Jump to content
BC Boards

How Can I Get My Dog To Look Like This?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Some of you judge these dogs and you are doing it based on their looks 100%. That's AKC all the way :lol: :lol: :lol: . In another topic some of you'd argue: "How can you judge anything about a dog who is running in a circle or standing stock still." Ah! The power of self-rewarding behavior. We want to indulge and indulge again.

 

So have at it :D , at least we are here on the forum you can criticize to you hearts' content to my face :) Here we are:

Floofy:

P18007511.jpg

 

Not floofy:

P1810005.jpg

 

Fluffy:

P1800753.jpg

 

not floofy:

P1800529.jpg

 

Here the dogs aren't floofy, but I am - presenting the Darth Vader outfit for herding:

P1810187.jpg

 

Here, because I got floofy presenting outfits for herding, my dogs demoted me from the position of a shepherd and took over:

daisy.jpg

 

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

Ok, I think you're suffering from an overdose of my weird sense of humor.

maja

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maja,

I like Raider (big surprise). I have to say, though, that the dogs in the show don't look quite so different from our working dogs (compared to the show dogs here). Is there also a working requirement, or only a show requirement? Perhaps the culture in Poland is different enough from the show culture here (egads! People in jeans showing dogs--you'd never see that here!) that extremes of conformation aren't rewarded? The picture Jodi posted could pass for an Australian shepherd as well (if you didn't know it was a border collie).

 

I also noticed that none of the dogs, including Bonnie, appeared to have as much coat or bone as American show dogs. Your point that it would be possible to floof our dogs up is well taken, but most of the working dogs here do not look structurally the same as the show dogs (and I've worked with the latter and saw plenty of them at the place where I first started working dogs).

 

You're also right that if we look at something and dismiss it based on appearance, then we're guilty of a KC mindset, but as someone who has worked with KC dogs I can honestly say that those who are strictly from conformation lines *are* different, and in general you'd never get them out in a field and work them like you do Bonnie. I don't know if that means that whatever requirements the FCI puts on breeding prevents the extremes that result from showing in the US and so also prevents the loss of working ability or if border collies just haven't been shown long enough in your country for breeders to have had a chance to go to those extremes.

 

J.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Julie,

 

I like Raider's temperament.

 

I think in the vid, this is male youth class judging form the date of the vid and the DOB of Raider (the owners are not consistent with the spelling). I think in open or champion class you'd see them more similar. At Cruft's or the US big show you'd have the very top show dogs so the uniformity would be greater I would think. But overall there is some variety and some people try very hard to breed good dogs.

 

For breeding purposes, the PKC only requires 3 shows, although part of the show evaluation is the dog's temperament (as presented in the standard). E.g. a dog too timid to be touched by the judge or aggressive towards the judge should be DQed. The only nod towards the working ability of BCs is that at a much higher level the inter-champion title can be any earned if the dog has the working dog status (the HWT I wrote about elsewhere - the lowest working test in herding career that allows the dog to compete in trials). And dogs that have the working dog status can be shown in working class. Bonnie however, won't be shown in working class because we didn't get the certificate in time, and I hope that this Sunday will be her last show.

 

There are many dogs that are heavy set and they are usually very successful in the ring. E.g. Bonnie's father is a very large dog and very strong boned, in my opinion. However, his fur is shortish, so it is not so prominent (I love this dog, but I don't really like the way he looks :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: )

P16703591.jpg

 

I could have made Bonnie much more floofy, she has a lovely coat with sleek long hairs. A little of "judicious" spray of "Fluffy" conditioner and some styling, and I assure you, she would look to you like a different dog: heavier set, with shorter legs. But I am not going to do it, and I won't glue ears of any of my puppies. But lots of people do it.

 

I think that Poland is not alone in how they breed the dogs. The Czech Republic is actually much better, they have a more useful system of giving a breeding license which bypasses the shows altogether and takes health into account. There are lots of working dogs in Germany, Austria etc. within the KC as well as the ISDS. So I think it is more a European thing - much greater variety in type and purpose. And there is much closer genetic connection between the show dogs and the ISDS working dogs. it is also related to the fact that FCI is fairly big on sports and there are a lot of really athletic, agile, physically superb BCs that appear in the conformation ring.

 

I know that the KC people are different, I was so surprised that with no regulations limiting the breeding of working dogs the AKC herding looks the way it does.

 

But I had seen a very similar discussion on a show dog forum about the "ugly" working bcs. People were competing in searching out the most unusual looking BCs and showing them as "Gee, look at that! is that even a border collie?!" [And in one case, I said, "No that isn't a dog-gone border collie, it's a dog-gone huntaway, for pete's sake just read the dog-gone website! :angry: :angry: ]

 

And then I come here and see topics like this one. And it makes me sad, because you (not you, Julie, but 'you' the board) are shooting yourself in the foot. Once a person is hurt, no reasonable arguments are going to reach them. Somebody (not here) said once "why would anybody want to mix ISDS genes with the FCI mud". As general a statement as you can get.

 

But he was talking about my dog: Bonnie Shepherds Green, FCI.

 

Maja

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maja,

I suspect a lot of the rancor you see here is based in the "dog wars" and AKC's history of taking useful, purpose-bred dogs and turning them into something else and then convincing the public that the only good dogs are those with the AKC stamp of approval. Have you read Donald McCaig's "The Dog Wars"? It boils down to different philosophies about what should define a breed and who gets to make that decision, and the inevitable changes that occur in a breed as a result of that recognition. And as your experience shows, the folks on the other side are just as vehement about what constitutes the breed. Unfortunately, the one thing that gets lost on that side of the aisle, so to speak, is the original purpose of the dog, which is the work.

 

If the only working dogs chosen for breeding were those who most matched what wins in conformation shows here in the US, we would lose a tremendous amount of excellent working genetics. That's the elephant in the room that the AKC and AKC breeders choose to ignore. And it's what sets me against conformation showing. Who should say that my mostly white, smooth-coated, prick-eared dog shouldn't be bred simply because he doesn't match the popular show ring look? Especially given his excellence as a working dog? What about his dam, who was pretty much self-training out of the box and could have been an asset on any farm or ranch with little or no training? And qualified for the National Finals numerous times, including once for the cattle finals. But she's piebald and smooth-coated and prick eared. Why should she be cut out of the breeding pool? That's the crux of the issue I personally have with a conformation mindset--a mindset that would say my excellent working dogs shouldn't be bred because they don't match the trends that define what will win in the conformation ring. I'm guessing that perhaps such a mindset doesn't exist where you live, or at least it's not as prevalent as it is here. Following that mindset is how we lose the working in the working dogs. I have no illusions that I could ever change a conformation person's mind (been there, done that), but I can't really apologize for believing that their philosophy is flawed at best and disastrous for the working ability of a working breed at worst.

 

J.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Julie,

 

I agree with you completely and entirely, and yesterday I felt bad because in trying to make a point, I made the Polish KC look better than it is. There are plenty of people who would say that my dog is very much second rate because all she's gonna get is the minimum show requirement for the license. She’ll be considered having only “bare license” meaning she has no show champion and thus she just barely makes it as a breeding worthy dog in their mind.

 

But the point I was trying to make is that engaging in self-rewarding, gratuitous exchanges about the show dogs (and I am not talking about your posts, Julie)is not going to help communicate the very things you said in your posts. Such exchanges can only hurt someone, and when you’re hurt, you don’t listen to reason. And as you pointed out, convincing people is hard as it is. One does not need to create additional obstacles that don’t add anything to anything.

 

Worse, many of the posts show a lot of ignorance in judging by appearance, something I mentioned elsewhere, thinking you can actually see how much the dog's silhouette is due to its fur, how much to bone structure, and how much to plain fat. Those who have experience in conformation will confirm that most of the time even seeing the dog in real life you can't tell unless you touch the dog (the head of course is another matter). So some of the people here are playing the KC game and losing for obvious reasons. This is my opinion on the topic, and that’s all I wanted to communicate.

 

This Sunday, I hope we will get the last show evaluation (I hope!), and after that we are going to a trial (I just hope we will make it in time) organized by the ISDS bunch. I just hope Bonnie does not flatten her outrun on me.

 

Maja

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maja,

 

Over here, there are people who are involved in conformation, who honestly feel they can build a better working dog from the ground up -- having never worked a dog in their lives -- including their own. They think that if you build the dog's body right, it will work all day long, etc. The truly believe that the "instinct" is just there and will always just be there because they're Border Collies. They don't have a clue about the instinct to chase something that moves, and actual natural working ability. They have not only bred the dogs to a certain physical standard, but have done everything they can to exaggerate that standard because, as everyone knows, if a little is good, a ton of it must be better, right? And now their breed doesn't even look like the breed their intending it to look like. They look like Aussies with tails. And, worse, "work" like them. There's no convincing these people that they don't know what the hell they're doing -- no matter how nicely you say that -- because essentially, that's what it is. Working dogs are not created by breeding for a straight topline and a gentle shoulder layback. The working breeders have a hard enough time breeding full litters of working dogs -- it's simply ridiculous that the show crowd thinks they are not only doing that, but making them pretty in the meantime.

 

So now the little show breeders have their cute little puppies. And their puppies get older, and their hair is all combed and they need their little HT or PT herding title, so they are going to bring their little doggie out for an instinct test. The doggie chases the sheep, eats the little poopies, goes back to chasing the sheep, it's tail as high as it can get, it stops by its owner for a pat on the head before it goes and chases the sheeps again. The owner is amazed, talking to her friend and giggling that she never thought her dog "had it in him." To which I would respond, "Has what in him?" And this would spark a conversation about what the dog is actually doing -- chasing, not working. And they leave in a huff, and weeks later, I will hear from other trainers that the same dog was brought out, with the same result, and eventually, a year or two later, you see that they've finally gotten their little HT or PT titles to add to their collection of letters on the end of the dog's name to justify breeding their "working dog."

 

No one needs a license to breed over here. If there was a requirement for all Border Collies to show some decent level of working ability, the show crowd would be in a world of hurt.

 

Jodi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jodi,

 

Very well put, I've seen myself a lot of what you are describing. I agree with everything you wrote. I never argued with any of these points, and I hope people read your post and think about it and come to conclusions.

 

Maja

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do they get herding titles if the dog simply chases the sheep? I've never bothered to watch AKC events, but I always thought the goal of such a trial was to show that the dog had control over the sheep and could manipulate the direction of the sheep according to the shepherd's cues.

 

I still can't imagine the care involved in a coat like that if you're taking them out in fields. And ticks. Ugh. The thought of combing through that for ticks seems daunting. Luckily for me, the Sierras are not known for being very tick infested. I've only ever pulled one tick off a dog, and it wasn't even my dog.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do they get herding titles if the dog simply chases the sheep? I've never bothered to watch AKC events, but I always thought the goal of such a trial was to show that the dog had control over the sheep and could manipulate the direction of the sheep according to the shepherd's cues.

 

While I have seen dogs "get a (first) leg" on a Herding Tested (HT) title when all I could see was a dog chasing sheep (or even the opposite, barely interested in the sheep even though encouraged), other judges may be more strict about awarding a second leg. I think this is another of those "you don't want to discourage the newbie" situations, and a "pass" on the first leg was not considered as strictly as a "pass" on the second leg. However, the standard of judging can still be very, very lenient.

 

I have also seen what I consider to be extremely lenient "judging" on other, lower-level courses. Remember that the judging system is very different - in a USBCHA/ISDS-style trial, there is a ranking of scores. There is one winner, there are no titles, there is nothing to attach to a dog's name. In AKC, each dog receives a score, which is either qualifying or not qualifying as a leg towards a title, and a dog can accumulate a veritable "alphabet soup" of titles attached to its name.

 

While each leg must be accomplished under different judges and at different events (except HT, which requires different judges but can be the same event), don't you think that the people who are hired to judge are going (in general) to be the people under whom folks want to run their dogs? And that means that they are not going to be the kind of judges that don't award qualifying legs.

 

Judges are hired to judge - which event (in general) do you think will be popular and have its fill of entries? The one where a judge that is generous with qualifying scores or the one with a judge under whom it is harder to get a qualifying score? How about one with easier courses and easier stock, or the one that offers a real challenge, both in course and stock? How about the one held where you can take lessons, on the same stock and the same field with the same obstacles, versus an unfamiliar field and unfamiliar stock that neither you nor your dog know well?

 

Remember that not all AKC-registered dogs are descended from show-line dogs - AKC allows (encourages?) registration of dogs from ABCA, CBCA, and ISDS. There are some very good dogs that are registered with AKC - dogs that have come first-generation from true working-bred backgrounds in these three other registries; dogs that have been dual-registered (or triple-registered) for multiple generations (not from bred-for-show lines); and the occasional show-bred dog that demonstrates working ability.

 

I think that, other than AKC's emphasis on the show ring as a true evaluation of a dog's worth, the fact that dogs are titled - and many titles are, by their nature, based on very low or limited standards of work - and therefore held up as having demonstrated superior "herding" abilities, runs counter to the work truly proving the dog, which is the goal of USBCHA/ISDS-style trialing. When people are impressed by a show-ring winner who "has herding titles" (even if it's only HT), you can see how easy it is for people to mistake a title, any title, for a meaningful indication of a dog's working ability.

 

I haven't said any of this well at all, and I hope someone else can and will explain it much better (and more succinctly) than I have tried to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...