Borderlines

[Gloria Atwater]

I fear you're right, Pearse. I look at the Australian Shepherd as a prime example of a good dog all but shorn of its original purpose. The AKC only recognized the breed in 1991, so I'm not sure if the Aussie's decline started before then. But a little Google-searching suggests that ASCA wasn't very happy about the AKC acceptance, either, for the very reasons we fear AKC meddling in the border collie.

 

As it is, the tough little "blue dog" that once populated the American ranch-scape, and was still with us in the 1970's, is now getting harder and harder to find. It really hasn't taken very long for a useful working dog to change drastically in quality and to diverge into distinctly separate lines, working and show. Sadly, the show Aussie dominates.

 

Thus I think it would be entirely possible for the working border collie to pull the same 30-year disappearing act as the Aussie, if the BC's champions ever weaken or lose focus. I don't know what the answers are ... but I think it's on us to make sure the BC does not follow the Aussie's road.

 

~ Gloria

[Gloria Atwater]

..............Perhaps we haven't spelled it out clearly enough for people exactly why dual-registration is a threat. That might be something to work on in order to build a consensus that the status quo isn't going to work in the long run.

 

 

I think this would be a great place to start. Facts, figures, statistics, history: we need all that, and not just beautifully worded, impassioned rhetoric. Heck, I am nowhere near learned enough to address or speak knowledgeably of the dual-registration question, and its not for lack of trying to scope the facts off the internet or wherever. As a willing foot soldier in the war to preserve working border collies, I would welcome a factual, intellectual address of the question so that I could, in turn, use the knowledge to educate others.

 

It's not enough that we love our breed and determine to fight for its survival. We must also become educated in and conversant regarding the threats against it. I for one would enjoy seeing articles, essays and interviews that would put the facts out there for public consumption. The knowledge may exist, but it's not easy for the layman or newcomer to find.

 

~ Gloria

[rushdoggie]

 

 

 

Not so many decades ago hardly anybody had Border Collies except people who actually used them for what they were bred for.

 

Well, it was obedience not agility, actually.

 

Then somebody thought up Agility. Border Collies were found to be very good at it. Better than SHELTIES! Faster, smarter, handier. There were two kinds of dogs that did/do agility - Border Collies and everything else. More snob appeal. Nyah-nyah, my Border Collie can do a clean round while your GSD is getting warmed up.

 

Sorry, agility folk, I have nothing against you or your sport, but you know it's true. Then somebody thought up flyball. Oh, and disc dogs became Yuppie-chic too.

 

Umm, it kind of sounds like you do have something against sports...Yuppie-chic? Really???

 

How about maybe we just enjoy doing a sport thats a fun game to play with our dogs, and its even more fun to do it with a dog who seems to enjoy it as much as we do?

 

God forbid that some of us simply enjoy having a Border Collie around as a pet too.

 

 

How about we argue the merits of the issue without resorting to insulting generalizations?

[Eileen Stein]

I wasn't "trashing" you or anyone else Eileen.

 

That's what I said. I said I didn't consider that you were trashing me, even though you used somewhat harsh language that I took to be directed at me. I don't think you trashed me, and I don't think I trashed Lisa Pruka. I expressed my opinion about an issue that is important to me.

 

Basically, I'm going to stick up for someone who is a neighbor (relatively speaking), a member of the club I'm the current president of, and a decent person whether I agree with her position or not.

 

Fair enough.

 

Talk by itself rarely convinces anyone, especially anyone who already holds a strong opinion. The best talk can do, if the person is rational and reasonable, is to convince them to take a look at the other side. What they see and experience will either reinforce their preconceived idea, or open their eyes to another way. If their first impression is that they will be shunned or subjected to ridicule for the positions they held in the past, they aren't going to look any further.

 

I don't think anyone who turns away from AKC would ever be shunned or ridiculed for the positions they held in the past. I've never seen this happen, or seen anything to indicate that it could ever happen. It's pretty unthinkable, really. They would be welcomed.

 

Perhaps, but what I was positing was a worst case scenario, and asking people if it came to that could they support it. I figured that's a prudent place to start. Maybe we only lose 10%. If that were the most likely scenario, I'm not sure why we haven't done it already. I'm not sure how one would determine which was most likely or more likely.

 

The sentence I put in boldface is the problem. It's impossible to know what will happen, and any step is scary when you don't know what will happen. There's a tendency just to shut your eyes and cling to what you've got, unfortunately, even if it's gradually eroding away.

 

Any member could "force" a choice. All they'd have to do is propose a ByLaws change and bring it to a vote at a general meeting. It's the convincing enough members whose bread and butter comes from selling dual registered dogs, training AKC dogs, hosting AKC trials, running in AKC trials, that it's in their best interest to support such a motion and to show up and vote on it that's the hard part as you well know from having tried it in the past.

 

By "force a choice," I meant force individuals to choose between the ABCA and the AKC, which is what banning dual registration would do. I wasn't referring to forcing the ABCA to make a choice. As far as changing the policy, there are several possible scenarios. I don't think there are anywhere near enough members whose bread and butter comes from selling dual-registered dogs, etc., to defeat a ban, if it came to a vote of the membership. But there may be enough members worried about the members who sell dual-registered dogs, and what they would do, to defeat a ban. Again, nobody knows. When I say I don't think banning dual registration is feasible now, I'm basing that on my strong sense that the people who've been through this recurrently for more than fifteen years by and large regard the decision as having been made, in the way that putting off a decision eventually becomes a decision in itself. My sense is that they are not up for the turmoil and acrimony that would come with starting it up again.

[geonni banner]

Well, it was obedience not agility, actually.

 

 

 

Umm, it kind of sounds like you do have something against sports...Yuppie-chic? Really???

 

How about maybe we just enjoy doing a sport thats a fun game to play with our dogs, and its even more fun to do it with a dog who seems to enjoy it as much as we do?

 

God forbid that some of us simply enjoy having a Border Collie around as a pet too.

 

 

How about we argue the merits of the issue without resorting to insulting generalizations?

 

Awww, C'mon Rushdoggie...No insult intended. I was attempting to describe the view through the eyes of the "How can we use this breed to our advantage?" AKC. They seem to want to create fads, and/or take a monetary advantage of them - as in: If lots of people are into Agility (and/or Flyball, or Frisbee, or Obedience) we can make a bundle registering puppies of the breed that's best at all these things! So let's recognize this breed and make some ca$h!

 

ETA: The Yuppie-chic reference refers to an attitude prevalent in upper middle-class dog-owning folk who are driven to buy a dog that is likely to be "in the ribbons," even if they aren't likely to move from in front of the TV long enough to compete in those activities with their dogs. The AKC has been capitalizing on that one for decades.

You're out there doing stuff with your dog. You go girl!

 

I have nothing against anyone who does anything fun with/for their dogs. I do question ability in these areas as a choice for breeding Border Collies. As has been pointed out, the things that make the Border Collie a great stock dog are the things that also make it a great dog for many performance activities, so there's no reason to breed for anything else but stock dog ability. And further, breeding for anything else is bound to result in a deterioration of stock working ability. But if you want to take your working-bred Border Collie and do sports with it I say have at it!

 

Do I want to do sports with my dog? Not really, I'm more the "take a long hike through pretty country with the dog" person.

 

But I don't have a problem with other people getting a kick out of doing different stuff with their dogs. Just like I don't have a problem with other people putting ketchup on steak. No fun for me, but have at it if you like it!

[MyTDogs]

Please lets not let this thread deteriorate into the herding vs agility thing again. It is so very important that we all work to keep the dog as we know it around.

 

For the record- before someone else mentions it- AKC doesn't sanction Flyball or Disc dog events.

[Pam Wolf]

Just to add to the split debate. While I foresaw that AKC would keep their doors open to the Border Collie and hoped for the split, I agree with Eileen in that it could have happened then but not now.

 

A definitive split will not necessarily in and of itself preserve the BC as working dogs. Only working them will do that. I do not think Pearse's numbers are that accurate as for AKC registered ABCA dogs. But there are many who produce BC's that are ABCA registered from dogs which have little or less 'instinct' than AKC registered dogs. THIS will affect the validity of ABCA as a working dog registry. After all, a registry's quality is only as good as the dogs/breeders who register with the organization.

 

A definitive split would force the hand of some people to go one route or the other like it did with the conformation Ch thing ( whereby some AKC/BC owners take pride in not finishing the CH so they can maintain dual registration of a almost champion of beauty thus proving you can 'have it all'). Such a split would serve to a small extent (if publicity was done) to educate potential buyers of working dogs that the dog from ABCA lines was a more likely prospect for work.

 

But OTOH, simply education to the public would probably be a better route. I encounter many farmers who simply do NOT know about the problems discussed here. Some buy ABCA registered dogs from poorly bred litters and then consider ALL BC's worthless on stock.

[Sue R]

Wow, Pam, I think you hit on several good points.

 

One is the sad fact that ABCA-registered does not mean well-bred or working-bred. We've seen all too many websites mentioned on other topics that show that anybody with an intact dog and bitch that are ABCA-registered, can produce ABCA-registered pups. There are good breeders, there are responsible breeders, there are those that produce quality litters - but are they a majority of ABCA breeders? I wonder.

 

I, too, have met people that brag on their dual-registered dog's "two legs because I don't want him/her to lose ABCA registration". But it doesn't stop them from showing, wanting to win, and bragging on it.

 

I think education is key - but how to get that education out to potential stockdog owners is a question that I can't answer. This forum and the www.bordercollie.org website are two resources. Information material given out at trials and other spectator activities is another resource.

 

It's a tough slog, and many people may make the same mistake as you refer to in your last paragraph. Or, maybe worse, they'll think maybe they should have gotten an AKC dog instead because "AKC is the gold standard" of dog registrations and must mean quality.

[Sue R]

As for registration numbers, and this is just musing on my part, if ABCA sees 20,000 registered each year, and AKC sees 2,000, what proportion of those AKC registrations are dual-registrations? After all, a number of them must be registrations from AKC parents only. One half? One quarter? More? Less?

 

Perhaps banning dual registration would not have that much of an effect directly on the ABCA, perhaps more of an effect indirectly (pushing a split).

 

Maybe the biggest impact of banning dual registration would be to cause people to make a choice, and not sit on the fence using ABCA dogs to bolster the AKC dog. Yes, I realize that that would not stop people from taking ABCA dogs and bringing them into AKC, but they would no longer maintain ABCA registration.

 

It always rather irks me to see people take ABCA dogs, dual register them, and then run them in AKC venues, bragging on about their "AKC" dogs - when, in reality, they are ABCA dogs running under AKC registration. Perhaps those that are aware of top "AKC dogs" that are really ABCA dogs, might just put two and two together and get it that working ability is not fostered by the show dog climate. That's an educational opportunity.

 

Sorry - too much musing after an interrupted night's sleep.

[mum24dog]

As much as the working dogs are entitled to the name Border Collie, is it worth watching working ability go down the tubes to protect the use of a name? Seems like it's more important to save the usefulness than the moniker. Heigh-ho for the Anglo-American Stock Dog, or whatever name seems good to those of you who have working dogs.

 

Ironic really that the ISDS is the International Sheep Dog Society, not the International Border Collie Society.

We call them collies or sheepdogs mostly over here. Farmers just call them dogs. Doesn't alter what they are.

Border Collie is a term most used by the ignorant or people with a vested interest such as breed showing or international pedigree only competition. In terms of competitive sports, sensible people consider the term to be rather derogatory because of what it says about the owner. I'd be quite happy to say "Here, have the name, but keep it to yourselves."

For competition purposes the rest are called working sheep dogs, which could mean anything - actually bred to work, purely sport bred, a mixture of the two or just don't know.

When we were looking for a rescue collie the RSPCA offered us a dual registered dog, papers and all, but he didn't have what we were looking for as a prospective agility dog. Instead we took a dog of unknown background but obvious farm origin that needed us more because of previous lack of socialisation. The dual registered one went as a family pet. I didn't look into his background so don't know how he came by his paperwork but the mere fact that he had it didn't impress me at all.

I'm guessing that he probably didn't have the makings of a good working dog either since the person who was in charge of rehoming was a sheep farmer herself and always tried to place likely rescues in working homes. But he was an official Border Collie.

[Donald McCaig]

Dear Doggers,

 

My friend Eileen wrote: "I don't think anyone who turns away from AKC would ever be shunned or ridiculed for the positions they held in the past. I've never seen this happen, or seen anything to indicate that it could ever happen. It's pretty unthinkable, really. They would be welcomed."

 

And are welcomed every day. In the east, most novice sheepdoggers come out of the dog fancy, most often agility. Some very fine, respected handlers once showed dogs.

 

Donald McCaig

[PennyT]

Pearse, I guess you were addressing me in part.

 

The BCSA board must know that B course is an inadequate measure of excellence as a titling mechanism because the organization does not award its highest honor to a stockdog without a few USBCHA open points.

 

I devote countless hours every week to helping people with Border collies expand their horizons from arena based venues and B course trials that are geared to AKC novice thus by their rules also limiting the possibilities for their advanced course. I do this at no charge other than occasional labor because both the handlers and the dogs deserve better than they get from a title based system that rewards poor performance more regularly than ours does.

 

Penny

[Eileen Stein]

The BCSA board must know that B course is an inadequate measure of excellence as a titling mechanism because the organization does not award its highest honor to a stockdog without a few USBCHA open points.

 

You may be right that the BCSA requires USBCHA points for one of its titles, as opposed to just recognizing USBCHA trial achievements as one of several ways to satisfy the title requirements. The BCSA inaugurates new titles so frequently I can't keep track. But I think you're wrong about the reason they do this. They do it to recruit HA trial participants, and to promote as much as possible the idea that they are a part of us and we are a part of them, and we are all one big unitary gene pool of Border Collies.

 

This goes back to 2001, when the AKC extended the open studbook for another five years, while expressing disappointment at the small number of registrations that had been garnered by their previous extensions, and charging the BCSA to increase the numbers of dogs registered. (From the AKC BoD minutes for Jan 8-9, 2001: "VOTED . . . to keep the stud book for Border Collies open through January 1, 2006. The Parent Club was to be advised that no further extension would be granted unless its efforts to increase registrations during this five-year period were successful.") In early 2002, the "AKC Registration Increase Committee" of the BCSA sent a memo to the membership proposing several ways of getting USBCHA trialers to register with the AKC, including having "an award system for Highest Scoring AKC-Registered Border Collie in Advanced/Open -- which would include, for example, two highest scores in Course A, B . . . and x number of placements in Open with x number of entrants." They proposed paying a cash award, "something like $1,500 . . . The amount needs to be enough to catch the eye of the traditional BC competitor." Other proposals were to set up a system where "AKC BC clubs would be able to hold USBCHA-sanctioned events either on the same day or days before or after AKC-sanctioned events to encourage participation by traditional triallers" and "Prizes of AKC registration could be given out at USBCHA sanctioned trials."

 

When this became known (the first step they took was to apply for -- under the name "Border Collie Supporters of America" -- and get HA sanction for a trial held in conjunction with their National Specialty), there was a strong backlash from the traditional border collie community, and they backed off. But even though there's no longer any pressure on them from AKC to get more ABCA people to register with them, they still want to get more ABCA people to register with them, and they've never abandoned the intent to co-opt our trials and get them to be seen, insofar as possible, as their trials too. I think that's the motivation behind including USBCHA Open trial accomplishments in their titles. They're doing what they can to blur the distinction between their dogs and our dogs -- which is bad for us and good for them.

[G. Festerling]

Pam Wolf wrote:

But there are many who produce BC's that are ABCA registered from dogs which have little or less 'instinct' than AKC registered dogs. THIS will affect the validity of ABCA as a working dog registry. After all, a registry's quality is only as good as the dogs/breeders who register with the organization.

 

Whenever I read these discussions it is this what always comes to my mind first.

 

There have been so many attempts by different breeds and countries to preserve original breeds and purposes through registries. Not sure that I know too many where it has worked.

 

The SV (German parent club of the German Shepherd Club) requires health clearances , temperament testing (equivalent to a CGC with a traffic portion), an endurance test, a show rating and at least one title for a dog to be allowed to breed. Then they have age requirements for breeding, limitations on how many litters. If you want the cream of the crop, pink papers, your dog also needs a Koerrating (basically an evaluation in front of a special judge). If you just want a Koer, it will be for a limited time. If you want it for the dogs life, you need to go again. And this is only part of it written down very quickly and crudely.

Now with all of this you would assume that we still had ONE German Shepherd. We all know better. So what is the answer? Peoples personalities and mindsets is what will always make the difference. And if someone chooses to abuse a system...they will do it no matter what the letters on the registration papers are!

 

And to come back on what was earlier mentioned as well, I also believe that one of the biggest dangers to the working sheep dog is the times we live in. The change in attitude to any animal is a big problem. Even though getting someone to watch a trial should give most normal folks goose bumps, watching a days work with dogs is what really will make a person appreciate the whole scope of why the passion about the true working sheep dog. And so many people just simply don't have a chance to ever see that.

 

Years ago, I was invited to accompany a friend cowboy for a few days. We took what I was told to be catahoula/cur crosses. Never a dog I would be into owning. But watching them work, not always pretty but darn sure effective, sure gave me a whole different outlook and respect for those dogs and their jobs. These where good dogs with great handlers so that made it even more eye opening. So again, nothing anyone could probably say would make as much of an impression (it anything will) as seeing the "real" thing. JMO of course.

[Eileen Stein]

Pam Wolf wrote:

But there are many who produce BC's that are ABCA registered from dogs which have little or less 'instinct' than AKC registered dogs. THIS will affect the validity of ABCA as a working dog registry. After all, a registry's quality is only as good as the dogs/breeders who register with the organization.

 

Whenever I read these discussions it is this what always comes to my mind first.

 

There have been so many attempts by different breeds and countries to preserve original breeds and purposes through registries. Not sure that I know too many where it has worked.

 

The SV (German parent club of the German Shepherd Club) requires health clearances , temperament testing (equivalent to a CGC with a traffic portion), an endurance test, a show rating and at least one title for a dog to be allowed to breed. Then they have age requirements for breeding, limitations on how many litters. If you want the cream of the crop, pink papers, your dog also needs a Koerrating (basically an evaluation in front of a special judge). If you just want a Koer, it will be for a limited time. If you want it for the dogs life, you need to go again. And this is only part of it written down very quickly and crudely.

Now with all of this you would assume that we still had ONE German Shepherd. We all know better. So what is the answer? Peoples personalities and mindsets is what will always make the difference. And if someone chooses to abuse a system...they will do it no matter what the letters on the registration papers are!

 

I accept that there will always be breeders registering with ABCA who are not producing good working dogs. I think that's unavoidable, and I don't think the kind of strict regulation the SV imposes would lead to good results here, even if Americans would accept it, which they never would.

 

I think the key thing is that working ability is the one and only purpose that the ABCA promotes for breeding border collies, and the one and only standard of excellence that the ABCA recognizes. We support the USBCHA trialing system for proving working excellence, both in word and in dollars, and we do not confer or support awards or recognition for any other type of accomplishment. In every decision we make, we consider what is best for keeping and improving working ability in the breed. There will always be some sludge at the bottom of our gene pool, but I don't think that "affects the validity of ABCA as a working dog registry," so long as we maintain our single standard of excellence. The fact is that to achieve any kind of stature or recognition as a breeder in the ABCA you must be producing good working dogs. That's what distinguishes the ABCA from other registries, and IMO that's what makes it so important for the future of the border collie.

[Debbie Meier]

The fact is that to achieve any kind of stature or recognition as a breeder in the ABCA you must be producing good working dogs.

 

I was thinking about the above yesterday.

 

Do you think that ABCA is doing enough to publicly recognize the good working dog breeders?

 

I'm not aware of which breeders gain recognition other then the breeders of the Open and Nursery Sheep and Cattledogs provided that the breeder is a current member of ABCA at the time the dog wins the finals. Are there other breeder recognition programs offered by ABCA?

 

 

Deb

[Debbie Meier]

My last Quarter Horse was in the AQHA Incentive program, the breeder, the stallion owner and the horse owner all recieved money for each AQHA point earned based on the size of the previous years fund. If memory serves me correctly, foals had to be by a stallion that was entered and paid up in the incentive fund and the foals had to have their fees paid up I think before they were a year old to stay in the program. A decal appeared on my horses papers and who ever her owner is, is eligable for her entire life to earn incentive fund money. It increased the value of the individual horses and it also promoted people to show the horses. It was a great way to get newbee Quarter Horse owners to think about showing the horses.

 

My first incentive fund check is still in the cedar chest, to me worth more then the 1/2 point that I earned and it was a hard earned 1/2 point, I think that check it was about a whole $28.00, regardless of the amount it stood for something special. Kinda like that first belt buckle if you have never won one before.

 

Deb

[PennyT]

You may be right about the motivation behind their highest stockdog recognition award called, get this, SOD-X and meaning Stockdog of Distinction Excellent. The USBCHA point requirement is 15 and not limited to one year as far as the wording I saw suggests, which seems too paltry to be an incentive. For all that, the very notion of including points from the USBCHA caused resentment in BCSA members in the posts I read.

 

BTW, when I said that the earlier board members put herding (the word still rankles) first, I was referring to how they perceived themselves and were perceived by their community, certainly not in reality or they wouldn't have been board members in the first place.

 

Penny

[Sue R]

The historical information that's coming out in this topic is tremendously interesting. Thanks to those who know and who are willing to discuss it.

[MyTDogs]

The historical information that's coming out in this topic is tremendously interesting. Thanks to those who know and who are willing to discuss it.

 

YES!!

 

I suggest we all read Dog Wars since it goes into some of what we need to know. For instance the "swallowing of the Aussie" by the ACK is discussed & quite surprising really. Kind of gives the idea of what a big business it is...hostile takeovers and all.

[Pearse]

Pearse, I guess you were addressing me in part.

 

The BCSA board must know that B course is an inadequate measure of excellence as a titling mechanism because the organization does not award its highest honor to a stockdog without a few USBCHA open points.

 

I wasn't especially addressing you but I think what Lisa was saying in her article was not that the B course was the equal of an ISDS style Open course, but that it is closer to that style of work that the A or C course which tend to be more popular (I don't know that for sure as I have never been to an AKC trial or discussed it much with a lot of AKC herding people but that was my read on what she was saying).

 

The advanced B course has an outrun of between 100 yards and 400 yards, drive, pen, and shed, and 12 minutes allowed (which is overly generous even on an 800 yard course - 400 outrun, 400 drive). My understanding is that most are closer to the min than the max.

 

I understood Lisa to be saying that more emphasis should be put on pushing this closer to USBCHA ProNovice or Open level courses. I think she's right. I don't think that will happen in AKC trialling because I think AKC trialing is about the handlers, not about the dogs, and most of the handlers don't want letters as a score, or don't want to be timing out on the drive.

 

I see that in some people that do come over and run USBCHA style trials and are offended when people aren't impressed that they got around a novice course or placed in a novice trial. It takes a while before they learn that most people expect any working bred dog to be able to get around a novice course and only get excited about exceptional work on bigger course.

 

 

I devote countless hours every week to helping people with Border collies expand their horizons from arena based venues and B course trials that are geared to AKC novice thus by their rules also limiting the possibilities for their advanced course. I do this at no charge other than occasional labor because both the handlers and the dogs deserve better than they get from a title based system that rewards poor performance more regularly than ours does.

 

Penny

 

I completely agree with you on that score. . I think the AKC is doing a disservice to their members who are interested in stock work in catering to the lowest common denominator.

 

I took what Lisa was saying in her article to be along the same lines. I just hope that the ones who are serious about learning stock work, will come out and run at some of our trials, see the greater possibility for growth with their dogs, and stick with it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Pearse]

I was thinking about the above yesterday.

 

Do you think that ABCA is doing enough to publicly recognize the good working dog breeders?

 

I'm not aware of which breeders gain recognition other then the breeders of the Open and Nursery Sheep and Cattledogs provided that the breeder is a current member of ABCA at the time the dog wins the finals. Are there other breeder recognition programs offered by ABCA?

 

 

I think this would be impossible to implement.

 

Define "good working dog breeder". Better still, define how to measure "good working dog". If we could easily do the latter, we could change the way the dogs are registered. It's been discussed to death and no one can come up with an affordable and practical way to do that. There are too many variables, and too many ways in which the dogs are used.

 

Any attempt to produce a list or an award for "good working dog breeder of the year" or some such would create all kinds of mischief. Good working dog breeders will always be recognized. There'll be a line up out the door of top quality hands asking after their dogs.

 

Pearse

 

 

 

[workindogs]

The ABCA does recognize breeders of superior working dogs.....an award is granted to the breeder of National Finals Champion.

[Sue R]

Good working dog breeders will always be recognized. There'll be a line up out the door of top quality hands asking after their dogs.

 

Pearse

And they are, but I think it's largely a word-of-mouth. After all, how often do you see folks who are breeders of really good dogs having to advertise litters anywhere, or finding homes for pups that weren't placed? They may have a breeder's listing or ad in WBC or on their own website, but they sure won't be selling pups on Pupfinder.com, in the AKC or pet magazines, classifieds, etc.

 

Nope, their pups are generally all spoken for before they hit the ground. That's why it's so important for new people to make contacts with people before they start looking for a pup (or started/trained dog). The "old people" know who's good, and are the best to ask about where to go to find good prospective dogs and pups.

 

PS - One of the red flags we all talk about is a website with lots of pups/frequent litters mentioned. I just visited a website where I wondered why no breedings, no future breedings, and no current pups were listed. I assumed they didn't often breed. Not so at all - the "contact me if you're interested in a pup" was a way to get customers without revealing volume breeding. Interesting.

[Donald McCaig]

Dear Sheepdoggers,

 

My friend Eileen writes:

 

 

"I accept that there will always be breeders registering with ABCA who are not producing good working dogs. I think that's unavoidable, and I don't think the kind of strict regulation the SV imposes would lead to good results here, even if Americans would accept it, which they never would.

 

I think the key thing is that working ability is the one and only purpose that the ABCA promotes for breeding border collies, and the one and only standard of excellence that the ABCA recognizes. We support the USBCHA trialing system for proving working excellence, both in word and in dollars, and we do not confer or support awards or recognition for any other type of accomplishment. In every decision we make, we consider what is best for keeping and improving working ability in the breed. There will always be some sludge at the bottom of our gene pool, but I don't think that "affects the validity of ABCA as a working dog registry," so long as we maintain our single standard of excellence. The fact is that to achieve any kind of stature or recognition as a breeder in the ABCA you must be producing good working dogs. That's what distinguishes the ABCA from other registries, and IMO that's what makes it so important for the future of the border collie."

 

I've reprised her post because it's vital. In an earlier post,someone noted that many Border Collie breeders - even those registering with the ABCA are neither testing for working ability nor breeding for it. I think this is true. Some years ago (before agility), the ABCA commissioned a survey of owners. It turned out that most were rural and more used their dogs on cattle than sheep. A substantial minority were pet owners. I'd guess that minority would be a substantial majority today.

 

When I was an ABCA director (after agility, before rally), I visited the registry office and was surprised to find drawer after drawer of registrations by people I'd never heard of. I know, or know of, most open handlers but their files were thin and scattered.

 

Top breeders don't produce the majority of Border Collies but they do produce almost all the admired Border Collies.

 

Take a lesson from our enemies: most people who own AKC registered dogs never show them; I'd venture that most have never been to a dog show though they might have seen one on TV. A relatively small population of people with a common mythos and a deep commitment to a competition have altered the genetics of how many dog breeds? 140 plus?

 

That's why the top trialers and trial dog breeders and ABCA and Meeker and Kingston and The National Finals and Soldier Hollow are important to the Border Collie breed - they have and are defining it.

 

Donald McCaig