is The Chelsea Flower show at Kew Gardens shown in prime time.

That said I do believe that if you can make Westminster interesting with good production values and good commentary then sheep dog trials should be possible.

 

I also want to comment on sheep in the UK, it is a much smaller country but people who are raised and live for example in the SE do not see many sheep, sheep are regional mostly seen in hill country such as Wales, Yorkshire, etc.

[juliepoudrier]

Um, while you may not *think* a sheep dog trial is "interesting" enough- are you aware they show BREED ring on tv- I mean REALLY- we are all watching dogs walk around, and look pretty, and look at different breeds, FOR 3 HOURS!

Oh good grief. Yep, I've been guilty of watching breed shows because there are certain breeds I like and a breed show is one way to see a bunch of a breed I like all together. That said, I don't sit for three hours watching, I half watch/listen, and when the breeds I'm interested in are announced, I go watch.

 

You can argue that people watch agility and breed shows all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that stockdog trialing is a bit more esoteric than either of those. I think it's pretty clear to most of us that agility and flyball are very popular sports for the average person who wants to do something with his/her dog. Conformation is popular for any number of reasons, one of which I stated above. Because they're so popular and accessible, of course shows depicting the same garner large audiences. Let me repeat myself: agility and conformation showing are popular and generally accessible to the general public. In turn, shows about these endeavors are also popular.

 

As for stockdog trialing, talk to some of the folks who have tried to find sponsors for big trials. The most often-made argument is that the base group (i.e., people interested in the subject) isn't large enough to justify sponsorship dollars. I tend to believe that advertisers/sponsors put their money where it will reach the most people and gain them the most potential profits. It's very telling that many decline to support stockdog trials. It doesn't matter if the entire world will sit and watch three hours of dogs trotting around the ring (and the advertisers certainly flock to such shows), if advertisers won't support the airing of sheepdog trials, it won't happen. Someone has to pay for it.

 

As for research, I'm old enough to have learned (and needed to be able to do) library research. I am old enough to remember when Mosaic was the only web browser and when Usenet was the way we communicated with like-minded folks (groups like this, for example). I do plenty of Internet research and am quite capable of determining websites that are good resources vs. those that aren't. When I'm looking for information, my first line of research is the Internet. But I also realize that the *entire world* is NOT on the Internet. If I limited myself in such a way, I'd never find my shearer, for example. He's a 79-year-old man who doesn't even have an answering machine, let alone a computer or cell phone. It's easy to say that people all should get themselves out there via the Web, but the fact is some won't.

 

This thread has been a lot of discussion about where and how to find working breeders. While I understand people's frustration with their inability to find good working stockdog breeders online, numerous websites of such good breeders have been pointed out. Those of you looking have some resources now. Presumably you would pass that information on to your friends. You now know that searching "border collie breeders" isn't a great search, but that searching "working stockdogs" is. We've done our part to try to educate you, now it's up to you to help out by spreading the word.

 

We can't force people to put themselves on the Internet, so instead of haggling over that, why not take the information we do have and run with it?

 

J.

[jdarling]

why not take the information we do have and run with it

 

... or dump the excuses and make time to go watch a trial or ten and meet some people and their dogs and get to know who they are and what they do? If I didn't have enough time to do that, I'd be questioning whether I had time enough to raise a Border Collie pup.

[Laurae]

Donald, I think the biggest problem with buying a novice handler's novice dog's puppies is that the cross, whatever it is, is likely to be haphazard and not proven. As you know, a lot of decisions go into finding a promising cross and in most cases it would seem the novice wouldn't understand the genetic or working characteristics combinations complexity involved due to inexperience. I've been doing this for about five years and still consider myself a novice (I trial in pro-novice/open ranch), and I have been approached by several people to use my dog as a stud. Two of those people were Big Hats, and for different reasons a breeding didn't happen. Both these handlers have decades of top-level working experience under their belts and have bred multiple successful litters. I trust their judgment about breeding decisions regarding my dog. But I've also been approached by a few less experienced folks, and though they have nice dogs, I just don't have enough experience to say for myself if these crosses would be genetically sound or the right combination of working traits would be produced. And I didn't trust that they did either, so I've passed. I may be wrong, since I just said I don't have enough experience to make educated breeding decisions, but I don't think breeding is as simple as putting together two dogs with nice dogs behind them.

[Denise Wall]

I do not think there is a significant difference between the novice/novice gene pool and the open gene pool and it may be easier to find a pup.

 

Your crystal ball must be better than mine because IMO you don't know if they can do the stuff until you actually see them do the stuff. I don't see N/N as anywhere close to doing the stuff.

 

I disagree with much of what you wrote above, especially the "fact" that novice handlers usually get their dogs from open handlers. But I do agree that it's probably easier to find a pup from novice handlers. Especially now that you've validated just about everything the AKC and sport people say about the potential of their pups and "working lines."

 

Sorry to be too pure.

[Eileen Stein]

Often I see novice dogs I'd buy if their owners were less sentimental. To be sure, they aren't as proven as open dogs but one can see the dogs' natural talent. If one can judge a nursery dog's talent, one can judge a novice dog.

 

One can make a judgment, I suppose, but one will have much, much less basis for the judgment. The nursery course is the open course minus the shed. The novice course could have an outrun as small as 75 yards and doesn't even include a drive. I've heard top breeders and handlers I respect say that they don't see the point of even having novice/novice trials, since a test that doesn't call upon a dog to drive doesn't tell you enough to be worth anything. And then too, if you often see novice dogs you'd buy, I'm sure you often see novice dogs you wouldn't touch with a ten-foot pole. How is the agility enthusiast going to tell the difference?

 

While its possible novice (or nursery) dogs could have problems later, its hard to think where, given skilled training, the problems might be. Tight outrun? Maturity. Inability to run out 1000 yards? Experience. Inability to drive? Training. Inability to shed? Maybe. Some dogs are naturally better shedders and I don't know how to spot that ability absent shedding In any case, many not-so-good shedders do qualify for the Finals and even reach the Semi-Finals (I won't say they reach the Double Lift because my not-so-good shedder hasn't got that far.)

 

I'm really dumbfounded by this statement. Are you really saying that all dogs who run out tight in novice/novice develop correct outruns with maturity? All dogs who can outrun 100 yards will with experience be able to outrun 1000 yards, and will be able to handle lifting and fetching at that distance? All dogs who are not yet driving will become good drivers with training? And what about courage, natural balance, obedience at a great distance, power and push, and the myriad other qualities that are not tested in novice/novice? Many, if not most, novice/novice dogs will fall by the wayside as more is demanded of them. I've seen that many times; surely you have too. Often the dogs who look the nicest in novice/novice are the dogs who don't have it in them to work at a really demanding level.

 

The fact is: Novice handlers usually get their dogs as pups from open handlers. Yes, a few are rescues and a few may even be AKC registered (though probably not AKC bred), but most novice/novice dogs are well bred.

 

I'm not sure what basis you have for saying this. My guess is that most novice/novice dogs are the dogs the owners brought with them from other programs. But even if they got their dogs as pups from open handlers, that is no guarantee at all that the dogs are worthy of breeding.

 

You cannot train up a talentless dog to compete successfully in a novice/novice sheepdog trial.

 

You can certainly train a minimally talented dog to compete successfully in a novice/novice sheepdog trial. Why encourage the breeding of minimally talented dogs? Does that enhance our gene pool?

 

I have heard you say more than once that you don't believe people who breed rarely can reliably produce good dogs -- that it's the knowledgeable breeders who breed frequently and therefore have a lot of opportunities to assess the outcome of their breeding and improve their knowledge that produce good border collies. How much less likely is it that someone who has not progressed beyond novice/novice would have the knowledge and experience to produce the caliber of dogs that would maintain and improve the quality of our breed?

 

When I encourage people to buy pups from working breeders, it is those knowledgeable, experienced breeders that I want to encourage and support. Buying from them enables them to breed more frequently, which results in higher quality dogs entering our gene pool, because they know what they're doing. Buying from a random novice/novice handler, who breeds, as you say, out of enthusiasm and sentiment, and without the experience and judgment to accurately assess his/her own dog and the merits of a particular cross, is unlikely to result in higher quality dogs entering our gene pool. So what's the point?

[ShoresDog]

Question for those more experienced: If there were more novice or non-working homes seeking puppies from the big hats, would they breed more often?

[juliepoudrier]

You cannot train up a talentless dog to compete successfully in a novice/novice sheepdog trial.

I disagree. While I wouldn't call my first two dogs talentless, they certainly didn't have what it takes to run in open or to do difficult chores at home. Should they have been bred? I don't think so.

 

I've had a couple of folks come here with dogs of non-working breeding, and I firmly believe (and have stated as much) that many folks who start out trialing are coming from other venues with dogs bred for those other venues or bred for nothing in particular, though they may have some decent working dogs in their pedigrees. In all cases we had discussions about the futures of these dogs. Most of these dogs could certainly have done a creditable job around a novice-novice course. In all cases, it was my estimation that none of those same dogs were likely to make it out of novice-novice, though perhaps one might have gotten to P/N (east coast). Again, these are dogs I wouldn't encourage people to breed from or buy pups from.

 

As I've noted before, I set sheep for trials fairly often. I see a lot of novice dogs. Some truly are hampered by their handlers and do appear to have good instincts and natural talent. But *many* more are dogs that in my opinion don't have what it takes to get *out of* novice. I wouldn't recommend breeding these dogs or buying their offspring.

 

As I noted before, I think people would be better buying pups from non-big-hat open handlers--who at least should understand what that sort of work required of a dog at that level and by virtue of the fact that they're running in open probably have been working dogs long enough to have absorbed some ideas about suitable breeding practices--than from novice handlers, period. (And yes, there are open handlers whose dogs I wouldn't touch with a 10-foot pole, but in general, if their dogs are running in open, they are levels above the N/N dog in talent or skill, or perhaps handling.)

 

J.

[juliepoudrier]

Question for those more experienced: If there were more novice or non-working homes seeking puppies from the big hats, would they breed more often?

I don't know. One thing to consider, mainly for owners of good working bitches, is that breeding that bitch takes it away from work for a certain period of time, so I can't imagine someone who wants to work and trial their good bitch breeding it too terribly often for that reason alone, not to mention the health risks of pregnancy. This isn't a real issue for folks who are breeding good stud dogs.

 

Then again, if there were a greater demand, probably some folks would breed more often. I think this is one of those "it depends" questions.

 

J.

[stockdogranch]

I have to agree with Laura and Denise. Out here I see a lot of Novice dogs who come from various kinds of breedings--a fair number of them from SPORT breeders, others from some random "rancher" (whatever that means in SoCal), and others from some BYB. Not the gene pool I would want a pup from; not the gene pool I think we (the general "we" who are trying to keep the working bred border collie bred to the highest standards of work) want to encourage to continue breeding...Donald, you mention outrun problems, driving issues, etc., and I agree that those are things that can be taught/trained for the most part, but the one characteristic that simply CANNOT be taught is the dog's ability to read and feel stock, and its ability to deal properly with the pressure that any given group or species of stock is dolling out on any given day. That simply MUST be inherent. I can train a dog to do a proper outrun for the most part, and to drive, and to take flanks; in other words, I can direct the dog and place it in relation to the stock, but if the dog can't handle the pressure of the stock in close quarters with the quiet, calm confidence that is required, say, at the pen (we're talking range ewes here, or better yet, cattle), no amount of training can put that quality in the dog. Yes, you can help it, over time, to some degree, but why would I want to do that with a dog (i.e., struggle along, hoping that its ability to handle the pressure from the stock will somehow, someday get better), when the dog who has that built in is available from the *right kind of breeding*?

 

Another "purist,"

A

[Debbie Meier]

Everyone has a little different view, I personally appreciate Donald's suggestion due to it pointing out something to me that I had not considered nor thought of. If a person wants to purchase a pet or sport dog why not purchase from a novice that has a dog that can be "successful" on the novice course. IMO, successful is key, not just anyone that pays the entry fee and enters. In all reality if a good job of selection and setting traits was done leading up to that Novice's dog one mismatched cross, while maintaining a working intention, should still produce acceptable working dogs, maybe not top notch open trial dogs, but acceptable for many other applications.

 

On another level, I guess a person could also consider it as proving a line, basically how strong is your line if you have to breed specifically within the breed to insure work? Specificly meaning more exclusive to a particular style or line within the border collie breed. Thinking about what another handler said to me last weekend, what he likes about the stud dog that he is using is that he can cross him on any female and know that he will get a usable working dog. Not everyone can say that and some honestly will tell you they don't. Which makes me understand now, why another breeder I know sold off one of his stud dog even though the dog could run top notch in open, he was not reliably producing working prospects. To some breeders the ability of the individual as a worker is not good enough, the dog also has to prove that he can reliably or at a high rate produce workers.

 

 

Just pondering some thoughts.

 

Deb

[Eileen Stein]

Question for those more experienced: If there were more novice or non-working homes seeking puppies from the big hats, would they breed more often?

 

IMO some would not, but most would.

[Mark Billadeau]

Thanx! Its 4.5 hrs away..... When i first was looking, everyone suggested herding trials. I looked them up on the website and mapquested ALL of them in the general tri state area even to virginia/MD. Last year there was one about 3 hrs away, but it was on the weekend BEFORE i started looking- haha!

Not knowing where in NWPA it is difficult for me to know what will be close for you; however, on the internet one can find listings of "sheepdog trials". On the NEBCA list is Borders on Paradise and the following trial which google says is 3hrs from Erie:

 

Sand Creek Farm SDT

May 1-2

Mendon, NY

[Sue R]

If a person wants to purchase a pet or sport dog why not purchase from a novice that has a dog that can be "successful" on the novice course. IMO, successful is key, not just anyone that pays the entry fee and enters.

Whyever encourage novices who, honestly, have neither experience nor knowledge to really know what they are doing, to breed? To produce pet and sport dogs? How would that really be different in the long run from encouraging just anybody to breed to produce pet and sport dogs.

 

If good, Open handlers that are not Big Hats who now only breed occasionally to produce a pup for themselves and a few other homes, were able to breed somewhat more frequently because they had good working and other homes readily available, wouldn't that help the gene pool stay strong - and provide a reason to breed more than once every few years, and provide quality pups to those that want them? That sure would beat novices producing pups, IMO.

 

In all reality if a good job of selection and setting traits was done leading up to that Novice's dog one mismatched cross, while maintaining a working intention, should still produce acceptable working dogs, maybe not top notch open trial dogs, but acceptable for many other applications.

Why encourage the production of "acceptable" dogs when making sure that there are homes (mostly working but some pet or sport when necessary) for pups/dogs with better-than-average prospects and background will benefit the breed in the long run?

 

I have an "acceptable" dog, a useful dog, but one with definite holes in his breeding that can let us down when we need particular strengths. He was a pretty successful Novice dog because some of his major faults were not easily visible on a Novice field - should I have kept him intact to breed and produce pups for other Novices and pet/sport homes? Sadly, his sire was used to produce a lot of pups, most of which went to pet/sport homes and a few, like mine, to working homes - where the shortcomings of the sire are easily seen in the son. Those pups filled homes, working and non-working, that better-bred pups could have filled - and done a better job in those working homes.

 

On another level, I guess a person could also consider it as proving a line, basically how strong is your line if you have to breed specifically within the breed to insure work? Specificly meaning more exclusive to a particular style or line within the border collie breed. Thinking about what another handler said to me last weekend, what he likes about the stud dog that he is using is that he can cross him on any female and know that he will get a usable working dog. Not everyone can say that and some honestly will tell you they don't. Which makes me understand now, why another breeder I know sold off one of his stud dog even though the dog could run top notch in open, he was not reliably producing working prospects. To some breeders the ability of the individual as a worker is not good enough, the dog also has to prove that he can reliably or at a high rate produce workers.

Just pondering some thoughts.

Deb

Absolutely. Some dogs/bitches really stamp their pups with their own quality and some don't. That is part of the reason that breeding decisions can't just be a matter of who has testicles and who has ovaries. It's an art, not a science.

 

I am a proponent of the thought that a great dog that doesn't pass on great traits, is not really a great dog. Looking at the future, you need dogs and bitches that produce quality as consistently as possible. Usability is, in my mind, an important form of quality because without usability, what good is a dog on the farm or ranch?

[ThunderHill]

I rely on Mr. McCaig to correct me if I'm wrong. But I thought his suggestion about getting pups from breedings by ambitious novice handlers who have invested in well-bred dogs was directed toward frustrated people from outside the grassroots word-of-mouth network, who are trying to find (or simply identify) potentially decent dogs from working backgrounds, to use in non-competitive-sheepdog-trial situations. It wasn't aimed at folks looking for their next contender for the Intergalactic Sheepdog Finals. It seems to me that it's a helpful tip for those who aren't intimately familiar with stock work. And it would seem to be a way of funneling those pups (however well-bred, and yet still unproven) away from the hard-core working dog pool, while still keeping the genetic cocktail of top working dogs stirred.

 

I agree that novices in general shouldn't be pumping out pups from their unproven dogs. (And that goes for any breed or breeding.) But not all novices (and intermediate level handlers) are going to stay novices; and many novices are capable of doing their research, buying good dogs, and getting good advice from those with more experience. Seriously motivated newcomers may start with the so-so dog they already had in their kitchen, but chances are that once they've caught the passion, they'll go out and get the best dogs they can lay hands on. The folks in transition from suburbia to farm(ette) may well be a useful resource and a bridge for those who are looking for a decent dog to do something other than sheepwork. If the theoretical novice breeder and agility person make introductions on the sidelines at a stock dog trial -- at least they've both taken the initial steps to get to the "right" place as far as the dogs are concerned.

 

It's not a guarantee of quality or success; it's just another possible place for a non-stockdog-savvy person to start looking for a pup that's better than *MH's* (etc.) website.

[Shoofly]

It seems to me the greatest asset a dog can have to find success in the novice-novice class is a good down. Those AKC folks coming over to NN and doing so well, it's because their dogs take the down so well (forget about that pesky stock sense that tells the dog the down might not be a good idea). They also do well because they get in a class and stay there FOREVER, taking home ribbon after ribbon after ribbon (which they hang on front of the dog's crate for all to see). You can also factor in that trial hosts are probably trying to provide the easiest, most broke sheep they can for that class, to avoid the humongous wrecks and neck breaking dashes into the fences.

 

Do you really think, considering those things, that novice-novice is really just a junior version of the "real thing"? I don't. Success in novice-novice doesn't predict future success running with "the big dogs", as far as i'm concerned. And the stuff that makes a good NN dog sure isn't what i'd be wanting to breed for, not for myself and not for the good of the breed. I don't think all breeding dogs have to successful Open dogs, but i'd sure want to start looking at least as far up the ladder as Pro-novice or Ranch.

 

That said, i'm even more convinced that offering NN at trials is a bad idea, something i've felt for awhile now.

[Mark Billadeau]

Another way to find breeders of working dogs (if you won't be going to a trial) is to contact authors of books on working border collies or on training working border collies. These books are readily available to the general public at on-line book and pet stores.

[juliepoudrier]

That said, i'm even more convinced that offering NN at trials is a bad idea, something i've felt for awhile now.

I was just thinking while out walking the dogs that it seems many trial hosts in this area feel the same way, since N/N is being offered at fewer and fewer trials.

 

Thunderhill,

I did consider that Donald might be steering folks to any working dog (since presumably they aren't getting the dog for stockwork anyway) as that would be a better choice than sport, mill, or BYB bred dogs, at least from the standpoint of what dogs should be bred. But if the idea behind getting working dogs into the hands of JQ public is to expand the good working gene pool from which we all would be breeding in order to try to create more "red circle" dogs, then I don't know that encouraging novices to breed their dogs is any better than sports or pet people breeding their dogs.

 

I agree that some novices will move on up the ladder with or without their first dogs. But too many novices are like those Robin describes, parked where they can be a big fish in a small pond. And a good number of those are running dogs from crosses that wouldn't be considered good working crosses to begin with, so why promote the idea that they should breed from those dogs?

 

I think what we want to do is get *good working quality* dogs in the hands of sports people. That will create demand for more good working quality dogs, which will presumably increase the numbers of orange and perhaps yellow circle dogs in the gene pool.

 

If you go back and read Denise's target explanation again, I think it will be clearer why some of us think that breeding from dogs who can do consistently well on a novice-novice course isn't going to help the overall genetics of the working border collie, and if all we're doing is encouraging people to buy from folks who don't have a lot of experience, why bother?

 

More to the point, if the average sports person doesn't have the knowledge or background to tell good working dogs from poor, how is that person going to be able to recognize the novice handler who's got it together and is going to go places, has a dog with great potential, and a good mentor to guide him/her vs. the novice handler who just wants to get ribbons with his/her mediocre dog with no intention of ever aspiring to bigger and better things? At least if we tell them to seek out an open handler, we know the dog must be capable of working to that level, and while the dog still may not be all that at least it's light years ahead of the perpetual N/N dog.

 

J.

[Debbie Meier]

I've heard more then one breeder encourage a novice that purchased a dog from them to breed it, it's probably different in different areas of the country, probably would not want to see it an area where there is not alot of livestock industry. It can be a very valuable learning tool for both the novice (in the case that the breeding does not work) and for the original breeder (in the case that the novice struck gold or even a glimmer of gold with a mating that the original breeder would never have considered)

 

I think it all depends on how big of a picture you are looking at, and remember this it does not have to be about promoting the breeding of novice level dogs, it's about suggesting to the sport/pet community that it is ok to consider a working line breeding that was matched together by a novice. Now if the person looking for the pup was wanting to trial or use the dog for work that's totally different, I'd be steering them to a waiting list of a breeder that has established that they can produce a dog that can accomplish the work desired.

 

I've spoken to quite a few breeders that are concerned that they have bred there way into a box and are watching what the novices come up with when mating dogs that were purchased from them, especially when taken into another area where they are exposed to different lines. In some cases a novice will make a cross that a more expirenced breeder would never do feeling that they would not want to deal with the result if it did not work, but that does not mean that it would not have worked. Basically watching in hopes of learning something that they can use.

 

It does lead to another question and an entirely different topic, can you err on the side of caution breeding wise by sticking with what you know and understand and actually cause harm in the long run over many generations? I have heard talk of breeders that once had good dogs but they stuck to close to their line and are now breeding down instead of up.

 

In regard to successful Novice, I'm personally not thinking of the hail mary hope the sheep get to you so you can lead them through the course while yelling lie down with your stock stick waiving. I'm thinking of nice reasonable correct work on a novice level course that would warrent a high score from the judge. I guess look at the score not the placing and personally I like to see judges that score the novice just as tough as the other classes. When someone boosts about their win or being happy with their performance I always ask in my mind, how many points possible and how many did they keep. I really get cynical when someone boosts about a win with a low score but then the next day ends up in the middle of the pack or lower with the same score. But, that just me and with time I'll probably get softer.

 

Deb

[Eileen Stein]

On another level, I guess a person could also consider it as proving a line, basically how strong is your line if you have to breed specifically within the breed to insure work? Specificly meaning more exclusive to a particular style or line within the border collie breed. Thinking about what another handler said to me last weekend, what he likes about the stud dog that he is using is that he can cross him on any female and know that he will get a usable working dog. Not everyone can say that and some honestly will tell you they don't. Which makes me understand now, why another breeder I know sold off one of his stud dog even though the dog could run top notch in open, he was not reliably producing working prospects. To some breeders the ability of the individual as a worker is not good enough, the dog also has to prove that he can reliably or at a high rate produce workers.

 

The working breeder would assess his stud dog by what it produced -- the first generation. IOW, the generation that the novice/novice handler's dog is a part of. The generation the novice/novice handler produces contains only 1/4 the genes of the original stud dog, and with each generation that percentage diminishes -- 1/8 in the next generation, 1/16 in the next generation. Do you really know anyone who would sell off a stud dog because that dog's grandchildren -- 3/4 of whose genes come from other sources -- were not reliable working prospects? I hope not. So what worth does the novice/novice handler's pups -- which will likely never be worked anyway if they go to sport or pet homes -- have in proving that stud's quality? To use that as a justification for breeding that novice/novice dog is specious, IMO.

 

Because genes recombine at every generation, selective breeding pressure needs to be applied at every generation to keep good working quality in the breed.

 

I've spoken to quite a few breeders that are concerned that they have bred there way into a box and are watching what the novices come up with when mating dogs that were purchased from them, especially when taken into another area where they are exposed to different lines. . . . Basically watching in hopes of learning something that they can use.

 

It does lead to another question and an entirely different topic, can you err on the side of caution breeding wise by sticking with what you know and understand and actually cause harm in the long run over many generations? I have heard talk of breeders that once had good dogs but they stuck to close to their line and are now breeding down instead of up.

 

The good breeders I am thinking of certainly don't just breed the same dogs and their get over and over again. They buy in new dogs and breed to others' dogs that they judge would complement the dogs of their breeding. Participating in Open trials gives them an enhanced opportunity to see and judge these other dogs. They certainly have no need to hope that some novice who's bought one of their dogs will strike on a lucky breeding combination and save them from a box they've bred themselves into.

[Lana]

Because genes recombine at every generation, selective breeding pressure needs to be applied at every generation to keep good working quality in the breed.

The good breeders I am thinking of certainly don't just breed the same dogs and their get over and over again. They buy in new dogs and breed to others' dogs that they judge would complement the dogs of their breeding. Participating in Open trials gives them an enhanced opportunity to see and judge these other dogs. They certainly have no need to hope that some novice who's bought one of their dogs will strike on a lucky breeding combination and save them from a box they've bred themselves into.

 

Well said Ellen. Wow this topic has become surreal.

 

Lana

[Debbie Meier]

Eileen, I said this:

 

Which makes me understand now, why another breeder I know sold off one of his stud dog even though the dog could run top notch in open, he was not reliably producing working prospects. To some breeders the ability of the individual as a worker is not good enough, the dog also has to prove that he can reliably or at a high rate produce workers.

 

Nothing to do with grandpups and novice breeders.

 

The good breeders I am thinking of certainly don't just breed the same dogs and their get over and over again

 

I never said that the ones that I know of do either. They are bringing outside dogs in, but somewhere some how the outside crosses are not maintaining or improving to the degree they are expecting. In some cases it could be that the breeder has raised their standards too, what was acceptable 2 generations ago is no longer the case. It also could be that they didn't select for what they thought they did in an earlier generation.

 

They certainly have no need to hope that some novice who's bought one of their dogs will strike on a lucky breeding combination and save them from a box they've bred themselves into.

 

"hope....that the novice will save them from the box" are your words not mine, I said "watching in hopes of learning something that they can use". I often remind myself of the advice that one of my trainers gave me. Never discredit the ideas of a beginner, novice or someone from outside the industry, they may have an idea that actually works and they could teach you something. Could be easier for a person to think outside the box when their ideas are not so slanted by the environment as opposed to the person that is surrounded by it.

 

Why you would assume that every novice produced pup would end up in a sport home is beyond me, there are things to be learned all around us, we just have to be willing to look. Let's see, breeder X sells female dog to novice handler, novice handler breeds dog to breeder A's male dog that breeder X never considered breeding to. The resulting pups end up being as good or better then the novice handlers original dog and go all the way to Open. You don't think that breeder X could learn anything from the grandpups of his dogs? Ok...

 

 

I'm not going to argue with you about the breeders that you know and the breeders that I know, we know different people and are in different parts of the country. It's the same old arguement, people do things differently and have different perspectives based on their direct expirences. If you don't want to send sport/pet people to novices that's fine. But, I'd rather send them there then to tell them to buy a dog from farmer John down the road that is proud of his working border collies based soley on their ability to hold a gate....still trying to figure out how good they could be when they turned tail and hid from the billy goat I was leading by the horns...but that's neither here nor there.

[abcollie]

Well said Ellen. Wow this topic has become surreal.

 

Lana

 

"AMEN" :@)

 

How can you breed for something ... if you don't KNOW what that "something" is. How can I try to breed up if I've never trained my dog "far enough up" to know what I need to improve on?

 

I had a dog one time that I thought was one of the best dogs I ever started. He had everything I wanted ... power, thought, feel, listening ability, etc. I thought he would be my next open dog until I tried stretching out his outrun to beyond 300 yards. He couldn't do it ... I tried everything and then some. I ran up the field (I was MUCH younger then :@), I stopped and re-directed, I worked on it for a year. He did well in smaller Open trials that were under 300 yards but he didn't have the scope for a top Open dog "in my book". I never bred him and I sold him to a PN home (where he did GREAT).

 

The STANDARD for a Border Collie is working ability ... and breeding for ANYTHING else ... well, you may be breeding but your NOT breeding Border Collies.