Borderlines

[Root Beer]

So, would you regard a more difficult title to obtain as more difficult?

 

Actually, for some dog and handler teams a lower level title can be a lot more difficult to obtain than a more difficult one is for another team.

 

Generally speaking, yes, difficulty increases as one goes up the ranks. I also know, though, that there are those who work just as hard to succeed in the lower levels as others work to get to the top. And I know that what they accomplish means a lot to them and that, in many cases (I know not all, but many), those at the top actually don't consider any of that to be meaningless just because they have accomplished something that is more "impressive".

 

I love the I'm-great-you're-great-we're-all-winners attitude.

 

I get that you see what I am saying that way. I am actually saying something quite different. Subjectivity comes into play again.

 

I guess it means that my dog's DQ in the intermediate class of an arena trial on Saturday is just as impressive (to me!) as Patrick Shannahan's Riggs winning the USBCHA National Finals last year! Awesome! I rule!

 

Nice sarcasm. Not impressive, but nice. Nice way to twist the meaning of what I said, too.

 

I don't know Mr. Shannahan, but I would be very surprised if he regards anything that you are doing in the intermediate class as "meaningless" just because he won the National Finals. Note, I am not saying that he does consider what you are doing as "meaningless", in fact I am taking for granted that he would not say that your work in intermediate is "meaningless". Only he could say for sure.

[D Strickland]

I was responding to someone who posted that titles are "ridiculous and meaningless," accepting his premise. My response to you (which you have not replied to) is in post #193.

 

I was the one that said that titles were ridiculous and meaningless. Here is why I said that even though I was playing Devil's Advocate that's one thing I couldn't support.

 

I said that because I started in USBCHA with my dog. We did well and moved up from Novice to Ranch. We were still learning and she was 2 yrs. old. I went over to AKC to see what it was all about and managed to get her Advanced titles ( Herding Excellent A and B course ) on sheep before she turned 3.. and placed 1st in most trials. By AKC standards she was a Top Dog.

 

I then went back to USBCHA trials and got my a** handed to me !!!! LOL .... Which is why I'd rather spend my money on USBCHA trials.... people are more fun and the competition much better.

 

.... as stated earlier I stopped this conversation because I took it too far and it was not my intention to support the AKC ... I was trying to get a discussion going by playing Devil's Advocate..... MY FAULT ...

 

If this helps at all ... I got my better responses on this list than I did on Facebook.

[juliepoudrier]

How about the dicussion stick to titles in stockdog venues? Other venues are completely artificial (in that they don't relate to breeding selection or purpose-related "testing"). Someone who overcomes serious physical or mental obstacles (human or dog) can certainly be proud of whatever titles they earn, but I don't think that's relevant to the main discussion here, which has to do with *working* ability and how that might be maintained and why folks in organizations like the AKC would pay lip service to working ability while not actually *doing* anything about the fact that its herding program does not do anything to encourage the breeding of superior working dogs.

 

As for Dave's comments, I'm as confused as everyone else. Either he's running his dogs in all venues and it's all about fun and everything else be damned or he recognizes that by giving his money to organizations like the AKC, all in the pursuit of fun, he's helping (deliberately or inadvertently) to speed along the downfall of the working border collie, but it's anyone's guess. I also don't get the "I don't do arena trials" comment, since most AKC trials are held in just such venues, and even if they happen to be held in an open field (which I gather is quite rare), the distances involved are still usually the minimums required by AKC, which means the course is still arena-sized.

 

Re: Ranch type courses being a more realistic test of a dog: This is an argument often made by aficianadoes of venues like AHBA and AKC. I am not convinced that the argument has merit. I once took my two open dogs to an AHBA trial and ran them in the Advanced Ranch course (I didn't practice at home ahead of time). My dogs placed 1-2 both days of the trial. For any dog who does regular work around the farm, the ranch course, even with all its disparate elements, was not a great challenge. Even my youngster, who's not quite ready for a USBCHA P/N (East) course could likely make it around most AHBA ranch courses with little difficulty. I remember folks that day encouraging me to enter another AHBA trial so I could get a title (certificate?) on my dogs. I honestly didn't see the point. Not only was the trial not a great challenge, but it also cost more than it does to enter a USBCHA open class. I can see the merit if you have the money to spend and you just want to get mileage on a dog, but aside from that, I don't think such a test gives any great bragging rights. My opinion of course.

 

And WRT the (Dave's) comments about course-trained open dogs, I just find that amusing. I have been trialing for 10 years and have never owned a panel, and just got a pen in the past six months because a student wanted one and so built it and put it on my farm. Oh, and I had another student bring me some cones so I could set up something akin to panels, also in the past year. And despite the fact that I owned no pen or panels, I've managed to be reasonably successful in open and have qualified dogs for the national finals regularly. I would venture to say that there are likely as many reasonably successful trialers like me, who don't even have the elements of a trial course out in their pastures, as there are reasonably successsful trialers who do. (An anecdote: When I ran Lark in P/N at the Bluegrass several years ago, it wasn't until I actually got to the pen that I realized we had never actually put sheep in a pen. But because I had trained my dog for *work* it was possible to pen sheep without having practiced doing so a gazillion times beforehand. Gasp!)

 

J.

[Pam Wolf]

Dave, I look at AKC for non Border Collies pure and simple. Their trials were set up for dogs NOT bred for work for many generations and are designed with that sort of dog in mind. I have titled many dogs in AKC (for their owners) and know that game quite well. I have put over a dozen HX's on various breeds so I for one do not consider an HX as a major accomplishment. I look at anyone who is capable of running in USBCHA and is running a well bred BC in those trials as lacking sportsmanship. Wow, that would be like Michael Jorden playing basketball against me (I am short and cannot play well at all) and bragging to the press that he beat me in a one on one.

 

And if you cannot drive/crossdrive 200yards w/o yelling and cursing your dog then your dog needs to be trained or have it's hearing checked to see if it cannot hear you.

 

I have read all the posts here BTW. But you still come across as an advocate for running BC's in AKC trials. I also see you fishing for ways to get more dogs into the AKC coffers, but then I am paranoid

[Ooky]

I feel what RB and others may be overlooking on the whole titles as meaningless tangent is this: stockwork is a real job that affects other living beings and serves a very real purpose. If you and your dog work very very hard, even overcoming physical or behavioral difficulties to finally be able to earn a title on dog broke sheep on an ACK A course, that may well mean a lot to you. But it doesn't mean your dog can do real work, treats stock with respect, or even that you as a team can accomPlish even simple farm tasks safely and humanely. There is an objective and very important standard wrt stockwork. Hence, titles are not meaningful in that sense. It is just different. People can get hurt, dogs can get hurt, sheep can die if the team is out of their league, no matter what their titles mean to them. Not to be overly dramatic, I'm just saying it's apples and oranges.

[G. Festerling]

To me personally, even the success of a dog (not sure if you can or want to call them titles) in USBCHA venues are not the only meaning full indicator for selecting a breeding.

They are at best a way to start some research and to get a dogs name out there that has proven itself on the trial field. But I still want to know more. How tough is that dog? How hard was he to train? Can he handle a large herd in a real pasture? What are his strong suits etc....

And of course those things have been worked through at the time the dog does well in trial venues. But if I had it my way (which rarely happens) I would like to watch that same dog work in a real herd or be told the truth about that. So that the right match can be made between two dog that are to be bred with working ability in mind.

So to me personally I respect, admire the accomplishments of a dog on the field.

But I don't think that is where it stops. Not when we are talking about BREEDING working dogs.

 

Years ago I leased a mare. I had a breeding to one of the top sires in the sport available to me. When the studs owner cautioned me that in his opinion that cross was not a good one based on his knowledge, he told me a few things, I opted against it. I would have never known just based on the horses performance in the ring. But of course that performance was what did attract me to him in the first place.

[ItsADogsLyfe]

I think one important thing to remember is, not everyone is equal in their ability to work dogs. Some may practice at it for years and never be able to be as successful as someone else just starting out. It is important to have fun I suppose, but when it comes to breeding the dogs that will be (hopefully) carrying on the genes to preserve the good working Border Collie, I think we should leave the decisions for that in the hands of the more talented. Not to say that someone less accomplished shouldn't breed, but should definitely realize their limitations and seek out the experts for advice. I have never bred my Border Collies. I know enough to see some of their limitations and qualities, but am not talented enough to prove that they are breed worthy myself.

[Laura L]

 

Case in point ... A couple years ago I was asked to help a friend of a friend load 50 very angry goats into a trailer. These goats had never seen a dog .. only coyotes ... so I was out-matched with my one dog. I called friends of mine that had two Open trial dogs that had placed in the top third at the big field trials at Knox and MacRae's in Missouri so I called them for help.

 

These two dogs got out looked around and could't understand what to do without drive and cross-drive panels. They were pattern-trained to the course .. the same as many AKC dogs ...

 

Dave,

I don't know who you're talking about, but there is a world of difference between a few sheep being run in a trial and 50 angry goats being loaded on a trailer. Sheep and goats act very differently and even if there had been panels out where you were trying to load it wouldn't have helped. I don't think it's fair to say that the dog was patterned trained a course and that's why they didn't understand what to do. I used to be one of those people who thought that trial dogs couldn't do farm work, but I do think differently now. Most of them can do it just fine and those that need some help just need a little more training so they know what is expected of them.

Laura

[Laurae]

I was only talking about herding titles. What the heck is this entire conversation even about then?

[D Strickland]

 

And if you cannot drive/crossdrive 200yards w/o yelling and cursing your dog then your dog needs to be trained or have it's hearing checked to see if it cannot hear you.

 

I have read all the posts here BTW. But you still come across as an advocate for running BC's in AKC trials. I also see you fishing for ways to get more dogs into the AKC coffers, but then I am paranoid

 

I don't yell and curse at my dog .... where did you come up with that one ???? There is no need to yell if you train and have a good working relationship with your dog. Maybe that's your problem but it's not mine.

 

Pam ... aren't you an AKC herding judge !!!! Talk about the pot calling the kettle black !!!!

[Diana A]

To me personally, even the success of a dog (not sure if you can or want to call them titles) in USBCHA venues are not the only meaning full indicator for selecting a breeding.

They are at best a way to start some research and to get a dogs name out there that has proven itself on the trial field. But I still want to know more. How tough is that dog? How hard was he to train? Can he handle a large herd in a real pasture? What are his strong suits etc....

And of course those things have been worked through at the time the dog does well in trial venues. But if I had it my way (which rarely happens) I would like to watch that same dog work in a real herd or be told the truth about that. So that the right match can be made between two dog that are to be bred with working ability in mind.

So to me personally I respect, admire the accomplishments of a dog on the field.

But I don't think that is where it stops. Not when we are talking about BREEDING working dogs.

 

I always thought that maybe that was the purpose of nursery trials - the dogs were too young to have had a ton of training on them so you were more likely to see the 'real' dog. I'm not sure if more experienced people have found this to be true. I always ask when I buy a dog, what were they like as pups and how were they their first few times on sheep. I know of the two working bred dogs I've trained, there was a huge difference in how easy they were to start and how quickly the initial training went.

 

One thing someone told me once that always stuck in my head - the dogs were meant for real work and every rancher who wants to use them shouldn't have to be a brilliant trainer or doggy psychologist to get good work out of them. So ease of training and maintaining the training is definitely an important consideration.

[geonni banner]

I have had the honor, and I mean honor, to watch a young girl participate in agility over the last few years. I only get to see her once a year but she has been a true inspiration as the very first time I saw her, she wore a body brace that went from hip to shoulder. I am not sure what exactly what this girls issues are but it seems as they will be life long as she still has extreme mobility problems. She was probably 7/8 years old the first time I saw her so now would be in her early teens. Her coordination/mobility are still restricted. Regardless, her determination is fantastic and she keeps at it. Each year she and her dog seem to be another level up the proverbial ladder, obviously gaining titles along the way. These titles may be meaningless to some just for the fact that they are AKC in origin but, I am sure that to this young lady, these meaningless titles mean the world. "Meaningless" is highly subjective.

 

Yeah, OK, let me get my hanky out and crank up the ATT "Reach Out and Touch Someone" music.

 

The little girl is courageous, and determined, and that is very praiseworthy, but what does that have to do with running Barbie Collies in Barbie sheepdog events and winning idiotic Barbie ribbons in them?

 

Basing breeding decisions on titles won by dogs hoiking dog-broke sheep around a big pen makes about as much sense as choosing your next ram because he has a cute marking in the shape of a heart on his forehead. And it is that very concept that should make anyone who gives a rat's patooti about the future of the Border Collie want to stay as far away as possible from the AKC and it's pathetic attempts to display their Herding Dogs "working heritage."

[Liz P]

I always thought that maybe that was the purpose of nursery trials - the dogs were too young to have had a ton of training on them so you were more likely to see the 'real' dog. I'm not sure if more experienced people have found this to be true. I always ask when I buy a dog, what were they like as pups and how were they their first few times on sheep. I know of the two working bred dogs I've trained, there was a huge difference in how easy they were to start and how quickly the initial training went.

 

One thing someone told me once that always stuck in my head - the dogs were meant for real work and every rancher who wants to use them shouldn't have to be a brilliant trainer or doggy psychologist to get good work out of them. So ease of training and maintaining the training is definitely an important consideration.

 

I've come to similar conclusions. You can hide a lot with good training and handling, even in a nursery trial. I want to know what the raw dog was like so I know what genetic potential was already there. Training doesn't get passed down to the pups. Before I decide on a stud I want to hear from the person who put the foundation training on him and find out what he was like.

 

That isn't to say that a farmer doesn't need some basic knowledge about how to train their dog, or that a dog that is pushy and difficult to start doesn't have something to contribute to the gene pool.

 

 

JMHO

[SS Cressa]

Not sure if this would go to a new topic. And seeing how this thread has gone everywhere.

 

Would akc ever be able to redeem themselves? I know not all breeds get "destroyed" by akc.

 

I personally enjoy akc agility. Titles are "meaningless " in the sense it doesn't really show you the type of dog you have. All it show is your journey to get to the point you are at. Cressa is amazing at agility. If you have gone to either akc or usdaa national, most likely you would agree. You don't need to hear her title to see her excel. Was told akc isn't were its competitive you have to go to usdaa where she still placed. This was before she ever earn her mach.

 

Eta: I perfer akc since it waay closer. I like their jumps height requirements . The people are way friendlier then the usdaa trials. And the trials were more structure and orderly.

[geonni banner]

What about starting a USDAA chapter (or whatever it's called) where you are? Is that allowed? Then you could have it at structured and orderly as you see fit. Can't do much about jump heights, I suppose. But still.

[Pam Wolf]

My older dog can execute a 200 yard cross-drive but not without me sweating my butt off !!! LOL

 

 

OK,Dave, Sweating, not swearing (but I would bet that happens too )

 

And I never said I wasn't an AKC judge, I have a lot of friends who trial other breeds and respect me for my stand on the BC NOT being an AKC breed. I have adhered to that all along, before the AKC took in the BC and during the Dog Wars and since. I have said I run other people's dogs in AKC which gives me good insight into the system and it's flaws. I DO NOT register my dogs with AKC and hope that any that run in AKC see the flaws for using that system as a measure of a BC's abilities. As I said(if you had bothered to read) the system was set up for other breeds not recently selected for working ability.

 

And my views are known in AKC circles. But this is about making clear lines. If you had read the whole thread, Lisa was condeming what the minimal standards of the AKC are doing for the AKC BC's. That lead (this thread) to dual registration, something I would like to see an end to for the future of the working dog. Is USBCHA perfect, no, ABCA has it difficulties too, but it is a better road to travel for this breed. Leave the AKC to the 'other' breeds.

[appyridr]

I doubt that Francis even knows as it is not a requirement to disclose the course size when requesting sanctioning.

 

There are states, 2 that come to mind and I suspect there may be more, that have no open field trials, all of the USBCHA sanctioned trials are held in arenas

 

I would suspect that areas that have more arena trials that also have ASCA and AKC trials will support more handlers that are walking on both sides of the fence, or that have chosen to not pick sides and instead just trial their dogs.

 

> So in theory, after a quick read of the 'Trial Approval Form' on the USBCHA website, that anyone, including a AKC/ASCA/AHBA trial organizer could submit and receive approval and sanctioning for a trial with points counting towards Finals. Which could also at the same time, have Kclub sanctioning & be run/judged on their little arena course?

Again, in theory, a Border Collie could likely win the class over all the all-breed dogs? Or that there would be so many Border Collies entered, that the all breed dogs wouldn't stand a chance of winning a ribbon at all. Wouldn't that cause a revolution? lol I am NOT advocating doing this, just an observation & question.

 

> Regarding the duel registry ban; it wouldn't solve the problem. Here in Canada, the CKC, despite all kinds of opposition from CBCA and working BC breeders, is allowing Border Collies to compete in all of their events, including conformation. No registration from them necessary. You just apply and pay their fee. They allow BCs registered with all the usual KCs(NZ, Oz, UK, AKC plus the working registries) & I'm not sure but I think they will also give the equivalent of a PAL.

 

regards Lani

[Debbie Meier]

> So in theory, after a quick read of the 'Trial Approval Form' on the USBCHA website, that anyone, including a AKC/ASCA/AHBA trial organizer could submit and receive approval and sanctioning for a trial with points counting towards Finals. Which could also at the same time, have Kclub sanctioning & be run/judged on their little arena course?

 

Yes and No, if I understand AKC/ASCA and AHBA correctly, which I may not, they would require the dogs to be registered with them or atleast have tracking number making it a limited trial. But a group could have a seperate class that was not affiliated with the other organizations and bound by the other associations entry rules and livestock and judging limitations on the same days, example, run the ASCA/AKC classes and then run a Open & Nursery USBCHA at the end of the day.

[Ooky]

> Regarding the duel registry ban; it wouldn't solve the problem. Here in Canada, the CKC, despite all kinds of opposition from CBCA and working BC breeders, is allowing Border Collies to compete in all of their events, including conformation. No registration from them necessary. You just apply and pay their fee. They allow BCs registered with all the usual KCs(NZ, Oz, UK, AKC plus the working registries) & I'm not sure but I think they will also give the equivalent of a PAL.

There are plenty of ACK-registered bcs, not just dual registered either. And besides,as far as confo goes, they don't want anything to do with any old scraggly working dog ABCA look anyway. They have their own golden-in-a-tux thing going. And of course they would continue to ILP. But finally, just because the ABCA didn't allow dual reg, why would the ACK care? They would probably still keep open stud books just the same as they do now. The difference would be that you could no longer have both, and breeders couldn't claim both. What it would do at a very minimum is that IF you cared at all about having ABCA reg, or if you had any desire for that dog's progeny to ever be ABCA, you wouldn't reg with ACK, because you would then be making a choice you couldn't come back from.

 

I guess the question comes down to who are the people who reg ABCA bred dogs with ack? Why do they not just buy ack bred dogs in the first place? What is it that they really care about? And is it a net good or bad to lose the dogs that are ack reg from ABCA lines for gOod?

 

I guess I keep hearing it won't solve the problem in one fail swoop, and I see that. But would it really accomplish nothing at all? I can't wrap my head around that.

 

Still trying to learn here...

[Laurae]

The difference would be that you could no longer have both, and breeders couldn't claim both. What it would do at a very minimum is that IF you cared at all about having ABCA reg, or if you had any desire for that dog's progeny to ever be ABCA, you wouldn't reg with ACK, because you would then be making a choice you couldn't come back from.

 

I guess the question comes down to who are the people who reg ABCA bred dogs with ack? Why do they not just buy ack bred dogs in the first place? What is it that they really care about? And is it a net good or bad to lose the dogs that are ack reg from ABCA lines for gOod?

 

I guess I keep hearing it won't solve the problem in one fail swoop, and I see that. But would it really accomplish nothing at all? I can't wrap my head around that.

 

Still trying to learn here...

 

I think the main thing it would accomplish is further defining the split between border collies and sport collies. I also believe that unless a more defined split occurs, sport collies will eventually do more harm to the gene pool of the breed as a whole than conformation barbie collies will. If people can no longer claim both registries, people who breed sport dogs from "working lines" will at least have a more difficult time making their claims. I mean, I know they will still be able to breed back their sport collies to working border collies, but their progeny will only be registered with the AKC, and in order to maintain claims of having "working lines," these breeders would have to start over again with another working-bred dog to repeat the process. Over time, I bet it would happen less, and at the very least the general public would be less confused about what a true working-bred border collie actually is.

[Debbie Meier]

How many people got their start or introduction via AKC or ASCA? Would a ban on duel registration also change the attitudes and effectively split the herding community and totally end cross over, do we want that? If it was not for ASCA/AKC/AHBA handlers and judges we would not be running USBCHA today nor would we have border collies let alone ABCA registered border collies. They are the ones that hosted the trials that introduced us to competition which is now taking us toward open field sheepdog trials, atleast me, Wayne is going to stick to cattledog trials.

[G. Festerling]

To Debbie, I am with you, I did not get my intro though ASCA but I just recently put my foot in the pen for the first time judged, at an ASCA trial. Just recently have I been able to take lessons consistently with a good trainer, working towards putting many years of unorganized playing together for the purpose of trialing at a local field trial.

The facility that brings this trainer in and makes her accessible to me is owned and operated by a lady that is heavily involved in ASCA. So I support her local trial while enjoying my dog, dreaming of bigger things to come....some day!

It does not matter to me if we title or place. What does thrill me is if she does as I ask. Didn't always happen to be the case and still isn't!

We did title....but again....never in my wildest dreams would I consider this a "license" to breed.

So for the sake of argument, title all you want and enjoy your dogs, learn, just don't let it fool you to believe or advertise them as something they are not?

This refers only to ASCA. Since my dogs is obviously not an Aussie and not registered with them. She does however have an ASCA tracking number. So I am not including AKC in my statement as none of mine are AKC registered nor am I ever planning to.

[Laurae]

ASCA is not the AKC. Apples and oranges, as far as damage to the breed is concerned. But I wholeheartedly agree that it is the same in that collecting titles should have no bearing on breeding decisions.

[Pearse]

> So in theory, after a quick read of the 'Trial Approval Form' on the USBCHA website, that anyone, including a AKC/ASCA/AHBA trial organizer could submit and receive approval and sanctioning for a trial with points counting towards Finals. Which could also at the same time, have Kclub sanctioning & be run/judged on their little arena course?

 

 

Well, if the trial is USBCHA sanctioned, then entries must be open to anyone who wants to run, so you are correct as long as the AKC trial would let any dog not registered with AKC run in the trial.

 

USBCHA will not sanction a trial that is not open to anyone to enter. For example, that is one reason why Soldier Hollow is not a sanctioned trial. Entry is by invitation only. Same goes for most Double-Lift Finals. Non-sanctionable because you need to qualify to enter.

 

In the past, one probably could have snuck a trial or two past the USBCHA sanctioning by just not advertising it too widely and hoping no one would notice. Now, all trials must be listed on the USBCHA website 30 days before entries open so the chances of getting away with it are less than they used to be.

[G. Festerling]

So, from someone that does a terrible job reading any rules or stuff....

 

Clarify for me, if USBCHA sanctions a trial is has to be USBCHA format? Correct? As in proper outruns, driving requirements etc?