How working breeds are lost

[Denise Wall]

In another thread Laurie writes:

 

?why would any one in ABCA be worried that the working gene pool will be diluted??

 

Why indeed? Historical data on other breeds alone is enough to make anyone worried. I don?t exactly know why it happens but it happens. I have an analogy on how working breeds are lost that I?ve posted twice before, a couple of years apart. Each time I gain more insight on how to refine the model. Here it is again:

 

Okay, here?s my attempt at explaining what I think happens when working breeds are lost. Assume the border collie is the theoretical breed, where many strong workers existed in the original breeding pool and the need for their work was not lost or reduced but instead the dogs became less and less useful for it.

 

I believe it helps to think of the different levels of workers in more concrete groups, even though, in reality, the scale from all to none is graduated. Imagine something such as a dart board, with a bull?s-eye and several circles that indicate areas farther and farther from the middle target. Let?s say the bull?s-eye circle is red, the next circle is orange, the next yellow, and the very outside circle is white. The actual area within these circles varies depending on the number of dogs in each class at any one time.

 

Now let?s define the groups of dogs in the different colored circles. Please remember all of these categories in this hypothetical situation represent the **genetic potential** of these dogs. In other words, this is what's in the gene pool. I'm not talking about what people think the dogs are or don't know whether they are or not due to not having tested them:

 

Red circle (bull?s eye) = The very top working border collies. A working definition might be dogs who are exceptional enough to save a great deal of time and manpower for a livestock operation.

 

Orange circle = Useful dogs who save time and manpower for the operation but who are not top quality.

 

Yellow circle = Dogs who will work a little, but wouldn?t be considered useful workers on a real livestock operation because they would cost time and cause too much trouble. IOW, someone may want to pretend they're actually helping, but they really aren't and sometimes they're hindering. Although they may show some herding instincts, it's not the right package for work.

 

White circle = Dogs not interested or not capable of doing anything with stock except maybe chasing. So, not useful or way less than helpful.

 

 

Livestock working ability is comprised of many complex traits. These traits all need to fit together just right and in the right amounts for the dog to be the complete package, and be considered a top worker -- the bull?s-eye. Achieving this package with the consistency needed requires stringent evaluation and selection for working ability every generation. Because of the complexity of reproducing behavioral traits such as these, it?s difficult to get this package that is a top worker, in every pup, or even close, despite crossing the best to the best. This is partly because some dogs, for whatever reason, aren?t good breeders, no matter how good they, themselves, are. So let?s say if only red circle dogs were crossed, only 80% of that number of red circle dogs would be produced in the next generation. (This is a hypothetical number ? it may actually be less.) Therefore, breeding only red circle dogs will not replace all of the red circle dogs, and the number of red circle dogs will drop each generation if only these crosses are used.

 

As with other breeds used for other purposes, many a top sire gets bred to a mediocre bitch. Because the working genes are still highly concentrated in the border collie gene pool, the chances of hitting upon a dog who may not be a top worker herself but is a good breeder, are still pretty good. This type of good breeder would be mostly in the orange circle with a few in the yellow circle, but almost none in the white circle. Breeders of these top working sires may take a stud pup from these crosses to increase their chances of hitting on a good breeder should their top bitches not be, or not cross well their sire. In other words, the top breeders still rely on the peripheral pools of dogs who are not as good themselves but who are good breeders, to provide some of their next generations of top red circle dogs. As long as the emphasis is on breeding for work and the momentum of most of the breeding is going toward breeding for the bull?s-eye and concentrating only the working genes, the number of red circle dogs will be replaced each generation and maybe even expanded.

 

Now, suppose the breed becomes popular for dog shows, pets, and dog sports such as agility. Suppose these people do not only buy puppies from the working bred dogs. Now instead of a mostly dead end gene pool -- dogs that will not be bred, these dogs with no working ability will be bred. The number of white circle dogs increases. And since people seem to want to claim their ?borders? can still herd with the best of them, or the sport dog people need to tap into the working traits for success in their endeavor, they will look to the working circles for breeding to try to get these traits in the pups. Regardless of how it happens, however, now the momentum has changed and the working genes are being diluted, instead of concentrated, in this peripheral gene pool that has formerly been the source of good breeders to help replenish the red circle top workers. As this progresses, the good breeders in the peripheral gene pool become more rare, the yellow circle fades more to white, the orange fades more to yellow and the red fades more to orange. Unable to replace themselves without the help of the strong working genes formerly present in the peripheral gene pool, over time, the number of dogs truly in the red circle diminish until the gene pool is too small.

[laurie etc]

Denise, I understand this - it makes total sense. But don't you think it can happen just as easily within the ABCA today, without the impact of an outside registry organization? As long as ABCA dogs are either:

a) not being worked/proven, but being bred anyways (maybe for profit, or maybe from lack of knowledge); or

being bred for other ideals/characteristics than the bulls-eye -like color, agility, flyball, structure, great pets, or "best" clearances - regardless of dual registry.

 

Again, I don't have statistics, but I see a lot of border collies (both ABCA and AKC)that the general public owns who either are "in the white area" or totally off the dartboard!

 

I know ABCA's goal is to promote the bulls-eye dogs, and keep as many "darts" heading toward the center circle as possible. I see a problem with not taking a stance on who can play darts and how often; not regulating at least how many throws a player gets (especially when their darts never get close to the bulls-eye). I think what might be the downfall of the dart game is not necessarily the people who miss the dartboard entirely (because those people will get tired of the game and go on to something else); but all the people who are consistently in the white and yellow, and no one tells them to sit down and stop playing.

 

edited to say - I just don't see AKC making a big impact on the true working Border Collie because they do have their own registry; just like it can't make an impact on the true hunting Foxhound because they have their own registry. I know the AKC BC's will no-doubt become mindless clone-like fluffballs just like the Goldens and every other breed within the AKC. But the difference is - Goldens didn't have their own working registry to keep the working lines pure.

[Eileen Stein]

Laurie, it's not your fault that a terrible weariness comes over me when I consider trying to tackle this again. I sometimes think there's no use even trying to explain this to a non-working border collie person. I very much hate to outline what I think the future holds if dual registration continues, because I feel I'm putting out there a blueprint for what I don't want to happen, and that blueprint could be used to make it happen. But I'll start and see how far I get.

 

>

 

You can participate on this board without agreeing with me or the USBCC, so you're not sticking your neck out. But I don't really understand what you're a convert to.

 

>

 

And why do they do that, do you suppose? Do you think the AKC has nothing to do with it? Have you failed to observe that it's the AKC that sponsors those beauty pageants, and advocates breeding for "pretty-fluffy"? It leads and they follow. There's an elephant in the room -- haven't you noticed? How the heck do they pull that off -- smoke and mirrors? A cloak of invisibility?

 

>

 

The parent club did not write the standard for the AKC border collie. When the AKC took in the border collie, they did not designate a parent club, because there was no club qualified except the USBCC, and the USBCC was not willing to cooperate. The AKC itself cobbled together a standard based on the Australian show standard, with some modifications. Since then the AKC has designated a parent club (from a pair of servile, supine contenders for the honor) and the club has modified the standard, and so the illusion is back in place that it's the parent club that sets the standard, drawing on its great expertise with the breed. But the history of AKC recognition of the border collie exposes the naked truth. The AKC is the puppet master. But the parent club is part of the AKC apparatus, and therefore an integral part of what I fear.

 

>

 

As I'm sure you know, that's not the case with the AKC.

 

>

 

Knowledgeable, dog-experienced ranchers would look to a working breeder. But there are many more livestock people who could benefit from using dogs than are using dogs now. There are plenty of farmers and ranchers who are just opening up to the thought of using a dog, and plenty of people taking up newer methods of livestock production where dogs are more valuable, and--believe it or not--many people just coming into small-scale farming. They are taken in by the claims--backed up with herding titles--of AKC breeders whose dogs are certified herding excellent and can supposedly do it all. When they find that this pup from titled parents is no use, they give up on dogs altogether, which is a loss for them and for the real border collie. And they share with others their new knowledge that dogs are no use. I know this happens, because I've heard from people it's happened to.

 

As for dilution, I think Denise's explanation is very valuable. And it's also important to keep in mind that a unitary gene pool between the AKC and the ABCA, which is what the BCSA is determined to achieve, is a tremendous destabilizing influence in our world, in many and varied respects. Everything is in flux now. We're like a third-world island where sophisticated people come in and start throwing their money around. I'll talk about the dangers I think we face in this regard in a separate post.

 

>

 

I don't think this comparison works for two reasons. First of all, non-working people don't seem to appreciate how much goes into making a good working border collie. It's orders of magnitude different from what's needed to make a good foxhound or coonhound, and therefore that much more fragile and easy to lose. Secondly, foxhounds and coonhounds just aren't popular. Nobody buys them for obedience or agility, and very few show them in conformation. If I'm not mistaken, the foxhound is dead last in numbers registered within the AKC, and the black and tan coonhound (the only coonhound AKC registers) is not far above them. A grand total of 22 English Foxhounds and 48 American foxhounds were registered with the AKC last year -- I just looked it up. So the AKC foxhound and coonhound people don't want the real foxhound and coonhound people's dogs, and the real foxhound and coonhound people really face no threat of being marginalized by the AKC version, either in numbers or in public perception. It's a very different situation for us. They're not threatened by the AKC, but we are.

 

>

 

I should make it clear that I don't think the only threat comes from conformation people and conformation-bred dogs. Some think that, because conformation has been the road to ruin for most KC breeds in the past. But breeding for anything other than working ability is the problem, so breeding for agility or obedience is just as bad as breeding for conformation. The real threat to us is the "versatility" ideal that the BCSA espouses and rewards, and the "versatility" fanatics don't disdain our dogs at all. They won't leave us alone because we are an essential ingredient (but only an ingredient) in making what they are defining and promoting as The Versatile Border Collie.

 

>

 

I guess it's just as well for you that you don't see the need, since it wouldn't be very good for business, would it?

 

>

 

I really have nothing more to say to this than I've already said.

 

Okay -- enough for now. I'll see if I can write up what the working border collie has to fear from dual registration in 10,000 words or less.

[bobh]

This

is sad after reading this post it seems that the true Working Bc in The USA is in for ahard time .

My ? is are any of you in the Know optomistic about the true Bcs . Every day i see more and more Bcs being dual or trippel regestered

bob

[Howdyjabo]

Hang in there Eileen

 

There HAS been a great improvement

Several years ago this thread would have been inundated with breeders saying that they can breed for everything. So no worries.

They have either gone elsewhere or know that they aren't gonna find any converts here or that you , Denise and others will show them up to be as foolish as they are.

 

So congrats-- its a small step but one you should be proud of.

 

I do think its too late for banning dual registration. There are too many traitors that have money and egos to loose. Being a membership there is little chance of reaching a consensus now. Shame it wasn't done years ago -- it would have worked back then.

Still I think its the right thing to keep the pressure on.

 

I know for a fact that you got several votes for the sole reason of your support of banning dual registration.

 

 

Education is the answer-- Create Buyer pressure to reject dual registering and those that do it .

 

 

Laurie-- the big difference you are missing between B&T and Fox hounds-- Is that the two groups with different goals have completely split.

Hunters have nothing to do with AKC-- and AKc has nothing to do with the hunting lines. I don't know of a single AKC breeder that touts their lines of having quality hunting instincts-- They could care less if they loose that.

 

The AKC lines of Border Collies continue to preach that they can do it all and meet the needs of farmers too. They get some sence of pride to "carry on" the herding tradition.

The split is not going to happen with the Border Collie unless outside pressures force it.

[laurie etc]

Eileen, no need to do that just on my account. You have given me some more valuable information, and if it's not productive for the board as a whole, I don't want you to wearily waste any more time on lil' ol' me.

One difference, still, that I see is the ability for Working Border Collies to keep their own working registry, as opposed to many breeds which have no REAL ALTERNATIVE to AKC. Instead of trying to belittle, berate and deregister the "opponents" and the elephant registry; why would ABCA not spend more time and energy extolling the virtues of ABCA working dogs to John Q Rancher (before the 4-wheelers make using a dog for farm work obsolete anyways?) I've always hated smear campaigns - I think they do far more harm than good.

[laurie etc]

Originally posted by KillerH:

Laurie-- the big difference you are missing between B&T and Fox hounds-- Is that the two groups with different goals have completely split.

Hunters have nothing to do with AKC-- and AKc has nothing to do with the hunting lines. ..The AKC lines of Border Collies continue to preach that they can do it all and meet the needs of farmers too. They get some sence of pride to "carry on" the herding tradition.

The split is not going to happen with the Border Collie unless outside pressures force it.

Good point - but I never heard the Hunters "smearing" the AKC - just making sure people knew they were separate entities. RE AKC Herding - I've seen it- never done it - but I guess if your farm had only 3 sheep, a few ducks and an acre or so, some of those dogs WOULD be able to do the job for you.

[Eileen Stein]

Laurie, if I see the AKC as a danger to the working border collie, why is it a "smear campaign" to say so and try to explain why? Is it a "smear campaign" when you criticize the "greedy, beauty pageant obsessed breeders and parent club 'gurus'" in order to exonerate the AKC of any responsibility? If you do see what I'm saying as a "smear campaign," then I would indeed be wasting my time.

 

>

 

We spend a great deal of time doing that (though we're no match for the AKC in resources and name recognition). But as long as there's dual registration, owners of dual registered dogs can simply claim their dogs are ABCA working dogs. After all, they're registered with the ABCA and they have herding titles from the AKC. So they're the best of both! Banning dual registration would in fact be an attempt to "keep our own working registry" -- to keep it separate and apart from dogs bred for AKC purposes, so that we can be separate entities.

 

>

 

Well, that's one we hear a lot -- to explain that it really doesn't matter whether working ability is preserved in the breed or not. So what difference does it all make anyway? Stop being so nasty and negative -- put on a happy face!

[Denise Wall]

But don't you think it can happen just as easily within the ABCA today, without the impact of an outside registry organization? As long as ABCA dogs are either:

a) not being worked/proven, but being bred anyways (maybe for profit, or maybe from lack of knowledge); or

being bred for other ideals/characteristics than the bulls-eye -like color, agility, flyball, structure, great pets, or "best" clearances - regardless of dual registry.

For a) you'll not get any argument from me about high volume/low quality producers. I'm the one that proposed the breeding limitation that was apparently rejected after I left the board.

 

However, if a person visits these places, many can understand simply by observing the conditions that they aren't responsible breeders by any standards. In contrast, the AKC crowd defines themselves as "responsible breeders" (with pups that can do it all!) in a way that appeals to outsiders and allows them to sell their pups over working bred pups. In general, they are much better at PR with all their titles and such.

 

For most of the characteristics or reasons you list are promoted by AKC or the way of thinking AKC influences.

 

So, no, I don't think it can happen just as easily within the ABCA today, without the impact of an outside registry organization.

 

Even though ABCA BYB breeders may be diluting the gene pool, they don't have directed, organized goals that are promoted and supported by a large organization such as AKC. This is why I see BYB as less of a threat to the future of the breed than AKC. They lack the power, structure and support to influence the masses, unlike AKC.

[Rebecca, Irena Farm]

RE AKC Herding - I've seen it- never done it - but I guess if your farm had only 3 sheep, a few ducks and an acre or so, some of those dogs WOULD be able to do the job for you.

Well, actually, under those circumstances my "farm" would be better (and more cheaply) managed with a bucket of feed.

[Rebecca, Irena Farm]

I hear the one about four wheelers a lot too. Just rarely from real farmers who currently use dogs, who have discovered that try as they may to replace those pesky dogs, it takes about six four wheelers to equal a couple good dogs.

 

But, it takes about the same number of four wheelers to fix the havoc one bad dog can make (and some good fence tools). We don't want to expose any more farmers to that kind of havoc created by watered-down dogs.

 

We'll take care of the dilution within our own ranks - that's a seperate problem and I don't see how it's more than a red herring here. But it's no use doing that with the elephant in the room playing darts.

[Denise Wall]

before the 4-wheelers make using a dog for farm work obsolete anyways

In a range-type situation, here's an illustration of why that's never going to happen:

 

 

Notice I've got a nice long view since the gator I was in couldn't get across that huge ditch. Mick is the small speck on the upper right hand side of the sheep (2,000-3,000 of them).

 

 

Using dogs is not limited to gathering from large areas anyway. In non-range situations such

as where I live, dogs are used all year around for sorting and moving sheep through handling equipment for such things worming, vaccinating, foot baths, foot trimming, crutching, shearing, and medications. During the grazing season, dogs are used to move sheep from field to field for rotational grazing. During non-grazing season, dogs are used to help during feeding, bringing sheep in and holding them off while food is put out (and this holding them off while food is being put out is a bigger deal that it might sound to those who've never done it).

 

The most intensive time for dog use where I live is during lambing season, where in climates such as ours many "pasture lamb" but soon after use dogs to bring the individual new mothers and lambs up to be put in "jugs" for one to several days alone with their lambs until they've mothered up good and are sure they've been fed and are healthy. In almost any situation lambing season is when the dogs will be used the most.

 

Try using a four wheeler for that stuff.

[laurie etc]

Originally posted by Eileen Stein:

Laurie, if I see the AKC as a danger to the working border collie, why is it a "smear campaign" to say so and try to explain why? Is it a "smear campaign" when you criticize the "greedy, beauty pageant obsessed breeders and parent club 'gurus'" in order to exonerate the AKC of any responsibility?

I was not trying to exonerate anybody - but again, I'm looking at AKC as primarily a "vehicle" for the breeders who are raking in the money. Eileen, I do think the accusatory tone of your message is causing the other people on this board who may have dual registered dogs to feel uncomfortable about responding. I'm sure I'm not the only one reading this thread.

 

 

Originally posted by Eileen Stein:

We spend a great deal of time doing that (though we're no match for the AKC in resources and name recognition). But as long as there's dual registration, owners of dual registered dogs can simply claim their dogs are ABCA working dogs. After all, they're registered with the ABCA and they have herding titles from the AKC. So they're the best of both! Banning dual registration would in fact be an attempt to "keep our own working registry" -- to keep it separate and apart from dogs bred for AKC purposes, so that we can be separate entities.

I'm on the fence right now- my older dogs are dual registered, to be honest. I did it for agility competition purposes. But now that I have seen the value of working dogs, and seen my own little 30 lb "agility" dog gently move ewes and lambs; stand up to a 200 lb ram; sort weak sheep from the flock; gather on her own, in the dark and snow, a flock of 50 or so sheep who had broken into the wrong pasture, and hold them at the gate for over an hour before I found her. All her top level agility titles pale in comparison. I've seriously thought about leaving the agility behind (at least the AKC variety) and only pursuing herding. That's why I'm so persistantly asking questions, trying to understand your points, and hashing this out. My livelyhood revolves primarily around people with AKC dogs and has for many years- for other breeds AKC is a "given". I don't abhor "the elephant" like you do, but I see them as a necessary evil for many purebred dogs.

[laurie etc]

Nice picture Denise - and I do basically understand about many of the uses for Border Collies in a farm situation - I regulary help out with the sheep (moving, sorting, vaccinating, foot-bathing, holding for sutures, etc) on the farm where I train.

I also find it hard to believe that a rancher would pay AKC prices for a Border Collie - but I guess there's a sucker born every minute.

[DeltaBluez Tess]

I had a person write me once and ask for a laid-back pup from Tess's last litter...upon further questions, they wrote back and wanted a calmed down model of Tess, one for a house pet that could also live outside in the backyard,non active etc.....told them that her pups were way more active than she was and then they asked to buy Tess!!!!.....told them if they wanted a calm, gentle dog that a Border Collie was not for them so next email from them was they got a AKC Border Collies that the breeder guaranteed them that it was a calmed down version....

 

Tess's pups ended up more high drive than Tess was at that age.....no way they could be low key dogs......think of little barracudas who drool at the sight of sheep or cows.....

 

Diane

 

p.s....Tess is never for sale as she is our child, God gave her four legs instead of two.....amd we are blessed to have her

[Eileen Stein]

>

 

I don't want them to feel uncomfortable about responding -- the whole purpose of a discussion board is for people to express their views -- but I do want to make them feel uncomfortable about dual registering enough so that they don't want to do it anymore, because I think it's ultimately bad for our dogs, and as things currently stand we have no way to fight it except the power of education, public opinion, peer pressure, moral suasion. I want to convince them that it's wrong, and I can't do that without saying it's wrong.

 

It wouldn't be necessary to confront this if the AKC had closed their studbook to our dogs as they repeatedly said they would, and as they've always done in the past. They didn't, just so that they could force us to be in a unitary gene pool with them, to their benefit and our detriment. So how can we get them to leave us alone, to go their way and let us go ours?

 

You've said a couple of times that our gene pool won't be diluted because dogs who go into the AKC and are bred for conformation or versatility will be gone for good--their pups won't be in the ABCA gene pool. But the whole point is that, if dual registration is permitted, they WILL be in our gene pool. As things stand, the offspring of two dual registered dogs can continue to be dual registered indefinitely. In a few generations of breeding for show they will be Barbies (just as the ones we now call Barbies were created originally from breeding working dogs to look like that), but their owners can still register them with us. In a few generations of breeding for versatility, they will be jacks of all trades and masters of none, but their owners can still register them with us. How does that not dilute our gene pool?

[Eileen Stein]

Laurie, two more things:

 

I don't think anyone should feel guilty that they may have registered a border collie with the AKC before they knew the issues involved. I just want to convince them that they shouldn't do it anymore.

 

I probably should apologize for the first paragraph of my first post in this thread. It was just stream of consciousness on my part, because I DID feel weary at that moment, but it is absolutely not your fault that this subject has been discussed to death a time or two. I should welcome every opportunity. And really, I do.

[Caroline]

I am reading this thread, and I ILP'd my first dog. I am sorry I did. I think that more ILP's helped encourage the AKC to consider registering Border Collies. I heartily encourage the ABCA to do anything they can to stop dual registration. I strongly feel that dual registration will dilute the breed's working ability in the long run. It is too bad it happened originally, but better to stop it late then never.

Eileen, your strong words are needed, many people don't realize the danger in the dual registration situation.

Caroline

[Dixie_Girl]

<< I?ve been around Hunting American Foxhound people for years, and they also have their own registry of working lines ? The Masters of Foxhounds Association. They just laugh at what AKC has done to ?stylize? their so-called American Foxhound. They dismiss them as ?unimportant?, they don?t feel threatened by them. And no Huntsman looking to form or improve a hunting Foxhound pack would ever think of using AKC hounds. I understand the same is true with Coonhounds, and some other true working breeds that have their own ?keepers of the working pedigrees?. >>

 

As I said before, it is BECAUSE of what AKC has done to these breeds that the people who want to use them for their breed purpose that they have to do that. If I'm not mistaken, the foxhound is dead last in numbers registered within the AKC, and the black and tan coonhound (the only coonhound AKC registers) is not far above them. A grand total of 22 English Foxhounds and 48 American foxhounds were registered with the AKC last year -- I just looked it up.

 

yeah, and every time they have the doggie beauty pagent on, I check for when they will show the herding dogs. There is always the one BC and he looks absolutely embarrased! The commentators will go on and on about the other breeds, but the last show I watched, it was like 15 seconds and at the end, very derogatory like, IMO, they mentioned his inteligence. If nothing else were in play, THAT would have stopped me from wanting anything to do with them! It is very plain, if you breed for one thing,,,,,,,one thing is what you get! And you absolutely CAN NOT breed for conformity and workability. One dog out of a million dogs will be exactly what is percieved as the "perfect" looking BC AND take the world champ dog trialing. It is not any plainer than that. If there is NOTHING wrong with letting AKC get a hold of a breed of dog, then name me ONE breed that was made better in ANY way, concerning doing what the breed was originally to be used for? If I was a betting person, which I am, I would bet you can't.

[Dixie_Girl]

BTW, the second paragraph of my above post was quoted from Eileen,,,,,,,,,it just didn't show the little do-hickeys before and after,,,,dunno why not?.........

[Dixie_Girl]

I was just watching Animal Planet. They had an advertisement come on about the up-coming "Sporthorse Cup". It started out saying, "It's not who has the best pedigree." "It's not who is the prettiest". "It's who can JUMP the HIGHEST!" That cracked me up! Now, if the AKC would just adopt that attitude for the dogs!

[Bill Fosher]

Eileen wrote:Knowledgeable, dog-experienced ranchers would look to a working breeder. But there are many more livestock people who could benefit from using dogs than are using dogs now. There are plenty of farmers and ranchers who are just opening up to the thought of using a dog, and plenty of people taking up newer methods of livestock production where dogs are more valuable, and--believe it or not--many people just coming into small-scale farming. They are taken in by the claims--backed up with herding titles--of AKC breeders whose dogs are certified herding excellent and can supposedly do it all. When they find that this pup from titled parents is no use, they give up on dogs altogether, which is a loss for them and for the real border collie. And they share with others their new knowledge that dogs are no use. I know this happens, because I've heard from people it's happened to.

 

About 17 years ago, I was very close to being this person. The AKC wasn't involved, but here's the story.

 

I was about to get sheep, and a friend of mine who had a small flock had a Border collie that seemed pretty useful. I thought I should have one of those, and I started asking other shepherds about them.

 

"Oh, you don't want a Border collie! They're too intense. They're impossible. They kill sheep." A few other suggested that I get an Australian shepherd -- they were supposed to be a little more mellow and less intense around sheep. I followed their advice.

 

Annie (RIP) was a wonderful dog but in describing her usefulness as a stockdog, the phrase "teats on a bull" springs to mind. After a spending a year trying to get something that resembled control over her, I pretty much gave up. If this was better than a Border collie, I wanted nothing to do with Border collies, I'll tell you that for certain.

 

I went back to my friend who had the nice working dog, and asked him for some advice. He said that when this dog died, he probably wouldn't get another of any breed. Just more trouble than they were worth, and he hadn't seen any that he would give you the time of day for in the past five years or so. He thought he had been lucky to stumble across his dog and considered him an exception rather than the rule. If you wanted a good sheepdog, he told me, you have to go to Scotland.

 

Bear in mind that this was all taking place within 20 miles of the farm of Edgar Gould, where some of the lines of better working dogs in the Northeast were established. Such is the nature of farming in New England. We are mostly small timers and fairly well cut off from one another.

 

As it happened, a friend of my wife's had a sister who owned a couple of Border collies. When she learned I had sheep, she begged and pleaded to come out to the farm to work them, as she had recently returned to New England and had sold her sheep when she left the midwest. I resisted, but when it came time for weaning and vaccinating, I agreed to allow her to help me.

 

I can trace the beginning of my journey with working dogs to that day: July 4, 1992. A job that I had figued would take all day -- gathering up 15 ewes and 28 lambs, penning them, giving the lambs injections, and separating the ewes from the lambs -- ended up being done in a couple of hours.

 

If that woman hadn't been persistent and polite and helpful, I wouldn't have ended up with Molly the following spring, and I would have been stuck at about 15 sheep, leading them around with buckets of grain and cursing them. I probably would have given up long ago. (There might have been some merit that course of action, but that's a discussion for another time.)

 

The point is that it's very easy to find examples of mediocre or poor Border collies, and it's very easy for a farmer to be swayed that dogs are a waste of time and money, and to never realize what he or she is missing in terms of opportunity, reduced labor, and improved husbandry.

 

A world full of AKC dogs trained for sport herding or worse, versatility, make that outcome much more likely. My concern is as much for the shepherd as it is for the breed.

 

I think that Denise and Rebecca have pretty well dispensed with the myth that ATVs can replace Border collies. Dogs can go a lot of places that ATVs can't, even if we were only using them for gathering.

[Rebecca, Irena Farm]

My livelyhood revolves primarily around people with AKC dogs and has for many years- for other breeds AKC is a "given". I don't abhor "the elephant" like you do, but I see them as a necessary evil for many purebred dogs.

But they are NOT a necessary evil for the Border collie, YET. That's what we are trying to avoid here. There are many breeds that started with their own registries (think the Golden started with the AKC? The labrador? How about the German Shepherd Dog?). But as the popularity of the breed grows, we are more in danger of becoming an unsupportable splinter group that "may as well" suborn to the AKC.

[kelpiegirl]

I do not understand why it is important in today's sport world, that one have anything to do with the AKC. Yes, sure, they have more trials, but that is about the only redeeming feature. Dogs are treated as beauty pageant entries first, and oh, isn't that nice that they can do agility/obedience well. Go and check out a show where they have all three in one place. THe conformation folks are very nose up to the other two. Why not stick with an agility group who's only purpose is agility? I have a breed that is not reg by the AKC, and I am MORE than fulfilled by my endeavors into USDAA.

AKC promulgates sports for the purebred dog, but they really mean- conformation dogs rule, but sport dogs- your money is just as good. My concern is the outright POPULARITY of the BC more than anything. Maybe it's because of agility, but I seem to see more and more every year. What about all those dogs in rescue? Where are they coming from? Which came first? Popularity, or breeding high numbers?

Julie

[Smokjbc]

had a person write me once and ask for a laid-back pup from Tess's last litter...upon further questions, they wrote back and wanted a calmed down model of Tess,>>>>Diane

 

HA HA HA HA... Laid back? Like the two little demons we have here? We spent most of yesterday afternoon de-tatching Brice from my poor sheep (who have long lost their amusement with him) while Bess spends most of her time bonging up and down in the house and making sheep run as FAST AS POSSIBLE...