Barbie Collies

[Deb Mickey]

Hey Julie,

 

It gets even more confusing when the dog competes in events sanctioned by another organization than AKC or outside of the U.S. More titles!

 

CH = breed champion in AKC. If a dog finishes his breed championship with AKC, the CH is put in front of his AKC registered name. All other titles are still displayed. As Eileen states, the titles following the dog's name are performance titles (agility, obedience, rally), not "championships". All championship titles, such as Breed Champion (CH), Field Champion (FC) or Amateur Field Champion (AFC) go in front of the dog's name. Some exceptions are OTCH (Obedience Trial Champion) and MACH (Master Agility Champion). These performance titles are also displayed in front of the dog's name. It's that "championship" thing again.

 

You're right that MH = Master Hunter, the top title awarded in AKC's Hunt Tests.

 

Then, to add to the confusion, parent clubs of breeds also offer titles. In springers you can earn a WD (working dog) or WDX (working dog excellent) title. Goldens can earn a WC (working certificate) or WCX (working certificate excellent). The OS in his name is a Golden Retriever Club of America (AKC parent club for goldens) title which stands for "Outstanding Sire". The FDHF stands for "Field Dog Hall of Fame". The AFC, FTCH, AFTCH are all field championships of some kind.

 

In my limited experience and humble opinion, I'd put field trials in par with ISDS trials in that the dogs are bred for working ability and the work required in field trials is top notch. There are people, of course, who would argue that field trials are too stylized and have gotten away from what makes a good hunting dog. I can't answer that one.

 

When breeding becomes too narrow or focused something else is lost. Here's an extreme example. Talking to a friend who breeds English Cockers for the show ring, she said that the conformation cocker breeders have now produced a dog that is lovely to look at stacked (standing still) but cannot move correctly. They bred exclusively for how the dog looks stacked and nothing else. How sad. There are fads in conformation showing and I guess this is just one of them. I wonder how long it will take the cocker people to get the breed back to a dog that looks good and still can move...

 

Back to lurking...

[juliepoudrier]

My head is really spinning now.... I think what you're saying is a dog can be a dual champion and still have some sort of titles behind--thank doG I don't have to worry about all that stuff. The discussions on Herders-L about figuring out titles, etc. for herding only are esoteric enough! Oh, and as for the cockers, I have no doubt there are plenty of other breeds whose breeders have had that same narrow-minded vision. Ugh.

 

J.

[Deb Mickey]

Out of lurk mode again...

 

Originally posted by Kat's Dogs:

What was wrong with the obedience ring dogs?

Nothing!

 

Years back when border collies took the stage in obedience in my area they blew everyone else away. These dogs were purchased from breeders who bred, used, and competed with stockdogs - ISDS style. These dogs brought all the traits that working stock gives the border collie to the obedience ring.

 

I think what some on this board are worried about and have said before is if breeding for a specific (great obedience, flyball or agility "lines"), the border collie as a breed moves away from what orginially made the breed. I've seen border collies bred from obedience lines that didn't have the drive or desire to compete in obedience. If that dog had been in another "costume" it could have been any breed and made someone a wonderful couch-potato pet. Now that I mentioned it, he was a great pet!

 

Over and out for the weekend...

[SoloRiver]

Believe it or not, I actually know someone who breeds working Cockers. I don't know how close these dogs are to the original dogs meant solely for hunting, but I've met them and they certainly don't look or act like the average foofy Cocker Spaniel. The one male she had (can't remember which one) had as much drive and interest for toys and agility as a Border Collie.

 

http://www.mfrye.com/skyrocket/

[Rosanne]

Back in the 90's I had a flat-coated retriever. Don't know if its still true today, but back then the field dogs and the conformation dogs were one and the same. My bitch's sire was the youngest Master Hunter ever (at the time), and also won the conformation show at the breed's National Specialty. Her mother was an OTCH/CH dog. My dog was VERY high drive, I got a major on her in the breed ring, she started some field training, and ended up being a super agility dog - got her ADCH, was top ten in the country in USDAA, and made the National Finals twice.

 

Obviously this will never occur in BC's, but it was a neat thing, to have breeders that really did care about that stuff.

[AK dog doc]

I've also seen a lot of the schism between people breding working Labs and Goldens, for instance, and show or pet variety. The working Goldens (at least locally) *tend* to be darker in color, a deep rufous red-gold; but so far pretty much *all* of them have been smaller, as well as much more lightly-coated dogs. They're usually a little more square in the head (which may in part appear to be that way because they're generally tighter-lipped, but it's also partly breadth of skull), and they're often a little stockier in build - trim, very muscular, and square of hip and shoulder (partly because they've all been QUITE fit and muscular, well-fleshed though lean.) The Labs pretty much ditto, except for the coat being not much different from the show ring version... except for the silver Lab I saw last week. (Sigh... color dilution alopecia, here we come, I suspect.)

 

Interestingly, I was reading something the other day about scenting ability in Beagles.... the investigators were looking into variation in ability to scent between breeds and within a breed. It turned out that show-bred Beag's had a lot of variation in ability: some very good, some very poor, most falling in the middle. The working-bred Beag's were much more uniform - all very good. This was in Dog Fancy or something like it, not a peer-reviewed journal, so I'm not 100% certain on how accurately the reporter represented the results, but it was interesting to me that such a schism was noted. This did not, mind you, make any statements as to the dog's ability to hunt, simply to the inborn physiologic ability to scent an item. Presumably there's more to the "huntability" of a hound than its ability to scent, but those other traits were not investigated, AFAIK, in that study. Anyway, more support for the idea that breeding for something besides the work a given breed was meant to do - whatever type of work that may be - results in dilution of the ability to do that work... even on a strictly physiologic level, let alone all the "other" stuff needed to do the job. Doesn't mean show Beag's are evil or worthless, just different from their hunting-bred bretheren despite generally similar looks.

 

And FWIW, I'm getting a first-hand education in the diff between "bred from working LINES" (ABCA Finn) and "bred from working PARENTS" (ABCA Raven). I suspected this would be a different cup of tea, but now I'm sure. You may all start laughing now.

[2 Devils]

OK and we do we get picture updates???

[Eileen Stein]

>

 

Roseanne, are BC sports breeders deliberately breeding for smaller size to qualify for the 22" jumps, or is that just coincidence?

[Rosanne]

I doubt it - the cutoff for 22" is 21" tall at the top of the shoulder. There are plenty of dogs that qualify for that height without breeding down.

 

My boy is actually small enough to jump that height, as are a lot of dogs who jump 26, but the international cutoff for the USDAA (all breed!) world team is 19.69", and my dog is over that, so I jump him 26, because I hope to get on that team soon. (as soon as they make the qualification criteria reasonable for a non-wealthy competitor!)

[Rosanne]

You know. . .the start of this thread was a Barbie Collie named Barbie. Well, I know a Sport Collie named Sport!

 

Actually I think he's a rescue, it just struck me as funny.

[SoloRiver]

I don't know about top agility competitors, but I do know that at least some people breeding for sports (agility and also flyball) are deliberately selecting for MUCH smaller dogs. They may be crappy sports breeders (relatively speaking -- since I don't think any Border Collies should be bred for sports).

 

Having a dog in 22" doesn't seem like much of a competitive advantage, because 22" is already stuffed to the gills with turbocharged Border Collies. It seems (and I am only a casual agility person) that there would be more incentive to get a really small dog, to compete in the next class down against Shelties, or more advantageous to have a slightly taller dog and run in 26". In 26" at many trials you'd be running against big non-Border Collies -- at least, Solo who is 23" and therefore way over the cutoff for 26" always was in USDAA -- breeds like GSDs and Goldens that the average Border Collie does not have a problem running past as if the other dog were standing still. This is one reason why a lot of dogs that qualify for shorter jump heights run in 26" instead.

[Rosanne]

The cutoff for the next height down is 16", and I only know of 2 BC's who qualify for that. Neither was particularly bred for height, and one is a show-bred dog. I don't know of anybody who is specifically trying to breed purebred BC's that small. Borderjacks are the closest thing, and they are generally bred for flyball.

 

My small girl is small enough to jump 16" in AKC, where the cutoff is 18", but too tall for USDAA. She jumps 22 with the majority of the other BCs. (she is just under 18" at the shoulder, but looks pretty normal. Also not bred for height.)

 

There are quite a few good BC's at 26, but most of them choose to jump it, because of the smaller classes and also because many people have internatinal dreams. . .

There were about 400 dogs jumping 22" at the USDAA Finals a few weeks ago. 2 years ago there were 250 (and my dog won a class that year, so clearly that is not the reason I jump him higher).

 

 

I do NOT want to start a really heated debate about breeding, but I was just idly wondering - if all the sport people went to working breeders. . . how would the working breeders every be able to supply that many dogs? I guess it would have to be from rescue. . .

[Shetlander]

Originally posted by Rosanne D.:

I wouldn't touch the pedigrees of those 22" dogs with a ten-foot pole! And the prices they charge! my dog is from a mainly-agility bitch who does work sometimes (his father was an imported trial dog), but I only paid $300 for him, and he's taking me far (or I'm taking him far). I would never pay $1000 for a dog, and I am at the top of the game

Congrats on your placement, Rosanne! Out of curiosity, other than not being bred for working ability, what is it you don't like about Comebye and Hob Nob dogs, or dogs of that sort? Both are popular for performance around here, especially Comebye since the breeder is in the general vicinity.

[Shetlander]

Originally posted by AK dog doc:

And FWIW, I'm getting a first-hand education in the diff between "bred from working LINES" (ABCA Finn) and "bred from working PARENTS" (ABCA Raven). I suspected this would be a different cup of tea, but now I'm sure. You may all start laughing now.

Since Quinn is my first BC and he is performance bred with working lines, I'm cureious to hear what are the differences you're seeing? I'm planning on getting a rescue for my next dog, but if for some reason that shouldn't work out, I'd have to find a breeder again.

[border_collie_crazy]

maybe its the area? because over here Happy is considered a large BC at 21". though its likley because in most places agiity is more prominant while here any jo blow knowswhat flyball is meanwhile has never heard of agility lol the result is that we has almost entirly flyball bred BCs which ARE bred to be smaller, but even our working bred BCs are small. as a result the averge BC in my area is 18-19" tall anything bigger is considered large lol

[C Crocker]

<< In the 22" USDAA Grand Prix this year {cream of the crop, fractions of seconds} the top 3 dogs were all sports-bred dogs {Comebye and Hob Nob}.

 

 

Admittedly do not much at all about agility of any kind , but I believe I know the Hob Nob dog who did well at thie USDAA event. Just wanted to say that if I am correct on my friend's dog being the the dam of this agility dog that I know the dam has Hob Nob in her reg name. The dam is owned by a friend of mine and that dam is ISDS bred on at least one side of her pedigree. In fact has similar breeding to my ISDS Nursery dog from this year.

I have seen a copy of the dam's papers, but not recently enough to want to quote exact names from her pedigree. If this is the agility dog you are refering to, her dam also qualified and competed at this year's USBCHA National Finals this year.

She has been doing very well on the West Coast for some time in the USBCHA Open trials. I suspect she is in the minority of AKC registered dogs to do so though, but her pedigree is pretty darn "sheepdog " bred for a show dog!

[Tracey M.]

I?ve found this thread to be very interesting. Earlier there was some discussion about the idea that herding dogs were ?quirky and ballistic?. Maybe you would like to hear from someone who bought into this idea for a while. When I first started looking for a border collie, I looked at AKC dogs because that was my background in dogs. (Many years ago I worked for a lady who bred and successfully showed German Shepherd Dogs.) So I talked to show people. I found a breeder who had dogs with beautiful temperaments, which is what I was most interested in. She had sheep on her property, and she had all these lovely, furry, black and white, friendly dogs. So I put my name on her list and waited for a puppy. Meanwhile, I read about border collies online and in books, and found this board. I began to get a feel for the ?right? way to breed good working dogs (although it took me a while). What I did get early on, from almost all sources, was the idea that working-bred border collies WERE NOT FOR EVERYONE. I totally understand why almost everyone puts this disclaimer first when someone says they want a border collie. It is something that needs to be said. But in my case, I started thinking ?Well, maybe I NEED something a little ?watered down?. I?m not going to be herding sheep. I want to do a little obedience, maybe some agility, and I REALLY need my dog to be good with my kids and with their friends. I certainly don?t need to have a dog who herds them into a corner and won?t let them out.? So the really sweet, fluffy dogs looked about right. As I said, I bought into the ?quirky and ballistic? thing. So when a puppy became available from the show breeder, I took him, even though I was starting to feel a little guilty about getting an AKC dog. In the year and a half we?ve had him, he has been nearly everything I hoped for, and where he isn?t, it?s my lack, not his. So I?m not sorry we got him. But I?ve kept reading these boards (and Thank You to everyone for much excellent advice!) and if I were in the market for a second dog, I would go to a working breeder or perhaps try rescue again. But the point of this long ramble is that I was frightened away from the working-bred dogs by the very people who loved them the most! I guess the intent is to steer the unprepared toward an ?easier? breed, but I just went part way away, to AKC. I wonder if this happens to others as well? Or maybe I?m just realllly slow at catching on?.

 

Tracey

[AK dog doc]

Liz, to answer your question, I should first preface this by saying that some of the differences are likely to be just the difference between two unrelated dogs. They're all individuals, even within a breed.

 

However, that said, I will say that Raven is MUCH more determined than Finn ever was, and of a harder temperament. Finn is a soft dog, which makes him OH so easy for school programs and general PR to the public. It also makes him easy to live with in most ways - but it means he loses confidence easily when on stock. Raven hasn't been on stock yet (really not the season up here, what with the dark, the cold and the ice), but she is just FAR more intent than Finn ever was. She notices and focuses in on details that none of my other dogs seem to be aware of, and when she gets an idea about wanting to do something she's extremely persistent. I can modify her and direct her, but she doesn't lose interest easily, and is extremely determined to return to her objective, whatever it might be. She's WAY snarkier than Finn ever thought of being, and in the first week she was here she took on every dog in the house (one at a time), including Pepper. That took some significant confidence, considering that A) she was only a few weeks old, and she had just come up from home base at Julie's house and EVERYTHING up here was new to her. Don't get the idea Raven is always spoiling for a fight - she's less reactive now that she's figuring out her place in the pack, and extremely respectful of Pepper in particular (like minds!)... but she will still defend her toy, her food, her spot on my lap, and her personal space with WAY more will and confidence than Finn ever showed at the same age - despite the fact that Finn is nearly twice her size and 4 years older.

 

Raven reminds me strongly of Pepper, the BF's dog, who was a farm-bred dog out of WV, IIRC. Not only are they posessed of some of the same facial expressions ("posessed" being the operative term here) but they operate in similar ways in the pack and interact in similar ways with me. Some of it is subtle enough that I can't really put my finger on it, but as a for-instance, Raven will respond to my facial expressions much more readily than the other dogs. If I make a "snarly face" at her, she backs off, as she would to a dominant dog lifting a lip. No one else, including Pepper, will do so. Maybe the rest of them don't think I'm serious or something, but I find it handy that if Raven is going to town with her little pointy nails on my leg while I'm at the computer, all I have to do is give her a glance and a snarly-face and she gets off immediately and sits respectfully at my feet, staring alert and intent at my face as if awaiting new orders. She's as cuddly and kissy and snuggly as you could want, but if I start acting like I mean buisness, she switches into buisness mode instantly. Finn is always ready to do anything I want to do, but you don't get the sense that this is *buisness* for him, that he takes it with the same seriousness that Raven (or Pepper) does. I don't know if that makes snese, but that's probably the best I can do to describe it. It just seems like there's something going on for her that isn't going on for Finn. As you all know, I totally adore Finn; enough so that I'll not do him the disrespect of pretending he's something he's not or of inventing things that I want him to be instead of adoring him for what he is, lock, stock and barrel, just as he stands.

 

Anyway, I'm not sure if that helps, but I don't want to hijack the thread further.

[Shetlander]

Originally posted by AK dog doc:

Liz, to answer your question, I should first preface this by saying that some of the differences are likely to be just the difference between two unrelated dogs. They're all individuals, even within a breed.

Thanks, AK dog doc. All very interesting.

[tumblehome]

Originally posted by Geoffrey:

About the golden retrievers....

 

there is a dual CH golden in Canada...field trials/conformation. Of course, I've never done a field trial so I don't quite know how good they represent true ability etc.

 

This is his webpage: http://www.ambertrail.com/pushstuddog.html

Yeah, I know Push. I watched him train as a pupster and watched him grow up. He's a remarkable golden, not to mention dog, but he's a rare bird indeed. FWIW, the Canadian CH and FTCH are achieved differently than the similar American titles.

Chris O

[tumblehome]

Originally posted by juliepoudrier:

Geoffrey,

I think the key is your statement that you don't know field trials. I would guess that the field trials the dog ran in are the equivalent of the AKC herding trials--that is, not a real tough test of ability. Now if the dog can go out and do real excellent fieldwork under all sorts of conditions or trial in "open" (i.e., non-KC-affiliated) trials and do well, then I'd believe the dog is "all that." But unfortunately a dual championship is the equivalent to what folks here have referred to as titles "on both ends." (This is not a slam on that partuicular dog, whom I know nothing about, but just pointing out that to many of us "DC" doesn't mean a whole lot.)

 

J.

The field trials are a bitch. They very definitely separate the posers from the goers. An open field trial is the moral and philosophical equivalent of an 800yd outrun with a blind double lift and 5 sheep shed. While the Amateur stake may be less difficult and the Qual is sort of like Pro/Novice, at no time does the dog's work represent a walk in the park. The walk in the park stuff is usually found at the Hunt Test level, which I think for the most part is similar to the AKC herding program.

 

The days of a "real" AKC dual championship are dead and gone. You can find a OTCH/FC or AFC) and you can still find (at least in Labs) an occasional CH/*** (not a FC but pointed), but the body styles have mutated so awfully for the breed ring that the big hat field dogs are for all intents and purposes a different breed now. Or vice versa. I don't believe either extreme represents what a golden (or Lab) was orginally invented for.

 

Which is why I am the very pleased owner of a 9wo b/w medium coat border collie by name of Tess. Not AKC, not nuttin but the daughter of some seriously working farm dogs.

Chris O

[kelpiegirl]

I have watched the field trials on the OLN. All I can say is WOW. For those dogs to not only be able to mark 4 different "birds", and take them all in order, and also respond on a dime to whistles- all while moving at hyper speed, that is just something else. If I were to get "into" sporting breeds, this is what I would do. ONe time I went to a field trial, and a young black lab was sent out. He couldn't find the duck (real) in the water, but was so bereft/intent on coming back with said duck, or likeness, he swam to the island where they were shooting from, found a nest of duck eggs, picked up, and brought the egg back, completely unscathed, and gave it to the handler. Will never forget that.

Julie

[Rhborder]

That is totally amazing, I have never seen a field trial before, I'd like to watch one.

[tumblehome]

Originally posted by Rhborder:

That is totally amazing, I have never seen a field trial before, I'd like to watch one.

It is awesome. The combination of talent and training produces some outstanding performances. My problem with the business (it is hardly a sport now) is as the courses get more difficult (and they do, so as to keep ahead of the dogs' capabilities), there is even less room for error, even less need for a dog that can think for itself.

 

Trialers demand dogs that can be trained to not veer from a straight line, that can run through hell and high water because they was sent there. The training is tough and huge and I am often disturbed by the pressure these fine dogs must take.

 

The open stakes of a USBCHA trail offers the exact same dazzling performances and the same communication between handler and dog but holy heaven the dog is a different creature entirely. Watching a smart sheepdog use its brains is not something to miss.

Chris O

[Sue R]

Chris - Some of your observations with regard to gun dog trials and the direction they are heading in, reminds me of some people's concerns with sheepdog trials and the direction some folks perceive them to be headed in. Namely, super-straight lines and tight turns, biddability instead of intelligent thought on the part of the dog, and results more dependent on or reflective of the handler and less on/of the dog.

 

I, for one, hope this isn't the direction in which stockdog handling/trialing is heading.