Early Takeoff Syndrome?

[MaryP]

As an add-on to Kristine's question (since we're about at that point in this thread anyway), how many of you who get that breeding for agility will change the breed in a significant way try to discuss this with your sporting friends?

 

I do. I do it all the time and I'm usually looked at as if I have a third eye.

 

How many of you who are seriously in to sports and "get it" make an effort to find a working bred pup vs. a sport bred pup?

 

If I were to ever purchase a pup (for whatever purpose), I would want a working-bred one. But, I don't plan to purchase because I'm happy with using my rescue dogs for sports and companionship.

[Rave]

As an add-on to Kristine's question (since we're about at that point in this thread anyway), how many of you who get that breeding for agility will change the breed in a significant way try to discuss this with your sporting friends? After all, you are in a much better position to understand their perspective, so why not try to be an agent of change? Too much trouble? Unable to push effectively against the ever-increasing tide?

 

How many of you who are seriously in to sports and "get it" make an effort to find a working bred pup vs. a sport bred pup?

 

Or does "get it" simply mean that you understand the argument philosophically, but in practice can't see how it matters (i.e., everyone else is doing it, so I won't make a dent in the problem if I personally don't do it)?

 

J.

 

All very good questions. I used to try to educate, and since I was younger, push my views a bit onto others in the sports world. I recall a dinner one night with a group of friends where a friend with working dogs made a comment to me about how our working-bred dogs would "represent" at Nationals that year. Another friend got upset and went on about how she was sick and tired of hearing how our working-bred BCs were any better (or any different) than their sport-bred BCs. Everyone else at the table agreed. I decided at that point it was not worth losing my friends over.

 

I am proud to tell everyone where I got my dogs from, and I have them from all sources. I am happy to tell anyone that I prefer working-bred dogs. If they ask, I explain further, but I respect everyone's decision to get their dog from wherever they please.

 

When looking for my pups, I have made an effort to find what I want from working breeders. With Kai, I just couldn't seem to find anything to get excited about from my searching though, and as it turned out, I apparently wanted a different breed altogether. With Hype, well she wasn't planned and just fell into my lap.

[Eileen Stein]

There are apparently a number of people posting who don't think that breeding for Agility will change border collies in any significant way -- that the product of these breedings will go on possessing the essential "border collie-ness" of border collies. I can't imagine why anyone who thinks that would have any problem with border collies being bred for Agility, whatever they might say.

 

Well, then there isn't much those people can say to convince you differently, I suppose.

 

Well, they could convince me differently if they could articulate a different reason why they oppose it, other than the fundamental one I've stated here which they deny. But I'm not hearing that from anyone. What you seem to be saying here is that, even though you don't particularly want to admit to holding the view that it's okay to breed border collies for Agility, you do in fact hold that view, your reason being that if border collies weren't bred for Agility there wouldn't be enough border collies to satisfy the demands of Agility people. I see that Rave apparently thinks you'll be smacked down for saying that, but I'd sure be surprised if you were.

 

Explaining how agility people and the general public see things isn't an admission to holding those same views.

 

I understand that -- they are two different things. I too can explain that the general public, and even the average Agility person, thinks that if the parents are border collies the offspring are border collies, end of story, and that they can probably hold onto this view a long way into the future, even when major differences are evident between the two populations. Having thought about the issue more than most people, I disagree with that view, but I have no trouble understanding and explaining it even though it's different from my own.

[Mark Billadeau]

Mark I understand what you're saying and your views on the matter, however most of the rest of the world outside of stockwork will not believe that two purebred dogs of one breed will not produce a purebred dog of that same breed in the short term. The overall, gradual, long-term effect is more believable though.

I know that those not using the instincts of the dogs don't understand my point of view which is likely because the ACK has done such a good job convincing people that if it looks like a breed it has all the instincts that the breed had when it was still being used for a job.

 

The issue is where do we draw the line as to when the "gradual, long-term effect" has progressed enough to have adversely affected the breed's instincts? Again, those not using (or breeding for) the breed's instincts can't tell when there has been an adverse affect and fall back onto the conformation definition of a breed: if it looks like a Border Collie it can still work like a Border Collie.

 

 

 

In the conformation standard the genes being selected for produce something visually recognized (for example color). If pups are produced (for what ever reason) are no longer the right color (don't carry the right genes) everyone can recognize that the pups may no longer be representatives of the breed. Now go back to the above scenario and replace color with livestock work. The only real difference is that color can easily be seen by everyone while livestock work require livestock. The resistance from the general population and sport breeders is that they still hold to the conformation standard; if it looks like a Border Collie (it could still work like a Border Collie) therefore it is a Border Collie.

 

 

[Root Beer]

As an add-on to Kristine's question (since we're about at that point in this thread anyway), how many of you who get that breeding for agility will change the breed in a significant way try to discuss this with your sporting friends?

 

In cases where the topic comes up in a natural way, I will discuss it. I do tend to promote rescue a good deal more, mostly because I do own and run with rescue dogs myself, and I can speak to my own experience with them.

 

I will point out that Dean is working bred and talk about what I appreciate about that fact.

 

I don't personally know any working breeders that I can refer people to, nor anyone who runs working bred dogs in Agility (that I know of) that I could refer people to. So, while I do discuss this when the topic comes up, I can't go as far with it as I can with referring rescue. If someone were seriously interested, I would make the effort to find them the contacts. Thus far nobody has been. Really, I don't run across many people who are looking for a Border Collie who don't already have houses full of them. And I am going to refer most first-timers to rescue for an adult.

 

Most of the people that I know in Agility run other breeds, chiefly Shelties. Most of the Border Collie people that I know personally in Agility run rescues.

 

After all, you are in a much better position to understand their perspective, so why not try to be an agent of change? Too much trouble? Unable to push effectively against the ever-increasing tide?

 

I don't go around forcibly trying to educate people on this matter, of course. If I'm in a natural position to discuss it, especially if the person that I am talking to is interested in the topic, then I certainly will talk about it. If not, I recognize that alienation never leads to education.

 

How many of you who are seriously in to sports and "get it" make an effort to find a working bred pup vs. a sport bred pup?

 

If I were going to buy a puppy, I would certainly seek out working breeders. If I have an opportunity to adopt a working bred dog from rescue, I do so, as long as the dog fits in all of the other ways.

 

On the other hand, I would not have turned away my rescue Border Collie of unknown origin who was obviously meant to be here with us in favor of purchasing a working bred puppy. She may be from a working breeder - I have no way to know. Or not.

 

Or does "get it" simply mean that you understand the argument philosophically, but in practice can't see how it matters (i.e., everyone else is doing it, so I won't make a dent in the problem if I personally don't do it)?

 

That is not an accurate characterization to my personal approach. I'm not pushy about it. I haven't made it my identity. But certainly when the opportunity arises, I do discuss this.

[Shetlander]

As an add-on to Kristine's question (since we're about at that point in this thread anyway), how many of you who get that breeding for agility will change the breed in a significant way try to discuss this with your sporting friends? After all, you are in a much better position to understand their perspective, so why not try to be an agent of change? Too much trouble? Unable to push effectively against the ever-increasing tide?

 

I'm not in agility any more but I have talked a number of times of agility friends about the subject. They don't really get it, I'm afraid. Since they are my friends, I don't pound it into the ground but just keep the conversation open and revisit from time to time. There are a couple people who have moved more into stock work who have been revising their opinion on breeding, but for those who stay in sports, I haven't seen any shifting.

 

How many of you who are seriously in to sports and "get it" make an effort to find a working bred pup vs. a sport bred pup?

 

I'm not seriously into sports but am seriously into my dogs. I don't see me getting another dog for a few years. If I get a Border Collie, I'd like to go through rescue but I can't say I won't buy a working bred dog. And I can't vow I wouldn't get a sports bred dog if it looked perfect for me. I love and appreicate my dog and my friends' dogs too much to say that. But rescue is very much my first choice.

[Rave]

I've found my sports friends are much more receptive to understanding the concepts of working-bred after they have had their dogs out on stock (and the dog did well).

[Sue R]

From my experience with AKC members, the idea of show-bred, agility-bred, obedience-bred, etc., is strongly ingrained. You want a dog to show? Get a show-bred dog. You want a dog for agility? Get an agility-bred dog. You want a dog for obedience? Get an obedience-bred dog.

 

Within the local club where I was involved, virtually no one was the least bit interested in dogs that were truly and solely bred for a purpose (hunting, stockwork, etc.). They had pointers, Weimeraners, poodles, Shelties, Border Collies (or descendents thereof), Irish Setters, mutts (yes, many understood the value of a good mutt), Beagles, and so on.

 

Even the well-known Beagle breeder was proud of his dogs' titles, including AKC field titles, but felt that any title (like "instinct test") was proof of innate ability to do the job that the breed was originally developed to do. But he was all about show dogs, build, color, ears, and so on. That was what made his dogs superior to those bred in someone's backyard as hunting dogs, and who were evaluated solely on ability to hunt. I will not repeat what he considered the "purpose-bred" dogs.

 

There is a woman who sees what has been done to her beloved GSDs, and always gets her pups from lines that are not show lines in any way - and has sound, sane dogs as a result. On the other hand, the dogs and pups that showed up for puppy and family dog classes were usually soundness or mental disasters in the making. One, at less than 18 years of age, could hardly walk - his hocks were almost on the floor.

 

Of course, there are always the "versatility" people - the dog that can "do everything". That is a mantra for many Aussie folks in particular and BC folks in the AKC world.

 

The concept of breeding lines for particular uses that relate to show and performance sports (and not the original purpose of the breed) is integral to the KC world - I might have gotten lip service when I spoke about breeding for a purpose (stockwork) for a breed like the Border Collie, but I never changed anyone's mind that I know of.

 

I hope I influenced someone, though. I ran into one woman recently that I knew from the club, and she was cognizant that breeding for show (and performance sports) reduces what you breed to a dog that no longer can do what the historical purpose of the breed way. Maybe I did have a small effect on someone, I hope.

[Sue R]

I've found my sports friends are much more receptive to understanding the concepts of working-bred after they have had their dogs out on stock (and the dog did well).

That's nice to hear - but I'm not clear if you are saying that their performance-bred dog did well or their working-bred dog did well, or what.

 

Too often, I see people who work with AKC folks a lot, teaching "herding" in small and controlled situations, and (more often then not) teaching courses rather than stockwork, will be very complimentary about anything and everything the dog does - that's how they make a living, and getting and keeping clients is based on making the clients happy.

 

If people do see and recognize what a dog with instinct and ability can do, that's great - and I do hope it influences their feelings about working-bred dogs.

[Rave]

That's nice to hear - but I'm not clear if you are saying that their performance-bred dog did well or their working-bred dog did well, or what.

 

To them it doesn't matter, it's their dog. Regardless of where it came from, if it did well then that piques their interest, the more interested they become in herding, the more likely they are to understand and respect the concept of working-bred. If it doesn't, then they'll just write off herding and go back to their sports world.

[juliepoudrier]

I've found my sports friends are much more receptive to understanding the concepts of working-bred after they have had their dogs out on stock (and the dog did well).

Interesting. What about if the dog didn't do well, which seems to be the bulk of what I see? I don't try to pound anything into anyone's head either in such a situation, because I recognize that people do have a lot invested in their individual dogs and there's no point in making them feel bad, but I do try to point out nicely that the lack of ability is likely due to the dog and its ancestors not having been bred for work. I don't know that it makes much difference, though, because for the most part the response I get is "Oh, well, I'll find something else to do with my dog."

 

And as Kristine and others have pointed out, if stockwork isn't important to a person, then there's no real reason for that person to see their dog fail on stock and then conclude that the fault is in the breeding (population genetics), even if do see that for their individual dog. <--Because they don't intend to work stock or raise stock and in fact will find something else to do, the breeding issue is simply something not to be considered further. And that's understandable, even if somewhat depressing.

 

I do see how if someone's dog clearly shows talent that they might become interested in the issue, but again I wonder if they wouldn't also view their individual dog's talent as justification of the belief that breeding for something else won't cause the loss of working ability....

 

J.

[stockdogranch]

I think it is true that there would not be enough working-bred dogs to meet the demands of sport (and non-sport) people, so people WOULD get their dogs from somewhere.

On the other hand, IF there were not so many people breeding sports dogs (or crappily bred, or just randomly bred dogs), then there just MIGHT be more "room" for more working bred dogs. And there would be more available homes for those working bred dogs, so good breeders of working bred dogs just might produce more of those good dogs,

A

ETA:

What about if the dog didn't do well, which seems to be the bulk of what I see?

But the thing is, Julie, when their dog goes in with the sheep and does some chasing and kind-of, sort-of wants to at least engage the sheep in some way, they think the dog is "working" the sheepies. You and I can see that there is a significant part of the puzzle missing, but to the proud owner and layperson, their dog is a great "herder." And, if the person they take the dog to is more interested in the owner's money than his or her own integrity, then the "trainer" will tell the owner the dog did a great job, and come back next week for another lesson. Only of the owner sticks around for quite some time, will s/he see that their dog is really a poor example of a working dog.

[MaryP]

I do see how if someone's dog clearly shows talent that they might become interested in the issue, but again I wonder if they wouldn't also view their individual dog's talent as justification of the belief that breeding for something else won't cause the loss of working ability....

 

J.

 

I don't know from personal experience, since I'm not involved in the stockdog world directly, but I wouldn't think so. If they were to become more and more interested in training their dog on stock, they are likely to become more and more imersed in that world and it's culture. If the culture tells them about the importance of breeding for work and they see it over and over again, they are probably going to "get it" and embrace it. Similarly, most folks that are immersed in the sport world and really have no connection to the stockdog world are most likely going to parrot the views and beliefs of that culture. That's just human nature.

[MaryP]

On the other hand, IF there were not so many people breeding sports dogs (or crappily bred, or just randomly bred dogs), then there just MIGHT be more "room" for more working bred dogs. And there would be more available homes for those working bred dogs, so good breeders of working bred dogs just might produce more of those good dogs,

A

 

That would be nice, but I don't see it ever happening because you would need to change the thinking of an entire culture. That's no small feat.

[Shetlander]

On the other hand, IF there were not so many people breeding sports dogs (or crappily bred, or just randomly bred dogs), then there just MIGHT be more "room" for more working bred dogs. And there would be more available homes for those working bred dogs, so good breeders of working bred dogs just might produce more of those good dogs,

 

I don't have figures for how many Border Collies are purchased/rescued each year with the hopes to do agility, but I think it is a good sized number. Would working breeders be able to still be breeding for the work if they were selling lots of dogs to nonworking home where their working ability would not be proven? I believe there was at least one discussion on that subject here and lots of people thought no.

 

I have never bred and never will breed my dogs. I know so little about stock work that I wouldn't presume to have an opinion on this. I'm just wondering, based on what I have learned here.

[Journey]

The resistance from the general population and sport breeders is that they still hold to the conformation standard; if it looks like a Border Collie (it could still work like a Border Collie) therefore it is a Border Collie.

 

I think there is more to it than that. Pedigrees. JQP is stuck on papers, if the papers say it's a "fill in the blank" then it's a "fill in the blank", regardless of what it does or what it looks like.

[Shetlander]

If the culture tells them about the importance of breeding for work and they see it over and over again, they are probably going to "get it" and embrace it.

 

That has been my experience. I know a couple of agility people who seem to be moving into stockwork more and more and are now looking at purchasing what I believe are working bred dogs. But I haven't talked to them in a while so I'm not sure what type of stockwork they are doing and what the actual breeding is of the dogs they are interested in.

[MaryP]

I think there is more to it than that. Pedigrees. JQP is stuck on papers, if the papers say it's a "fill in the blank" then it's a "fill in the blank", regardless of what it does or what it looks like.

 

Yes, yes! That is so [sadly] true.

[juliepoudrier]

I don't have figures for how many Border Collies are purchased/rescued each year with the hopes to do agility, but I think it is a good sized number. Would working breeders be able to still be breeding for the work if they were selling lots of dogs to nonworking home where their working ability would not be proven? I believe there was at least one discussion on that subject here and lots of people thought no.

Yep, the only way it would work is if at least some pups from every litter also went to working homes and were proved on stock (to test the breeding choice). The upside, however, to having a nonworking market would perhaps be that working breeders would try more crosses because they'd have an outlet for pups they wouldn't have if they sold only to working homes. So maybe a working breeder would breed three litters instead of one, knowing that s/he'd be able to evaluate (by keeping back for training some from each litter) more combinations without producing excess pups with nowhere to go.

 

If that would actually happen in practice I don't know.

 

J.

[MrSnappy]

One of my foster homes just bought a border collie puppy from a woman who primarily breeds beagles and "got into" border collies a little while ago because she likes agility and she likes to show. This woman and I have had words in the past about working instinct, as this 'breeder' believes it's trained, not bred into a dog. She has Clan Abby AKC registered dogs and *guaranteed* my friend a small female (someone lend me the head banging emoticon plz).

 

So but here's the thing - she's heard my spiel a thousand times. She knows the whole controversy between working bred / sport bred / byb bred. She got interested in border collies (and fostering) because her lifelong very good friends have a working ranch and raise working border collies. She's not a stupid woman. And she still went out and bought a show dog puppy - even with having access to everything else; rescues, working bred dogs etc.

 

When I expressed my disappointment in her decision, her response was "It's my dog, and my choice." And she's right - it is. At the time it depressed the hell out of me. If my own friends and foster homes don't get it, who is ever going to get it? But I'm over it. I can't control what other people do or think. And if she is one person who knows and (I thought) gets it, and still does something different, you're going to have a hell of a time convincing people with lesser exposure to the concept.

 

I get what Rave is saying ... this discussion goes on and on and on in every tightening circles and nobody is ever satisfied with the outcome. So few minds ever seem to be changed. I understand why it's frustrating for people for whom the concept is really important. The real, tangible changes in the breed could be very sad. But it's awfully hard to convince someone that their border collie is not a border collie because even though it's a border collie, it's not a border collie. I've said it before in these discussions - nobody believes ya'll, because to people for whom this is not very important, it sounds like you're snake handling and talking in tongues in your own strange little cult. I'm not saying that's how *I* feel, but that's very much how other people do. Besides, I never really hear this discussion anywhere but here on the boards.

 

RDM

[Sue R]

I know that those not using the instincts of the dogs don't understand my point of view which is likely because the ACK has done such a good job convincing people that if it looks like a breed it has all the instincts that the breed had when it was still being used for a job.

 

The issue is where do we draw the line as to when the "gradual, long-term effect" has progressed enough to have adversely affected the breed's instincts? Again, those not using (or breeding for) the breed's instincts can't tell when there has been an adverse affect and fall back onto the conformation definition of a breed: if it looks like a Border Collie it can still work like a Border Collie.

 

In the conformation standard the genes being selected for produce something visually recognized (for example color). If pups are produced (for what ever reason) are no longer the right color (don't carry the right genes) everyone can recognize that the pups may no longer be representatives of the breed. Now go back to the above scenario and replace color with livestock work. The only real difference is that color can easily be seen by everyone while livestock work require livestock. The resistance from the general population and sport breeders is that they still hold to the conformation standard; if it looks like a Border Collie (it could still work like a Border Collie) therefore it is a Border Collie.

Absolutely! I never understand how people feel it essential to breed for a "standard" (including such cosmetic things as color and ear set) but feel that somehow, all the instincts are hard-wired in and are not lost if they are not a breeding objective at all, much less the prime breeding objective.

[airbear]

As an add-on to Kristine's question (since we're about at that point in this thread anyway), how many of you who get that breeding for agility will change the breed in a significant way try to discuss this with your sporting friends? After all, you are in a much better position to understand their perspective, so why not try to be an agent of change? Too much trouble? Unable to push effectively against the ever-increasing tide?

I do. I'm not a super-successful competitor, though, so I don't know how much weight my words hold with those who have fairly high aspirations in the sport. I did have a funny conversation once with a "top handler" who was decrying some line of UK sporter collies who were being bred to be teeny-tiny so they could compete in the medium height class. I asked her how breeding border collies for size is worse than breeding them for agility (she has sporter collies). She kind of sputtered some stuff about health issues, but I think she might have kinda-sorta seen where I was coming from.

 

How many of you who are seriously in to sports and "get it" make an effort to find a working bred pup vs. a sport bred pup?

Again, I'm not sure if I meet the criteria as "seriously in to sports", but I do. Well, not a pup, I have a strict "no pup" rule. But of my three agility dogs, two have been rescues, and the latest one is a work-bred dog.

 

Rex does this:

 

 

And this:

 

 

 

Or does "get it" simply mean that you understand the argument philosophically, but in practice can't see how it matters (i.e., everyone else is doing it, so I won't make a dent in the problem if I personally don't do it)?

I actually try to steer people toward rescue first, as I think that, for most people's needs, they can find what they want there. For those who want a pup of known parentage and all that, of course I recommend working breeders, though there aren't many in my area, and those that I would recommend breed infrequently. Of the people who've asked me to help find them a breeder, a couple have purchased pups from working breeders that I helped them find, and a couple others have gone with the sport kennels. <shrug>

[rushdoggie]

I do. I do it all the time and I'm usually looked at as if I have a third eye.

 

Yeah, I had that happen the other day trying to explain why my dog looked a LOT different than the conformation dog we were standing next to. In addition, the owner of said conformation dog started turning red (turns out she was the breeder) and I could tell she was getting very angry so I let it go.

 

I do try, usually only when someone seems open to listening. Otherwise I am just preaching and people are not usually receptive.

 

I can tell you though, if I started in saying "well my dog is a Border Collie but her's is just a designer mutt" I don't think I would have influenced anyone there and man I would have NOBODY to track with...

 

Again, we're back to the flies and honey stuff.

 

And that's been my point throughout, which gets ignored among cries of you aren't supporting the Board philosophy and people telling me what I think (despite what I actually wrote). You don't reach people by insulting them or their dogs (but yes, yes I know its not an insult, etc etc... )

[Eileen Stein]

I can tell you though, if I started in saying "well my dog is a Border Collie but her's is just a designer mutt" I don't think I would have influenced anyone there and man I would have NOBODY to track with...

 

Again, we're back to the flies and honey stuff.

 

And that's been my point throughout, which gets ignored among cries of you aren't supporting the Board philosophy and people telling me what I think (despite what I actually wrote). You don't reach people by insulting them or their dogs (but yes, yes I know its not an insult, etc etc... )

 

It's not ignored. It's not a hard concept to get, and everyone here gets it. Okay, I won't make assumptions, I'll ask: Does anyone here disagree that it's important, when seeking to persuade people of your point of view, to try to be tactful and avoid giving people the impression that you are insulting them or their dogs? Anyone?

 

Even people here whom you find offensive understand and agree with your point. Either they aren't very good at being tactful, or they feel that there are certain facts they need to state to explain their position, even at the risk that some more sensitive listeners will be offended at hearing those facts. But they get your point.

[Mark Billadeau]

If someone buys their dog from a pet store which gets the pups from a puppy mill, should we not tell them their pet is a puppy mill dog for fear of hurting their feelings?

 

At some point you may decide that the welfare of the dogs or a dog breed is more important than ruffling a few feathers.