Borderlines

[Pearse]

 

 

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

 

Very true Donald, but as you pointed out earlier in that post, the other key factor in that equation are the men and women on farms and ranches who are producing quality dogs. The top breeders who trial may be putting more time into thinking about breeding, and their breeding stock will have a greater influence because of their prominence, but the good breeders who don't trial, the ones who know they need good working dogs and work hard at producing them are equally important.

 

We need to give some thought as to how to support those people too.

 

 

Pearse

[Gloria Atwater]

Very true Donald, but as you pointed out earlier in that post, the other key factor in that equation are the men and women on farms and ranches who are producing quality dogs. The top breeders who trial may be putting more time into thinking about breeding, and their breeding stock will have a greater influence because of their prominence, but the good breeders who don't trial, the ones who know they need good working dogs and work hard at producing them are equally important.

 

We need to give some thought as to how to support those people too.

 

 

Pearse

 

 

That. That right there. Not all good working border collies trial in USBCHA. Many are still out where they came from, working unseen beyond the pavement's end. We can't overlook their importance to the breed. Thank you, Pearse.

 

~ Gloria

[Donald McCaig]

Dear Doggers,

 

I agree with Pearse that one should support stockmen who use these dogs but other than paying for clinics and FFA classses in sheepy areas, I don't know what the ABCA might do.

 

I also think working stockman are the backbone of Border Collie survival. If the Border Collie is replaced on working farms/ranches by other tools (animal or mechanical) its working character will be lost - no matter what the sport trial people do.

 

And, there are plenty of stockmen who have never trialed I would buy a dog from though it might be on hand commands and untrained to shed.

 

Kudos aside: Stockmen don't buy Border Collies because they have any interest in preserving the breed. They buy Border Collies because they believe Border Collies will save time and money and give them better control of their livestock. What defines a breed is what human beings think it is. The Labrador Retriever is a labrador retriever because it looks like one. Ditto for other Dog Fancy breeds. We have a less familiar argument to make: that a Border Collie IS what a Border Collie DOES. When reporters ask me: What does a Border Collie look like?" I reply, "What does a reporter look like?"

 

If most people say: "It's one of those fluffy black and white dogs like at Westminster" or "Its the fast dog that wins all the agility on TV", we will lose control of our breed as surely as the Bearded Collie breeders and I'd argue, the Australian Shepherd breeders, lost control of theirs.

 

Today, the Border Collie is known primarily as a working sheepdog that does real well at other dog sports and is a little too weird to be a good pet.

 

The ABCA, USBCHA and the regional Border Collie orgs have done a good job of promoting that picture with trials and demonstrations. With the exception of the USBCC, Border Collie publicity/education efforts been meager.

 

Everyone who hosts a trial or does a public demonstration strengthens our breed. As does every pet Border Collie owner who explains, patiently, to his/her friends: "A Border Collie isn't what it looks like. It's what it does."

 

Donald McCaig

[Lana]

 

Kudos aside: Stockmen don't buy Border Collies because they have any interest in preserving the breed.

 

Donald McCaig

 

Stockmen don't have any interest in preserving the breed? What is that statement based on?

 

Many of the stock men and women that i know are very interested in preserving the breed, and they do so by breeding their tough useful dogs to other tough useful dogs. Many have strong feelings about the difference in their "ranch dogs" and "those trial dogs" but that does not make them any less interested in preserving the working Border Collie.

 

I do find that bold generalizations on either side about ranch dogs/ranchers and trial dogs/non ranchers is not helpful in the discussion about preserving the working Border Collie.

[DeltaBluez Tess]

Stockmen don't have any interest in preserving the breed?

 

If the above was the case "Stockmen don't have any interest in preserving the breed?"...I wouldn't have my Tess....her lines are from cattle ranches in Albtera....they breed for tough working dog....if the dogs didn't work, they were culled..only the toughest working dogs were breed. Most of my foundation dogs are from cattle ranch working lines.....

[D'Elle]

If the above was the case "Stockmen don't have any interest in preserving the breed?"...I wouldn't have my Tess....her lines are from cattle ranches in Albtera....they breed for tough working dog....if the dogs didn't work, they were culled..only the toughest working dogs were breed. Most of my foundation dogs are from cattle ranch working lines.....

 

Another very informative discussion -- thanks to all from whom I am learning.

 

This most recent aspect of the discussion catches my eye, because I have been thinking about what really constitutes good working lines breeding in border collies. I started a thread not long ago because I was about to buy a puppy, and in that discussion I learned how misguided my choice was. I have been left with the impression that the only way to get a good properly bred border collie is to buy one from someone who trials dogs in open USBCHA trials.

 

Giving it some thought, though, I am wondering if there are not very good working dogs who never make it to USBCHA trials because their people are too busy working to go trialing, or don't have the money to travel to trials, or simply have no interest in competition. Yet they could be very good working dogs who are proving themselves daily in the real world, if not in public trials. And if the people who have them breed those dogs carefully to enhance the working ability in the offspring are they not still preserving the real working border collie? After all, the working stock dog existed and was bred in just this way long before there were stockdog trials at which they can prove themselves publicly.

 

Just wondering.

--D'Elle (still looking for a puppy)

[Sue R]

Yes, but I think you have to still exercise care - many dogs (like my Celt) can do very well at home on our livestock, familiar ground, and routine chores. But oftentimes a dog like him, who can do so well at home, is still not the quality of dog that merits breeding. Just like a dog that is successful on the trial field is still not guaranteed to be a dog worth breeding (it could, for instance, have a problem that means it is not a good candidate for breeding).

 

However, I do believe and agree that there are many good farm and ranch dogs out there, who never see a trial field, whose matings can produce excellent working dogs. It isn't all about trialing, after all, it's about being well capable of doing the work.

[Lana]

D'elle, you can find good ranch dogs out there, but it is no different than getting a pup from a trial person. Not all ranch dogs or trial dogs are created equal. A "ranch dog" that is only used on a handful of broke stock is not what i would look for. A trial dog that has competed in some small arena, or trials on broke stock only, would be about the same category to me.

 

Either way you would want to go see the dogs work. If you are just starting out you might not know what to look for in a dog, so some home work is always in order. This can't be done strictly by using the computer or the phone.

 

I would suggest joining a stockdog club and getting your feet wet volunteering at some dog trials. Ask questions and keep your eyes and ears open, you will find somebody who will help you find a nice pup.

[Gloria Atwater]

If the above was the case "Stockmen don't have any interest in preserving the breed?"...I wouldn't have my Tess....her lines are from cattle ranches in Albtera....they breed for tough working dog....if the dogs didn't work, they were culled..only the toughest working dogs were breed. Most of my foundation dogs are from cattle ranch working lines.....

 

 

I wonder if what might be better said, is that many stockmen aren't thinking in terms of preserving the breed against the AKC or whomever. I've actually wondered how many stockmen might be only peripherally aware of the "dog wars," and instead focus their efforts on simply creating the best working dogs they can.

 

By that I mean, if John Q Public is ignorant of the threat the Dog Fancy presents to working dogs, maybe James Q Rancher isn't really in tune with the politics of it all, either. He just wants to make good dogs, the same way he seeks to improve his herd or flock, or put his mares to the best stud to continue good cow horses. It's not that he doesn't care, he just has other, more immediate concerns that exist within a less global horizon.

 

Again, it may be a matter of education and communication outside the relatively insular world of sheepdog trialing, before *all* proponents of the working border collie are on the same page.

 

Anyhow, just musing out loud. Or ... in type.

Respectfully,

 

Gloria

[abcollie]

I've always wondered why someone would think by working "within" AKC they could help the Border Collie? The Border Collie IS the best working dog ... and the ABCA registry is there to help preserve that "ideal" (NO it's not perfect because nothing ever is .. but the concept is sound). AKC took the BC and tried to build a "program" around the breed. Not to preserve or promote this dogs amazing talents but to give titles, ribbons, accolades to the people that own the dogs ---- SO they could make money.

 

I've never understood that "thought process" if you're just "nice enough" - you can convince them that everything they "believe" in is totally wrong ... and suddenly they will understand and change their entire organization.

 

It's not complicated it's pretty simple ... AKC doesn't CARE about working dogs. Nothing anyone says or does is going to change that (unless it hits them in the pocket book).

[Diana A]

In agility and sport dogs, what I have seen the past few years, and rapidly becoming more common, is that there is a frenzy of breeding the latest hot agility dog to the latest hot agility or flyball lines, Rampage bred to Frenzy and Mayhem and Nutball, and other such breedings of dogs valued for being 'over the top' sport dogs with no regard whatsoever for any type of stock working ability. I have even heard some of these people say they don't want all that 'herdy' behavior for a good sport dog so they intentionally breed away from working dogs. There are usually ABCA dogs to start with, but then within a generation or two it's all AKC only and they don't care about the ABCA registration anymore because puppy buyers looking for an agility or obedience or flyball dog don't care about that. Maybe my little corner of the world is unusual, but that is what I'm seeing with the people I personally know who are breeding border collies for purposes other than working stock - most of these dogs that are being objected to are already voluntarily being separated from ABCA through simple disinterest. I don't see any attempt by the agility folk to hold up ABCA registration or working parents as any kind of draw for puppy buyers. All the hype for a litter focuses on agility accomplishments or what relative did something at world team or nationals competition. I suspect it's much the same in the conformation lines although I have no personal experience there.

 

The damage to the public's perception of a border collie is done whether a dog is ABCA registered or not - when Joe Public sees black and white border collie 'MACH20 Frothing at the Mouth' winning world team agility on TV or doing that cool disc dog demo at the local pet fair, to him that becomes what a border collie is, and he has no idea how that dog is registered. In contrast, the dog quietly working on the ranch 20 miles outside of town with Farmer Smith may never be in the public eye. Showing Joe Public what a real working dog can do may do the breed more good than removing MACH20 Frothing at the Mouth's ABCA registration. Showing Farmer Smith's non-dog-owning sheep ranching neighbor what a good dog can do would do even more good.

 

I started in AKC, first with other breeds (one of which I still own), eventually with my first border collie to do obedience, then later got into agility, and much later learned there was such a thing as working dogs and stockdog trials right in my own area. I started doing USBCHA trials with my third border collie (who was not working bred or ABCA registerd) and soon realized that while he did quite well in AKC, he just didn't have what it took to make it in USBCHA trials beyond the novice level. Later I also got my own sheep and I know the frustration of trying to get something done but not having the right dog to help me do it and having to improvise when the dog just couldn't get it done. I'd heard all the arguments on both sides, but didn't really understand it until I experienced the difference for myself as far as what you really get in a good working bred dog vs one bred for other purposes. My next two border collies after that were strictly working bred and I tried to do my homework as far as asking breeders what were they breeding for and asking about (and seeing for myself when possible) how the parents and other relatives work stock. I have a young dog right now, just getting old enough to get more serious with the training, and it constantly amazes me how much is already there in her head, passed down from generations of good breeding for working ability, compared to how much effort it took to 'teach' the same skills to some of my previous dogs. Once you have experienced that, there is no going back, and the offspring of Frenzy and Screecher the agility stars no longer hold any appeal.

 

Diana

[abcollie]

I have a young dog right now, just getting old enough to get more serious with the training, and it constantly amazes me how much is already there in her head, passed down from generations of good breeding for working ability, compared to how much effort it took to 'teach' the same skills to some of my previous dogs. Once you have experienced that, there is no going back, and the offspring of Frenzy and Screecher the agility stars no longer hold any appeal.

 

Diana

 

So HOW do we get other people where you are now? Is it only because you were working livestock or would have "understood" the difference without the work?

[geonni banner]

I wonder if what might be better said, is that many stockmen aren't thinking in terms of preserving the breed against the AKC or whomever. I've actually wondered how many stockmen might be only peripherally aware of the "dog wars," and instead focus their efforts on simply creating the best working dogs they can.

 

By that I mean, if John Q Public is ignorant of the threat the Dog Fancy presents to working dogs, maybe James Q Rancher isn't really in tune with the politics of it all, either. He just wants to make good dogs, the same way he seeks to improve his herd or flock, or put his mares to the best stud to continue good cow horses. It's not that he doesn't care, he just has other, more immediate concerns that exist within a less global horizon.

 

Again, it may be a matter of education and communication outside the relatively insular world of sheepdog trialing, before *all* proponents of the working border collie are on the same page.

 

Anyhow, just musing out loud. Or ... in type.

Respectfully,

 

Gloria

I agree. There were only stockmen creating and preserving the traits of the working Border Collie before the was a "Dog Wars." Of course they will have good dogs. Their livelihood depends upon it.

What if they all got a copy of "The Dog Wars" e-mailed to them? They might find it interesting reading...

[shysheperdess]

My story is very similar which is why I still feel conflicted on the anti-AKC position....

 

I started out in AKC obedience, rescued my first dog and ILP'd him....got deep into obedience and agility. This dog was a herding breed and I saw a flyer for Herding Instinct tests being done...thought it might be fun....took the test, dog had interest..started lessons with an "all-breed" herding instructor....decided on a pup, saw how awesome border collies seemed to be at everything, plus I was a SUPER active owner and wanted a dog I could go hiking/camping/play fetch..whatever...got my bc pup, started all his foundation training in obedience/agility...then he turned onto stock and I got more involved in herding....slowly the obedience and agility weaned out....started doing AKC herding trials...NEVER heard of USBCHA trials, was OBLIVIOUS to "dog wars"...all of it...

 

At an AKC herding trial there was a woman there competing with her dogs that trialed USBCHA...her dogs were amazing...got to talking to her...she opened my eyes to the bc as a working stockdog and introduced me to USBCHA trials....started working even harder to become a better trainer/handler...bought my next bc pup, trained him up and currently run in PN..hoping to move up to open this spring.....

 

If it weren't for that knowledgable handler at that AKC trial I never would have been exposed to it all...for the general public or novice handlers...OR oblivious obedience/agility people that info is just not readily available unless you are fortunate to be educated on it from your breeder....like it or not the majority of dog newbies, essentially the people who will shape the breed in the future...are associated with some kind of kennel club through there local obedience classes or what not...

 

I have done my part to do what I can from people I now meet who have questions about the breed....but it is sad when I visit or help out at an odd AKC competiton event here or there and you just don't see really any really nice working dogs anymore...and that's what the general public sees..

[Ooky]

Those are good points, Diana!

 

But I have a question regarding not allowing dual reg and how it could affect the scenario you describe, where ABCA bred pups are within a few generations AKC and no one in the agility circles care if they retain ABCA reg or not:

 

Is there any way this might make at least some ABCA breeders more leery of selling to AKC sport folk, as they would know that the pups would likely be deregistered? And therefore all future progeny not kept within the ABCA registry?

 

I am not even a novice so I wish to defer to those who know so much more than I do (which is basically everyone here). But every time these conversations come up, it seems to me that many of the arguments in favor of not changing the allowed dual reg bring up how disallowing dual reg will not and cannot fix the problem in and of itself, which I can absolutely see. But at the same time, it also seems to me that ANYTHING that can be done concretely to encourage separation between the two registries and breeders/owners/dogs in each could only help the issue. ?

[Pam Wolf]

Ooky, not likely since the sport dogs bring much higher prices overall than working pups. People will breed to sport dogs and possibly even require a higher stud fee. Money is good incentive for most people.

 

I do not see it as a problem selling to sport homes (NB papers anyone?) but it is breeding dogs of unknown working ability that is the issue. Hence IMO breeding to sport dogs is not desirable but selling to sport homes might be(NB papers for one). Breeding dogs for sports is NOT breeding Border Collies. If the selection for the pups is anything other than improving the working dogs/lines then I would argue it is not breeding for Border Collies.

[Ooky]

Thank you Pam, excellent point.

 

And to be clear, I was not suggesting selling to sport folk was bad at all, merely trying to think if it would reduce the sale of ABCA-bred dogs to be used as breeding stock for sport breeders that dual register. Which, yes, NB clause is possibly a better way.

[jdarling]

Just out of curiosity, what is the procedure for having the by-laws changed? How does that happen? Does a board member have to propose it at a meeting, have it seconded/accepted/whatever at a Board meeting, then an "official" ballot is sent to the membership? Or would it just be voted on solely by the BOD? In this case, specifically wondering about the dual registration issue. Shouldn't the BOD find out whether there really is a membership majority who wish to change a rule (or changing the registration requirements in some way, ie, a tiered system)?

 

(This is something someone asked me so I am posting it here because I don't have the answers. The person is a member of the boards, though, and will see the response.)

[Eileen Stein]

I have even heard some of these people say they don't want all that 'herdy' behavior for a good sport dog so they intentionally breed away from working dogs. There are usually ABCA dogs to start with, but then within a generation or two it's all AKC only and they don't care about the ABCA registration anymore because puppy buyers looking for an agility or obedience or flyball dog don't care about that. Maybe my little corner of the world is unusual, but that is what I'm seeing with the people I personally know who are breeding border collies for purposes other than working stock - most of these dogs that are being objected to are already voluntarily being separated from ABCA through simple disinterest. I don't see any attempt by the agility folk to hold up ABCA registration or working parents as any kind of draw for puppy buyers. . . .

 

The damage to the public's perception of a border collie is done whether a dog is ABCA registered or not - when Joe Public sees black and white border collie 'MACH20 Frothing at the Mouth' winning world team agility on TV or doing that cool disc dog demo at the local pet fair, to him that becomes what a border collie is, and he has no idea how that dog is registered.

 

Of course I don't like it that dogs bred to be crazed sports dogs or conformation dogs are held up to the public as real border collies. That's a very bad thing, without a doubt, but it's something that we have absolutely no control over. If they are outside of the ABCA, either voluntarily or involuntarily, I don't regard them as being nearly as much of a threat as the dogs who are dual registered. Why? Because they are a separate population (even though, unfortunately, the name's the same). They are not being bred back to working dogs to maintain the claim that they ARE working dogs. It may be a tremendous uphill fight to educate the public and livestock producers that there is a difference between those "Border Collies" and the traditional border collie, bred for work. But it's not an impossible task. OTOH, if there is no clear line of demarcation between the traditional border collie and the KC Border Collie -- nothing to distinguish "those dogs" as separate from "these dogs" -- then it really is an impossible task. I see much more to fear from the dual registered, mish-mash dogs than the ones that have gone their separate way. So I wish I were seeing what you're seeing. But I'm only seeing that at the far extreme of single-focus agility. What I'm seeing much more of is the versatility ideal, which advocates breeding for "the dog who can do it all," and calling it a real working ABCA-registered border collie, with titles. A whole lot more people are in love with the sentimental mythology of the brilliant herding dog, and won't let it go, and want to say they have one, even while they're breeding for everything else and nothing at all. That's why we see so many breeders' websites bragging that they register ABCA and AKC.

 

Showing Joe Public what a real working dog can do may do the breed more good than removing MACH20 Frothing at the Mouth's ABCA registration. Showing Farmer Smith's non-dog-owning sheep ranching neighbor what a good dog can do would do even more good.

 

I think all three are very important. Therefore, I'd love to believe that all the sports dogs are going to be taken out of the ABCA by owners who will never look back, never want to breed back, never want to breed to anything but another AKC agility dog. Maybe I'll spend the next 24 hours or so trying to make myself believe that. Sure would be nice.

[Pearse]

Just out of curiosity, what is the procedure for having the by-laws changed? How does that happen?

 

From the ABCA ByLaws (on the ABCA website)

 

Article XII

Amendments

Only the membership shall have power to make, alter, amend and repeal the bylaws of the Corporation by affirmative vote of a majority, provided, however, that the action is proposed at a regular meeting, except as otherwise provided by law. All bylaws made by the Board of Directors may be altered, amended or repealed by the members.

 

[Eileen Stein]

If it weren't for that knowledgable handler at that AKC trial I never would have been exposed to it all...for the general public or novice handlers...OR oblivious obedience/agility people that info is just not readily available unless you are fortunate to be educated on it from your breeder.

 

I understand your feeling that way, since that's the way you did happen to become exposed to it all, but there are uncountable numbers of people who have become exposed to it in other ways. I hear from them all the time. I talked to quite a few at the finals just a few months ago. There are many of them on these Boards.

 

I know the AKC is its own little world, but it's hard for me to think that someone so involved in AKC herding would not have eventually become aware of the USBCHA and real working dogs, especially when there are BCSA titles that reward USBCHA trial placements. Even though there are definitely AKC people who have come over to USBCHA trialing, either leaving AKC behind or keeping a foot in both camps, I think the idea of registering dogs with the AKC and entering their herding trials in order to recruit new blood cannot be justified. There are much more effective ways to reach and educate people, and I would choose those ways rather than lending legitimacy to the AKC by participating in their events.

[Eileen Stein]

Just out of curiosity, what is the procedure for having the by-laws changed? How does that happen? Does a board member have to propose it at a meeting, have it seconded/accepted/whatever at a Board meeting, then an "official" ballot is sent to the membership? Or would it just be voted on solely by the BOD? In this case, specifically wondering about the dual registration issue.

 

There is no ByLaw that specifies what dogs are eligible for registration and what dogs are not. These are policies that in the past have been set and changed by the Board of Directors.

 

At this point in time, I doubt very much that the Board would consider banning dual registration without some indication of widespread support by the membership for such a course of action. If the Board did vote in a policy of banning dual registration, and that course was contrary to the wishes of a majority of the membership, then presumably in the next elections the members would vote for candidates pledged to change the policy back again.

[Kelliwic Border Collies]

This topic of dual registration has been discussed before, but I some questions based on what's been brought up recently.

 

From the ABCA ByLaws (on the ABCA website)

 

Article XII

Amendments

Only the membership shall have power to make, alter, amend and repeal the bylaws of the Corporation by affirmative vote of a majority, provided, however, that the action is proposed at a regular meeting, except as otherwise provided by law. All bylaws made by the Board of Directors may be altered, amended or repealed by the members.

 

 

(Bold emphasis mine.) What is a "regular" meeting? Is that the annual Membership meeting, a Board meeting, or something else? Who can propose the action; a member, or must it be a Board member?

 

At this point in time, I doubt very much that the Board would consider banning dual registration without some indication of widespread support by the membership for such a course of action.

 

How would the Board know whether there was widespread support from the membership (or not)? Does a poll or a ballot of some sort go out to membership? I am aware of the challenge of "policing" dual registration, as it has been posted before. But if the membership (or majority of) wished to enact the policy and at least try to enforce it, how does the Board become aware of it?

 

Thanks,

[Donald McCaig]

Dear Doggers,

 

Some background might be helpful.

 

The "regular"meeting - the only meeting I have ever heard of - is the membership meeting at the National Finals. It is, like the USBCHA annual meeting, unrepresentative of the entire membership because almost all those who attend are elected directors and/or those running dogs in the Finals who have an interest in sheepdog politics or a concern about a particular issue. Not all at the Finals attend (Though I was at the 2010 Finals I skipped the meetings in favor of dinner with old friends).

 

While USBCHA and ABCA Directors make routine decisions they reserve controversial issues for these meetings. The most I've ever seen present (perhaps 75) was at Oklahoma 1 when Final qualification methods were debated and decided. Usually fewer attend.

 

Some present will be new to sheepdog trialing, most will have known each other for decades. Half a dozen big hats who strongly support or oppose any proposal will, if not in theory in fact. determine its fate.

 

Eileen and I were on a committee to examine dual registration and at the Tennessee Finals annual meeting we proposed that dual registration be banned. Our proposal was soundly defeated.

 

We went back to the drawing board and at Sturgis One proposed that since the ABCA is a working dog registry dual registered dogs that sought and won a conformation championship would be deregistered. This proposal was accepted without demur.

 

Both the USBCHA and ABCA board are unpaid volunteers. All the directors train, trial, travel and compete with their dogs. Most host trials and/or give clinics. They spend a tremendous amount of their time on sheepdogs.

 

Unlike politicans who are paid well to devote their lives to these matters, in our community if an okay/imperfect decision has been reached on a controversial matter, unless there are extraordinary new reasons, our directors are unlikely to revisit said controversy. Hence the unwillingness to revisit the USBCHA qualification by points and dual registrations.

 

Donald McCaig

[mum24dog]

dogs bred to be crazed sports dogs

 

I can't speak for your country but I can't think of any decent breeder of agility dogs here breeding "crazed" dogs. They breed for a temperament that people can live with. "Crazed" is not what you want at all - ours is and we wish he weren't.

The "crazed" dogs you'll see here are most likely off a farm, partly because they aren't bred to be able to cope with the hyperstimulation of the agility environment.

I wouldn't generalise though, as I know some calm farm dogs in agility too.

Please don't take this as a justification for breeding sport dogs, just an attempt to redress what seems to be an often repeated belief.

 

Pam