Deb Posted October 17, 2002 Report Share Posted October 17, 2002 That's why I've posed the question. Seems pretty clear to me. And, yes, I'm opposed to dual registration. My life membership to ABCA will go in the mail tomorrow - along with a letter voicing my thoughts on the matter. I'm afraid the $1400 in repair work I had done on the truck last month slowed my response times! Deb Iron Pheasant Farm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest PrairieFire Posted October 17, 2002 Report Share Posted October 17, 2002 $1400? Coulda got a good dog for that, huh? Isn't transportation grand? Especially for those of us who choose to live a distance away from urban areas - in order to support our agrarian habit we need to stay close to urban centers so we can have jobs to PAY for that agrarian habit...and drive thousands of miles a year on urban freeways to come home and take care of the dogs and sheep... Y'know, if I didn't have the dogs, I wouldn't have time to take care of the sheep. If I didn't have the sheep, I wouldn't need the acres I've got. If I didn't need the acres, I could afford a pretty darn nice condo for my monthly expenses. What in the heck would I do with myself? I suppose I could get a nice akc Border Collie and spend my time getting titles on both ends and spending money on chalk, and tape, and blow dryers, and pretty leashes, and those cool canvas fold up kennels with the battery powered fans and a little groundcloth so Princess Ranier Foo-Foo the third wouldn't have to lay on that old grass...and I suppose, all things considered, that I wouldn't really KNOW the difference between my akc herding titles and (even just) getting around Gene Litton's course in under the 15 minute course time limit... Nah. Don't think so. ------------------ Bill Gary Kensmuir, Working Stockdog Center River Falls, WI 715.426.9877 www.kensmuir.com [This message has been edited by PrairieFire (edited 10-20-2002).] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deb Posted October 17, 2002 Report Share Posted October 17, 2002 Bill, A pretty good dog at that! I hear ya. My commute is 120 round trip - if I don't have a meeting in the D.C. metro area. Then it's 90-120 one way! My three year old commuter car has 160K on it... But, heck, I like living in rural Pennsylvania. Shoot, if I lived in Montgomery County MD I would not hear things like the owl calling outside my window this very minute (who-who-who-who, wah-who). Can't complain too much about the truck. It's twelve years old and the only work I've had to do before this last go-round is replace a speedometer cable and the water pump. It is on it's fourth stereo, however. And, it has 161K miles on it. "Y'know, if I didn't have the dogs, I wouldn't have time to take care of the sheep. If I didn't have the sheep, I wouldn't need the acres I've got. If I didn't need the acres, I could afford a pretty darn nice condo for my monthly expenses." Thanks - it's nice to know we're not the only fools trying to do this! Deb [This message has been edited by Deb (edited 10-17-2002).] [This message has been edited by Deb (edited 10-17-2002).] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Margaret M Wheeler Posted October 17, 2002 Report Share Posted October 17, 2002 Dang Bill, I was hoping you'd get all pumped up, call me a name and prove my point! Can't fool you country boys for a minute! Hi Deb! ------------------ Margaret retired terrierwoman, border collie newbie drumlins@adelphia.net Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tuck's BCBuddy Posted October 17, 2002 Report Share Posted October 17, 2002 Margaret, Reading the description that we were coming at Mark in a dark message board alley, my only response is....huh??????????? May have debated some opinions with Mark, but certainly don't see any "dark" side. In fact, in my last post, I noted to Mark that I was glad we could debate some of our opinions, without degenerating to insult slinging. Sooo, I guess I'm just not getting your point. Carl Hochberg P.S. Oh, by the way, while I'm not in their league, or even partially deserving (and I mean with regard to herding and Border Collie knowledge), I did want to say that I was quite honored to have been mentioned in the same sentence with Bill G., Bill F., Inci, and Eileen. Well, even if we were being sort of scolded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Margaret M Wheeler Posted October 17, 2002 Report Share Posted October 17, 2002 Carl, Meet me at sunrise behind the polo grounds! Pistols or swords? Margaret PS. Gotcha Bill! ------------------ Margaret retired terrierwoman, border collie newbie drumlins@adelphia.net Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tuck's BCBuddy Posted October 17, 2002 Report Share Posted October 17, 2002 Margaret, Neither. Wet noodles are my choice...now there's a dueling weapon with flair. Well, at least if you add some chicken chunks, it's effective in "dueling" my present cold and sinus problems. Carl Hochberg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Fosher Posted October 18, 2002 Report Share Posted October 18, 2002 Mark, The analogy to heroin is intentional. Once they enter the world of titles and conformation breeding, folk tend to loose perspective of what they're really supposed to be doing. Rules are bent or changed, lies are told, artificial testicles implanted. Courses are simplified to the point where all that is needed is a dog that will obey if you want a herding title. Similarly, once the Horse takes over a junkie's life, there's nothing else that matters. They will steal, cheat, even kill for that next fix. Nothing else matters. The AKC herding program and show ring are not the way to produce better border collies. That's what I'm interested in. We could argue whether it will destroy the breed, and I believe that without action on our part, it will. But we can set that aside for another time. The fact of the matter is that it will not *improve* the working breed, and as such I am opposed to it. As I've said before, there is nothing in the rules as they now stand that prohibits someone with an ABCA dog from registering it with the AKC. What is prohibited is registering the offspring of that AKC registered dog with the ABCA. I see no way that this will cut into anyone's market for puppies substantially. Yet, in another breath, you say that we should just wait for the AKC to close its stud book. What will happen to the puppy market then? Are you saying that we should accept AKC registered sires and dams in our registry? That would be a *huge* rule change. Follow your ideas out to their logical conclusion, and see if you still like them or can defend them. I know I said I wouldn't spend any more time on this, since you've said you won't change your mind. But I can't understand how you think the lack of enforcement of the existing rule will help the breed. I believe that the gene pool will continue to be healthy because I don't think that there will be a mass exodus from the ABCA if the regulation is enforced. But I'll leave that question to the geneticists who know their stuff much better than I do. If people like C. Denise Wall are satisfied that the gene pool would remain sufficiently diverse, I am satisfied. ------------------ Bill Fosher Surry, NH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest PrairieFire Posted October 18, 2002 Report Share Posted October 18, 2002 Mark writes: "those dogs that are part of a breeding program for excellence in herding that have been registered with the AKC to help financially support that breeding program will be excluded from the ABCA gene pool." Then when it is pointed out to him that one needn't register akc to sell pups, even in a predominantly akc area, Mark responds: "Breeding programs that truly have the goal of excellence in herding (using the yardstick state above) choose their crosses by the dogs' abilities not their papers. This by itself will keep inferior workers from adding to the gene pool, whether they be registered ABCA, AKC, ISDS, etc." And I once again ask, then why bother with akc registry, unless one is "cultivating" that market? As it stands, many folks can, and do, compete with thier ABCA Border Collie in agility, flyball, herding, obedience, and many other venues...heck, according to what some of the folks on these boards have written, it seems they can even get some sort of akc titles... And pups from ABCA litters CAN be registered akc - without the breeder's approval. They just aren't supposed to be able to have THIER offspring registered ABCA. So folks can even get every single darn akc title on every single end of any old poor working bred dog. They just can't (under this proposal) breed Princess Foo-foo and register the pups ABCA. What then, is the purpose of akc registration? As far as I can see, to increase, or take advantage of a market - a market that doesn't require the breeder to educate prospective buyers, or a market that allows the buyer to follow personal beliefs in "modifying" the present Border Collie into something different than it already is... Not a market that rewards - "herding excellence" - but a market that rewards "something different". Margaret - I guess you've lost me... ------------------ Bill Gary Kensmuir, Working Stockdog Center River Falls, WI 715.426.9877 www.kensmuir.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juliepoudrier Posted October 18, 2002 Report Share Posted October 18, 2002 An off-topic FYI, but if y'all are wondering why Mark isn't replying it's because he's trialling this weekend, so you may have to wait till Monday for him to join back in. Just didn't want anyone thinking you had scared him off... [This message has been edited by juliepoudrier (edited 10-18-2002).] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cholla1 Posted October 18, 2002 Report Share Posted October 18, 2002 Really, why do anyone here cares what AKC does or doesn't? Let's keep registering ABCA the ones elegible for it, the "real" working dogs and if someone chooses to start another registry or double register AKC, as some do (remember not all herding bred dogs herd and some like the choice of markets for their dogs) let them. Who cares if AKC has some "pure working lines" or not or what they do with them? Let's mind our own house as we have done and let others learn who ABCA is and what it represent. Use some money to advertise if necessary but don't cut some, who knows how many, out with such restrictions that smack of sour grapes. As mentioned, trialing can be done with dogs of any breed or registry, so that is not germane to registering. Very idealistic to say that the ABCA is "saving the working border collie" but that can be done as much as it can as it is as by keeping others from double registering. There is a whole big world out there and herding is a small part of it and ABCA and even smaller one. Make it even smaller and I don't know if it will be viable or end in a rare breed registry. I can see that something will be done as the ones for extra restrictions, especially anti AKC, are the ones that run the registry and that is ok. Just be careful of any action so it doesn't backfire, as I am sure you will be. Thanks anyway for doing the job of running it, however it get's done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest PrairieFire Posted October 18, 2002 Report Share Posted October 18, 2002 Hey Cholla - Wrote my thoughts to your post yesterday, but my system locked up and I never got back to it...I appreciate the comments on the horseys, and also appreciate some of the differences - after all, I've never seen a horse do a decent outrun, and my dogs hate it when I try to ride them out to the back pasture... Seriously, I think the problem with the akc is more visible in some areas than others - and in some venues more than others...and the fact that the akc has seriously undermined every breed of dog it has "recognized" is what some of us worry about... If you've read my posts, you know I'm not 100% behind simply banning dual registration - I think a tiered system that welcomes Border Collies, even couch dogs - but that makes a distinction between working tested, untested, and "unknown" would suit my beliefs better... But some have made a decision to support the dual banning simply as a matter of political expediency - as a doable thing. I see it also somewhat as simply trying to enforce what is already supposed to be happening, but because of lack (of funding, resources, or simply direction I don't know)isn't - the non-registration of the offspring of akc registered dogs. As I've said before (sorry, Deb) I think this needs a concerted effort by both the USBCHA and the ABCA - as an attempt to keep the herding world - both dogs and trials - "real". The USBCHA has taken a stance against ever "dual sanctioning" an akc trial again (and notice how the bcsa folks haven't publicly posted the information about their only (hopefully) USBCHA sanctioned trial on a public venue yet?). The ABCA Board feels it needs to do something since the bcsa and the akc are "upping the ante" by keeping the studbooks open (the original time period for closing them is passed and the bcsa is advocating keeping them open even longer), and are pouring large dollars and large efforts in DIRECTLY pulling dogs and handlers into thier fold... Now, one could argue that is market driven. But we have seen what "market driven" has done to our ethics as Americans and humans...through "business as normal" in the 1990's. You are right, it is a big world, and I have posted about my fears of the dog turning into a "heritage breed" in the past (sorry again, Deb), but it is important, to me personally, that folks can see a dog that is meant to do what it was bred for, loves, and FROM BIRTH, knows instinctually. I'm betting that you're old enough to know when nearly every black lab, golden retriever, coonhound, etc. had enough "instinct" to make a "working dog", and I'm betting you're also smart enough to know that simply isn't the case now... ------------------ Bill Gary Kensmuir, Working Stockdog Center River Falls, WI 715.426.9877 www.kensmuir.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest PrairieFire Posted October 18, 2002 Report Share Posted October 18, 2002 Oh, and as a point of reference, this is the "description of a Border Collie" that the akc breed club - the bcsa - is promoting... http://www.bordercolliesociety.com/bc/stan...rentrevised.htm When one signs on with the akc/bcsa one is ALSO signing on to the belief that all these criteria MEAN something - aren't they? Yet, despite all the claims to the contrary - what you will read is a CONFORMANCE standard...describing what a Border Collie should look like - NOT how a Border Collie should work. So, as Mr. Fosher points out, what is important is one be true to thier beleifs - mine are in the work, not conformance. ------------------ Bill Gary Kensmuir, Working Stockdog Center River Falls, WI 715.426.9877 www.kensmuir.com [This message has been edited by PrairieFire (edited 10-18-2002).] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest PrairieFire Posted October 21, 2002 Report Share Posted October 21, 2002 Oh, and to Mark B. - I took some cheap shots at you in an earlier post. As I said, a cheap shot is a cheap shot. My apologies. Some of us have been fighting the "dog wars" for many years - and forget, sometimes, that some newcomers don't have the background, information, or even the expereince, of having dealt with "The Fancy". So, once again, my apologies for the cheap shot. ------------------ Bill Gary Kensmuir, Working Stockdog Center River Falls, WI 715.426.9877 www.kensmuir.com [This message has been edited by PrairieFire (edited 10-21-2002).] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pipedream Farm Posted October 21, 2002 Report Share Posted October 21, 2002 Well I had a lot of reading to do when I got back. But it was good to go run my dog instead of this. It was amusing to have people come up to me at the trial and say "you don't look to battered". First off let me apologize to the posters and readers for my part of lowering the discussion to the childish level it had sunk. Bill G. I'm writing this as you're posting yours. Accepted. Based upon another thread http://www.bordercollie.org/ubb/Forum10/HTML/000277.html stirring the pot had a good outcome in terms of bringing in a new angle to think about the affects banning dual registration may have. I'm also sorry that my past success in NEBCA has offended anyone, we all have to start somewhere. But does current and past performance in trialing make me or anyone anymore or less worthy to challenge others views on how to protect the working border collie? I also don't discuss, debate, argue, bitch at the other posters in an attempt to change their minds (I know I can't); I go through the effort to open the reader's mind to other points of view and potential outcomes of the proposals. To stir the pot as it were. In my work I have found that discussing ALL the possiblities and potential ramifications often leads to better options than the most obvious. ------------------ Mark Billadeau [This message has been edited by Pipedream Farm (edited 10-21-2002).] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pipedream Farm Posted October 21, 2002 Report Share Posted October 21, 2002 So here's a ramification for you all to think about. What will breeders do when you tell them what they can and cannot do with their puppies? I know we've not (recently, sorry I haven't gone back to read all the past postings) touched on the money topic much. Will they say, OK I won't sell my puppies that way, or will they react another way? I guess it will depend upon how much income they derive from selling puppies. If the finial changes really cuts inot their income, these breeders may choose not to register with ABCA. Now before you jump all over me about the money thing, the breed was developed and has been improved due to economic forces. It's certainly more profitable for a sheep operation to have dogs rather than more people to move the sheep or an operation can manage more sheep with dogs. Breeders/trainers/judges will improve their stature and make more money if they have better dogs to run and can win more. ------------------ Mark Billadeau Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest PrairieFire Posted October 21, 2002 Report Share Posted October 21, 2002 Mark - I don't think you could have missed the part about ABCA pups being able to be akc registered without the breeder's approval - so banning dual registration will ONLY affect akc breeders as far as to where the pups can be registered...pups bred from akc dogs will need to be registered akc - just business as usual for most akc breeds... There must be something else you are talking about, want to clarify it for me? ------------------ Bill Gary Kensmuir, Working Stockdog Center River Falls, WI 715.426.9877 www.kensmuir.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pipedream Farm Posted October 21, 2002 Report Share Posted October 21, 2002 Bill G. I didn't miss it. There are ABCA breeders that have chosen to register their working border collies (as defined with the highest standard) to be better able to market their puppies they feel will not make the grade in herding to the AKC market. While you may not agree with their marketing stratigy, should all those dogs' offspring be excluded from the ABCA registry? Also, I'm curious when did this rule take affect? I couldn't find it in one of our dog's ABCA registration information from 1998. I would think it would have been enacted back during the "dog wars". "Dogs with the following are ineligible for ABCA registration: 1. Dogs having any ancestor that is registered with a registry that promotes conformation showing of Border Collies (American Kennel Club, British Kennel Club, F?d?racion Cynologique Internationale, Australian, or New Zealand Kennel Clubs, etc.)" ------------------ Mark Billadeau Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest PrairieFire Posted October 21, 2002 Report Share Posted October 21, 2002 Mark writes (and I've put his points into one quote for clarity of response) - "should all those dogs' offspring (...puppies they feel will not make the grade in herding to the AKC market...)be excluded from the ABCA registry?" Yes. Unless they are ROM'd. If they didn't make it as herding dogs, then unless the offspring can be proven to be valuable, why SHOULD they be registerable? ------------------ Bill Gary Kensmuir, Working Stockdog Center River Falls, WI 715.426.9877 www.kensmuir.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pipedream Farm Posted October 21, 2002 Report Share Posted October 21, 2002 Bill G. Nice job wiht the cut and paste to drive home your point. Too bad you altered the meaning in the post. ------------------ Mark Billadeau Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest PrairieFire Posted October 21, 2002 Report Share Posted October 21, 2002 Don't see it that way, Mark. Looks the same to me. ------------------ Bill Gary Kensmuir, Working Stockdog Center River Falls, WI 715.426.9877 www.kensmuir.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pipedream Farm Posted October 21, 2002 Report Share Posted October 21, 2002 "There are ABCA breeders that have chosen to register their working border collies (as defined with the highest standard) to be better able to market their puppies they feel will not make the grade in herding to the AKC market." Not every puppy in a litter will make the grade. Registering the parents AKC helps market those "lesser" puppies. There are puppies in that same litter that will make the grade, but banning dual registration will exclude them from ABCA registration. "should ALL those dogs' offspring be excluded from the ABCA registry?" ------------------ Mark Billadeau Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest PrairieFire Posted October 21, 2002 Report Share Posted October 21, 2002 "There are puppies in that same litter that will make the grade, but banning dual registration will exclude them from ABCA registration." No it won't. The pups can be registered on merit (ROM). Exactly as a registry, dedicated "to promote and foster in North America the breeding, training and distribution of reliable working Border Collies" should function. Seems like the same thing over and over, Mark. The answers to all these questions have been posted before. Unless something new comes up, I figure we're done. ------------------ Bill Gary Kensmuir, Working Stockdog Center River Falls, WI 715.426.9877 www.kensmuir.com [This message has been edited by PrairieFire (edited 10-21-2002).] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eileen Stein Posted October 21, 2002 Report Share Posted October 21, 2002 > Under Options B and C, those dogs' offspring would be includable into the ABCA registry through grandfathering. Those breeders would then have to decide whether to register FUTURE breeding stock with the AKC, knowing if they did so that their offspring would not be registerable with the ABCA. If they chose not to register their future breeding stock with the AKC, they would still be free to sell any of their offspring to AKC homes, just as many ABCA breeders with non-AKC-registered stock do now. There's no reason why "Nobody can tell me what to do!" feelings should arise. Nobody is telling them what to do; the registry is simply determining what dogs it will register. > This was certainly something the committee reflected on long and hard. As explained above, the question does not arise unless/until AKC closes its studbook. Until then, working breeders can readily sell their puppies to AKC homes without registering the sires and dams AKC, and indeed that seems to be the choice that the majority of working breeders have made. Just before the last deadline for closing the studbook, BCSA made a big pitch that dogs had to be AKC-registered now or they would be shut out. There was a little flurry of increased registrations, but still it appears that most working breeders chose not to register. To say what breeders will do if option B or C were to be enacted "will depend upon how much income they derive from selling puppies" is not really accurate. Rather, it might depend on how much income they derive from selling puppies that cannot be sold to non-AKC homes. "Selling puppies" does not = "selling puppies for AKC registration." If they can place their puppies in working homes, pet homes, non-AKC performance homes, ILP homes, or any combination thereof, then they will be unaffected by the change. Numerically, AKC-registering homes are far outnumbered by these other options. It may also depend on how much loyalty those breeders feel to the registry and the long-term welfare of the working border collie. A few people on these boards have said the registry is and ought to be nothing but a clerical service, recording pedigrees. But the registry is more than that. Why does it support eye research? Because it has a responsibility for advancing the welfare of the border collie, and that includes trying to eliminate health problems. Why does it support the finals, with contributions both to the costs of putting them on and substantial prize money, when this money benefits only the tiny fraction of the membership who run in the finals? Because it has a responsibility for preserving the working ability of the border collie and showcasing its worth, and the finals contributes to those goals. If it were nothing but a data bank, it shouldn't be doing any of those things, it should be just recording pedigrees, issuing registration certificates, and keeping its fees as low as possible. Responding to the threat that dual registration and AKC hegemony presents to the breed is another legitimate role of the registry, and I think most good working breeders accept that. A lot of these people had experience with the other proprietary border collie registries, and see this one as superior. Many have served on its board and take some pride in it and are committed to its welfare. That, plus the insignificance of the financial cost (if any) that options B and C would produce for them will cause most of them to remain with the ABCA in my opinion. Of course, if there are any among them who are actively courting the AKC market, and are trying to get in on the ground floor of what they hope will be some kind of financial bonanza, they will leave the ABCA, but if their goals are that AKC-centered, that will be just as well. [This message has been edited by Eileen Stein (edited 10-21-2002).] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoloRiver Posted October 21, 2002 Report Share Posted October 21, 2002 Am I the only person uncomfortable with the idea of any Border Collie breeder deriving a significant amount of income from the sale of puppies? My definition of a responsible breeder does not include someone who breeds for profit. A responsible breeder produces puppies with the aim of bettering the breed. In general, the time, hard work, and money breeders must put in to produce and evaluate high-quality dogs negates any monetary gain. How is someone who breeds puppies for profit anything less than a mill? To me the concern is finding enough suitable, high-quality homes for puppies, not "expanding the market." -- Melanie, Solo the Red, and The Fly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.