ABC Papers

[Brad]

If working certified dogs are sold to less-then-responsible breeders, then I think the whole purpose behind the stratification could be undermined.

 

J.

 

Which may in fact help propagate what we're trying to avoid. Breeders can now "prove" that their pups are working dogs, because they came from blue paper lines. Even if the blue papers are several generations old. Let's be honest, for every "system" out there, in anything, someone will figure out how to use it to their advantage, to the detriment of the original intent of the system. I see this with people I know that get other breeds, particualry from show lines. My new pup X is the great grandson of " El Grando", the super show dog. And they're honestly impressed and happy about the show pup they bought when in reality, it's just a dog (albeit way over priced). Case in point, a friend recently bought a Golden, and the pup sold on the coat tails of some ancestor that won a ribbon (and the fact that the litter was down the road).

The BC lines "could" fall into that trap, with pups advertised as great working dogs, because the great uncle twice removed had a particular title (in this case, a blue paper dog).

While I may come across as jaded, I do believe that most pretend working lines are sold by "breeders" motivated by quick dollars by breeding their pet dogs, and I'd hate to see us give them additional ammunition. The BC is safer than some breeds simply due to the fact that they don't sell for much money, but historic titles do go a long way selling pups with a higher price tag.

[abcollie]

Which may in fact help propagate what we're trying to avoid. Breeders can now "prove" that their pups are working dogs, because they came from blue paper lines. Even if the blue papers are several generations old. Let's be honest, for every "system" out there, in anything, someone will figure out how to use it to their advantage, to the detriment of the original intent of the system. I see this with people I know that get other breeds, particualry from show lines. My new pup X is the great grandson of " El Grando", the super show dog. And they're honestly impressed and happy about the show pup they bought when in reality, it's just a dog (albeit way over priced). Case in point, a friend recently bought a Golden, and the pup sold on the coat tails of some ancestor that won a ribbon (and the fact that the litter was down the road).

The BC lines "could" fall into that trap, with pups advertised as great working dogs, because the great uncle twice removed had a particular title (in this case, a blue paper dog).

While I may come across as jaded, I do believe that most pretend working lines are sold by "breeders" motivated by quick dollars by breeding their pet dogs, and I'd hate to see us give them additional ammunition. The BC is safer than some breeds simply due to the fact that they don't sell for much money, but historic titles do go a long way selling pups with a higher price tag.

 

I think they are doing it now with ... "out of working lines". I read it all the time ... so don't know if it would help/hurt that issue. Again, usually with the ones bragging about being "dual registered" (because saying they are "just" registered with AKC is NOT seem as a good thing).

[Brad]

Again, usually with the ones bragging about being "dual registered" (because saying they are "just" registered with AKC is NOT seem as a good thing).

 

I guess I don't see this much being in Canada, I don't think I've ever heard of a dual registered CKC/CBCA dog. I did get invited to a CKC agility trial, so I guess they have those here, but I've never seen one. Most of what I see is "fromworking lines", so my concern with a colored paper is that it might help validate that claim for the uninitiated.

[Mark Billadeau]

I think I'm looking at it differently than you are. To me if it was implemented and well known then it would differentiate between working dogs and just dogs --- that the "dual registered" people couldn't brag as much about having a ABCA dog. However, it wouldn't cut back on the "gene pool" that Denise talks about.

 

Does this make sense? What are you seeing that I'm missing?

The system will not impact those breeders who brag about their dogs being from working lines; you know, those breeders whose dogs have good working dogs 2 and 3 generations back. These are the dogs I see that are being incorrectly viewed as "from working lines" because they have working dogs in their pedigrees. I cannot see how a cert system will alter this practice.

 

How many ABCA dogs do not have dogs in their pedigrees (within 2-3 generations) that could have working certs?

[Mark Billadeau]

I guess I don't see this much being in Canada,

Doesn't Canada have a law which only allows 1 registry for each breed?

[Mark Billadeau]

Which is the bigger problem in the perception of "working dog/working line":

dual registration or claiming from working lines due to dogs 2-3 generations back?

 

While I like the working cert in principle, the more I think about it the more I think education of the general public is a better approach. Education on the genetics of working ability and demonstration of what real working dogs are capable of I believe will have a bigger impact on the false perception of the "from working lines" label used by those producing false border collies.

[Brad]

Doesn't Canada have a law which only allows 1 registry for each breed?

Not sure, but that would explain why I haven't seen it

[Sue R]

Not sure, but that would explain why I haven't seen it

In Canada, only one registry can exist for a breed. Fortunately, that's the CBCA and not the CKC.

[stockdogranch]

Ok, let me see if I am understanding how this system works...I breed a litter from both parents with blue papers (I'm assuming "open points" counts for cattle, too, right?). Now, I need to do something for each pup from that litter for the pups to end up with blue papers, too (pass the "test," have someone check out each pup, etc.)? So, while I may sell one or two to "pet" or "sport" homes, or to folks who won't care about paper color, I will keep at least one as a "project pup" to train up to sell as a started dog to a rancher (not counting the one I keep for me). So, I would need to have that project pup "certified" by the powers that be before selling it (because I would, of course, *only* want to sell a "blue papered" working pup). So, in order to get those blue papers, does the dog have to be fully finished in its training, or can it be "just" a started dog (maybe doesn't completely have the drive down, or isn't yet 100% on its flanks, say)? I can certainly imagine a pup who is not yet fully finished in its training, but can surely demonstrate that it has plenty of solid working ability--I'm thinking more of practical, everyday work on farm or ranch, not necessarily perfectly straight precise lines like we would find in trialling. As the breeder, this might be a bit of a hassle, especially if one trains up a number of dogs to sell, and, how much might it cost to get the "certification"? These would certainly be things a person in this kind of scenario would have to consider. It's easy enough to say that, well, the person who buys the dog can "finish up" its papers (go from pink to blue) on their own, once they own the dog (it's starting to sound a bit like "finishing" a championship). But I can see where it would be a major selling point at places like Red Bluff to sell a blue papered pup as opposed to one who just has its pink papers, no?

Just rambling thoughts,

A

[Brad]

Which is the bigger problem in the perception of "working dog/working line":

dual registration or claiming from working lines due to dogs 2-3 generations back?

 

I would guess the latter. Theoretically, you could have a top open dog that the owner wanted to show, and in fact could be a top working dog. This could give rise to dual registration. But basing litters on what 3 generations back earned is selling a pup based solely on the merits of other dogs. Although, I probably don't know enough about dual registered issues to really know.....

[Sue R]

Which is the bigger problem in the perception of "working dog/working line":

dual registration or claiming from working lines due to dogs 2-3 generations back?

The registry doesn't "make the dog" but the progenitors do. Too many people point to dogs generations back *without good breeding in the intervening generations* and call them "working-bred" or "champion bloodlines" or "carries the blood of (insert famous dog here)".

 

The registry chosen is a reflection of the owner/handler/trainer's outlook - irrespective of the dog in question - and that outlook is vitally important as we all agree that with succeeding generations of breeding away from quality working traits, it will result in the loss of working ability.

 

I always gag when I read the classifieds for pets and see the phrase, "champ bloodlines". It just makes curdles my own blood because it is essentially meaningless. Most dogs have *something good* within a few generations - but it takes *a lot of good* consistently to be able to result in pretty consistently good pups/dogs.

[abcollie]

Ok, let me see if I am understanding how this system works...I breed a litter from both parents with blue papers (I'm assuming "open points" counts for cattle, too, right?). Now, I need to do something for each pup from that litter for the pups to end up with blue papers, too (pass the "test," have someone check out each pup, etc.)? So, while I may sell one or two to "pet" or "sport" homes, or to folks who won't care about paper color, I will keep at least one as a "project pup" to train up to sell as a started dog to a rancher (not counting the one I keep for me). So, I would need to have that project pup "certified" by the powers that be before selling it (because I would, of course, *only* want to sell a "blue papered" working pup). So, in order to get those blue papers, does the dog have to be fully finished in its training, or can it be "just" a started dog (maybe doesn't completely have the drive down, or isn't yet 100% on its flanks, say)? I can certainly imagine a pup who is not yet fully finished in its training, but can surely demonstrate that it has plenty of solid working ability--I'm thinking more of practical, everyday work on farm or ranch, not necessarily perfectly straight precise lines like we would find in trialling. As the breeder, this might be a bit of a hassle, especially if one trains up a number of dogs to sell, and, how much might it cost to get the "certification"? These would certainly be things a person in this kind of scenario would have to consider. It's easy enough to say that, well, the person who buys the dog can "finish up" its papers (go from pink to blue) on their own, once they own the dog (it's starting to sound a bit like "finishing" a championship). But I can see where it would be a major selling point at places like Red Bluff to sell a blue papered pup as opposed to one who just has its pink papers, no?

Just rambling thoughts,

A

 

That's why I suggested 3 tiered system ... top working/working/"has papers". You could get working papers without finishing the dog which shows he/she has "at least" worked (instead of from working lines :@)

 

OF COURSE dogs working cattle would count :@)

[abcollie]

How many ABCA dogs do not have dogs in their pedigrees (within 2-3 generations) that could have working certs?

 

I think what I was envisioning was "just papered" dogs don't have the prestige that pink papered ones ... making it HARDER to brag. So, "people" would equate white papers with AKC or dual registered dogs INSTEAD of ABCA.

 

Not sure it would work but seemed better than the nothing that is going on now (and seems to be getting worse).

[Mark Billadeau]

The working certs could allow a clearer distinction between "working bred" and "from working lines".

Unless the buying public is educated about the difference will this distinction help?

[G. Festerling]

Example: German Shepherd Dog

 

In order to be even allowed to breed a dog has to pass either a SchH 1-3 or a IP 1-3 (different levels) which consist of 3 phases (a=tracking, b=obedience,c=protection) with at least a passing score of 80 points in C under a SV judge.

A HGH (german tending title) or equivalent is also allowed. Now keep in mind, to even be able to try for the SchH 1 the dog has to have passed a AD (Endurance test) and a BH (equivalent to the CGC but does include a traffic and temperaments portion). Then dog has to have at least a "G" show rating obtained at a SV breed show. Additional to that, the dog has to pass the german system of hip certification with at very least a "noch zugelassen" (worst hip rating in the system right before displastic) which translates to still allowed and a elbow grade of normal or "fast" (almost) normal or again, noch zugelassen.

Then there are serious age restrictions to ever title. Minimum age for the basic BH is 15 months.

Then you add all the restrictions on breeding age (males have to have completed their second year and females have to be at least a full 20 months at the time of the actual breeding taking place).

Add into this the difference if a dog has a Koerung: A dog can only get pink papers if the parents are koered. No Koerung, white papers only! So the Koerung is not a deal breaker but a add on to breed "better" dogs.

A Körung is an event where breed survey/s are done. In order for a dog to try for a breed survey, it must minimally hold either a SchH 1 or an HGH title. See above for what it takes to get those. When a dog passes a breed survey, which begins with a proscribed protection routine that it must pass first, then the Körmeister (a special certification held by only a few people) will use a specified form to fill out describing the dog. This report is known as a Kör report.

Two classifications may be awarded by the Körmeister when he/she performs this inspection. One is called KKL1 and the other KKL2. This abbreviation stands for Kör Klasse 1 or 2. Dogs awarded KKL1 are "recommended" for breeding, and dogs given the KKL2 designation are "suitable" for breeding. Often the difference between getting a KKL1 vs KKL2 is based on some minor fault, such as in dentition, or structure. Sometimes it is based on some other factor, including conformation that is not quite correct.

 

So then you check the list of disqualifying faults, these dogs are in no way shape, form or function allowed to breed. Here you find things like monochoiden, cryptorchids, teeth faults, coat faults, ear faults, bite (as in over or underbite) faults, bad and weak temperaments and a few more. Obviously dogs that have HD or ED problems. Also, bitches that have been sectioned 3 times are not allowed to breed anymore.

 

 

 

So despite the fact that obviously breed standards are bit different here this was still a dog that was supposed to be a working dog. The focus on having to have a SchH title was to maintain the working ability. So what happened? Humans happened. Look at the GSD of today. There is such an obvious split between the working dogs and the show dogs it it not even funny. They don't even look like the same breed but yet, they are. Bred under the same standard!

Most showline dogs can not work! How is that possible? Because humans run the show. I saw a SchH 3 male, return from Germany that could not even do a 50 foot straight track!!! And this is something I was told when asking how this could be possible, I was told that they will sometimes take a dog that is not a good tracker and put them in kind of of a small furrow as in a field I guess which will make it easier.

Even the working line shepherds are certainly tough to pick a good one from at times.

So despite the fact that I do feel something has to happen, many previous attempts at "guiding" breedings seem to fail simply because the human factor is too big.

I have no solution but just wanted to put this out here for food for thought.

Of course one thing that may or may not work is simply putting info on papers of what the dog has done. Sort of a record of its competing, placings and such. Like an equivalent to a score book that can be attached to a dogs registration. This would at least a allow a person looking to make a choice? But even then, I think education of the purchasing public will always be the key. And even a dog that is nothing but a sure enough hard core, jam up working ranch dog could maybe be evaluated but an official to get an honest evaluation of being a legitimate ranch dog. It would give the breeders/handlers a choice (if it was important to them) to in a sense "certify" their stock?

[abcollie]

The working certs could allow a clearer distinction between "working bred" and "from working lines".

Unless the buying public is educated about the difference will this distinction help?

 

I see what you are saying but I "think" the public goes on the old "Good house keeping seal" thought process. So right now the lines are SO blurred between AKC/ABCA that AKC gets the seal of approval.

 

So, yes we would have to educate JQ public but I think the way it is now ... there is NO WAY to differentiate between the two registries. At least almost ALL the AKC dogs (unless they take the time and effort) would be white papers.

 

I think of it along the lines of what I *see* when I look at USBCHA points ... at least know those dogs are accomplished enough to get points. It's a visual gauge that people seem to need. Not saying it's the best way ... just what it is.

 

I'm opened to ANYTHING to "cut the cord" with AKC!

[Mark Billadeau]

A different name?

[abcollie]

Example: German Shepherd Dog

 

So despite the fact that obviously breed standards are bit different here this was still a dog that was supposed to be a working dog. The focus on having to have a SchH title was to maintain the working ability. So what happened? Humans happened.

 

I totally understand and agree ... *Humans* will manipulate any system set up to get what they want. I don't know how to avoid that part? I know my daughter bought an imported SchH dog just because she couldn't stand anything she saw here :@(

 

I wonder if horse people (reining ... anything that deals with ability NOT conformation) have anything any ideas?

[abcollie]

A different name?

 

 

I suggested that 15 years ago (or however long it's been since AKC came into the picture). Working Border Collie would be fine with me :@)

[Mark Billadeau]

A new name that the ABCA trademarks.

[G. Festerling]

Reining? Did you say reining?

Look at the breeds? Look at the split between the using, performance (heck even there it is a huge split in that small section) and halter horses within the AQHA.

At times I wonder if the show horses are bred like sport dogs. They are faster maturing, less opinionated, physically more adapt at performing that one task.

I remember when I started the old Okie Leos, Grey Badgers, close up Little Peppys, totally different horses. In my nostalgic memory, much sounder, harder headed, opinionated but damn, once you had them, they would never quit.

And that is only a tiny 4 line summary of 20 plus years in horses. So no, it is not all there is to it.

 

The one thing NRHA has done is, being that they are a non breed association, they have a NRHA competition license that is almost like a separate registry that tracks owner, breed, bloodline and money won. But there again, it is not a breed registry.

Die hard reiners just simply won't look at a horse that does not have the modern bloodlines...LOL

Most clubs and registries seem to constantly adjust, add, subtract in order to stay up to speed. But not sure if anyone has found the magic answer yet.

[abcollie]

t.

 

The one thing NRHA has done is, being that they are a non breed association, they have a NRHA competition license that is almost like a separate registry that tracks owner, breed, bloodline and money won. But there again, it is not a breed registry.

 

Maybe that's "the lines" I was thinking ... a registry *within* a registry. Pink/blue/white papers ... all registered with ABCA but a difference within the registry?

 

I know again people can "play" the system ... but the way it's going now ... I'm not sure the TRUE working dogs are going to survive?

[abcollie]

A new name that the ABCA trademarks.

 

Great idea ... any lawyers around :@) that want to take on the *project* :@)

 

Actually, if I recall, the ABCA didn't want to change their name ... they thought AKC should change theirs (which is TRUE but not helpful :@)

[Mark Billadeau]

I'm not sure the TRUE working dogs are going to survive?

Unless you think the "true working dogs" are not represented by those dogs running in the USBCHA trials I see these dogs surviving; as long as the members of the USBCHA continue to set the performance bar high.

 

We also need to stress the importance of genetic diversity in each and every working bred litter to keep our gene pool as large as possible.

[abcollie]

Unless you think the "true working dogs" are not represented by those dogs running in the USBCHA trials I see these dogs surviving; as long as the members of the USBCHA continue to set the performance bar high.

 

What I meant was when I think of the numbers of "sport dogs" being bred and run (I thought I heard at agility nationals there were thousands of dogs?) compared to the USBCHA and guess it worries me.

 

That's why I said that keeping the "white papers' would keep the "gene pool" full ...