fooshuman Posted February 18, 2006 Report Share Posted February 18, 2006 Ok I understand the hatered of all things AKC. I don't argue against what you all have to say. (I agree on the most part) But after watching the westminster show, something struck me as way cool! Did anyone listen to what exactly the announcer said during the breed discription for the BC? He mentions the large number of BC's that end up in rescue and explains why. Love um or hate um AKC did that right! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eileen Stein Posted February 18, 2006 Report Share Posted February 18, 2006 Yeah, the Westminster announcers always say that. Why the angry face? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dixie_Girl Posted February 18, 2006 Report Share Posted February 18, 2006 I didn't get to see it. What were the reasons given? I have a hard time with AKC in general, and how they have been with BCs in particular. And sometimes AKC tries to make the implications that they are "doing right" by the breed. Could you please give me an idea of what was said? I am all for AKC "changing" its stance on the BC, I am not "close minded". I just haven't seen it,,,,,,,,,,,yet. Thanks, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fooshuman Posted February 18, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 18, 2006 Just grimacing not angry. And Dixie He just basically said that alot of BC's end up in rescue because people don't give them a job to do, and lose control over the dog. (We all know what happens when a BC becomes bored!) and that they aren't for everyone. I dont ever watch dog shows, so it suprised me that they (the AKC) actually acknowledge that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebecca, Irena Farm Posted February 18, 2006 Report Share Posted February 18, 2006 They do always say that at the big televised shows - it always gives me a giggle because it SO doesn't apply to the Goldens-in-a-tux mincing around in the ring at the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urge to herd Posted February 18, 2006 Report Share Posted February 18, 2006 They also say for a lot of breeds, "This is NOT a dog for an inexperienced handler." Ruth n the BC3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kajarrel Posted February 18, 2006 Report Share Posted February 18, 2006 Frooshuman, Maybe I'm dense, but what is your point? Kim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fooshuman Posted February 18, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 18, 2006 My point!? I was just rambling :confused: I guess it would be, even tho they tend to ruin breeds, it's nice to see them make it a point to bring up the abandoning issue with this breed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katelynn & Gang Posted February 18, 2006 Report Share Posted February 18, 2006 Sorry, I did not watch the show. Did they also mention that most Border Collies that are in rescues are there because of conformation and conformation breeders for advertising them as they do to the general public? Out of sight, out of mind. That is how breeds are kept safe. Katelynn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyrasmom Posted February 18, 2006 Report Share Posted February 18, 2006 I don't think that conformation breeders and their advertising are the sole reason that Border Collie's end up in rescue. Bad breeding practices extend to those breeding "working" dogs as well, or farm dogs, or Sport dogs however you want to distinguish the non-Barbie BC's that aren't necessarily of breeding quality. The newspapers are full of ads for "working bred pups" when in reality many of them are just border collies that live on a farm, a back yard breeder with a much bigger back yard. There are a TON of them in rescue, some are misunderstood souls, and some are really wired incorrectly. If anything in Rescue I see a lot more Border Collie type dogs than Barbie collie type dogs though that will probably even out with time as greed is greed, no matter what the coat length or ear set. And I don't totally agree that the Golden's in a tux don't need a job, as Mom to three, I can attest that two of mine are very intense and will confess that the third is a total fluff butt. If I don't occupy the two, mentally, they will find their own entertainment, and I know that while they may not herd sheep (though they've never been tested) they would not do well in a couch potato home. I know Barbie Collies are not popular here...but it's not fair to assume that all of them are inane stupid dogs. Just some. Maria Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyrasmom Posted February 19, 2006 Report Share Posted February 19, 2006 I want to stress that when I said "working bred" I didn't necessarily mean your top trial dogs, just the "look" of the working bred BC's versus the "Barbie look" seems prevalent in shelters at the moment. But our papers are full of "working bred BC puppies" that are little more than BYB, at least IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebecca, Irena Farm Posted February 19, 2006 Report Share Posted February 19, 2006 And I don't totally agree that the Golden's in a tux don't need a job, as Mom to three, I can attest that two of mine are very intense and will confess that the third is a total fluff butt.Trust me, I've met Merlin. He's an awfully nice dog. Outgoing, with that perfect melting look, and perfectly happy to stand vacantly - and he was young when I met him. He is the type the conformation breeders go for and the type that the AKC celebrates - therefore the breed will continue to go down that road. As to rescue, it's a numbers game. The majority of American dogs are still American type, that is, not bred with any view to AKC breed ring standards in mind and in fact with very little standard at all in mind. Breeding here has been very haphazard in general up to the last twenty years or so. There's been some very good work in the last couple of human generations importing superior working dogs and maintaining that level of work through the promotion of trials. However, there's plenty of backyard breeding still going on and the majority of it has nothing to do with the AKC. What the AKC can and WILL do is promote the Border collie as just another ornamental dog suitable to Joe Everyman and family. Their warnings are lip service - the breed formed in their image may have plenty of nervy energy but so do Aussies, German shorthaired pointers, retrievers, Shelties, and "Parson" terriers. Their desire to encompass the entire breed, in fact, endangers the efforts of generations of overseas conformation breeders to create a mellow family dog out of their working breed. The only way for the AKC to fix this conflict of interests is to ensure that conformation calls the shots. The celebration of the "title at both ends" always means conformation and well, whatever, who cares, as long as it's something. That is the power of the Kennel Club. If the American Kennel Club can legitimize the notion that conformation is first in importance for the Border collie, for every Border collie, even working Border collies, then we as working only breeders will be marginalized and our gene pool will be dangerously narrowed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katelynn & Gang Posted February 20, 2006 Report Share Posted February 20, 2006 It is very correct that conformation is not the sole reason Border Collies end up in rescue. But, how large was the call for rescue before the dogs showed up in the conformation ring being falsely presented? Conformation gives a very false impression of the Border Collie, for, what they show in their rings are not really Border Collies at all but "Barbie Collies." Now, for the general public that attends dog shows to meet breeders, like the American Kennel Club always suggest, is seeing what they believe to be the very best in that claimed breed. Meaning, in the mind of most, is every dog that carries that claimed breed name is going to be like that dog in the ring, no matter the price or the breeder. So, buyers leave the show with a set mind that they want one of those pretty fluffy black and white dogs that are so darn calm and smart. Is this the correct impression that show should have left on these buyers? Well, if they had 1,000 or better for a puppy from a conformation breeder, then yes. BUT if those buyers do not have 1,000 to buy a dog from a conformation breeder where do you think they are going to turn? To the Back Yard Breeders & Mills of America! Most public don't know, understand, or care where the puppy is coming from. All they know is that they want that pretty black and white fluffy that was so calm and smart that they saw at the show the week before but for a much cheaper price. So, they buy a dog that is more then likely from some sort of "working dog" pedigree that has been breed for generations in aimless directions with nothing in mind but a money sign. They haven't a clue that the little black and white puppy that they bought is not a thing like any Barbie Collie they saw. From there, things go down hill. Some end up on chains. Others in shelters. Then, the lucky ones, are drop in a rescue that understand them. Now, these are dogs from breeders that breed aimlessly for no reason but money. Do you really think they depend on the working world to create their buyers market or the American Kennel Club? You tell me. As for Barbie/Sport Collies also needing jobs. Yes. Most Barbie/Sport Collies will need simple jobs because not all the working traits have been successfully been breed out of them, YET. Some are hyper with no drive or herding triats, others are hyper with a ton of drive and no herding traits or hyper with no drive and some herding traits, then there are those that aren't hyper that have no drive or herding traits, ect. Talk about wired incorrectly. *sigh* Oh and conformation dogs are yet to full blown find their selves in rescue (my sister has a Barbie Collie that is indeed a rescue) because there are not enough of them yet. The conformation destruction of the breed hasn't taken that sort of hold, YET and hopefully never will. That is why the American Kennel Club has their books open to our dogs still. Katelynn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyrasmom Posted February 20, 2006 Report Share Posted February 20, 2006 And I agree with the points made by both of you. I'm not defending the AKC, I don't breed, I don't show, I have 3 Barbie Collies and 2 B BC mixes plus one in foster. I've had the opportunity to meet some working BC's and was very impressed with the dogs themselves but not so impressed with the owners who use them to work cattle...and breed the bitch at every heat. There is bad on all sides of the BC issue, I agree with the detriment of changing what the BC inherently and if I were to add to my family (god forbid at this point) I would love a true working pup, but one who comes from a truly responsible breeder, one who breeds from proven, healthy, and well adjusted pairings and takes responsibility for his dogs and the fact that he brings dog lives into a world that is already full of them. The ignorance of people who breed to just prance around a ring is matched by those who breed just because their dogs have genitals. And thus you have the badly wired dogs on either end of the spectrum, bad breeding is just bad breeding. My main or only point is that it's not ONLY the AKC that hurts this breed and puts dogs into rescue. And you're right, someone may watch Westminster and say, "oh, I want me one of those" but I met plenty of "city folk" at a sheep herding trial last year who said, "oh I want me one of those" and they won't necessarily be any more educated about their choice then someone watching a dog show. After all, what do they know, all Border Collie's are the same. Maria Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katelynn & Gang Posted February 20, 2006 Report Share Posted February 20, 2006 The same question still remains: How large was the need for rescue before the Barbie Collie showed up in the conformation ring being falsely presented as a Border Collie? Katelynn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyrasmom Posted February 20, 2006 Report Share Posted February 20, 2006 Originally posted by Kate, Dice, Cue, and Rev:The same question still remains: How large was the need for rescue before the Barbie Collie showed up in the conformation ring being falsely presented as a Border Collie? Katelynn I'm sure there is someone who can answer this better than I as I'm relatively new to the US BUT from statistics I've gotten from our local pound, and we live in a rural area, our pound has been putting to sleep border collies and border collie mixes for many many years (before the movie Babe) simply because the farmers don't spay/neuter and allow their dogs to roam. It's not always a matter of supply and demand, sometimes it's just plain ignorance. One litter that I fostered came from a local ranch, they wanted/needed new pups to train, bred their own dogs, kept the winners, and left the losers behind a supermarket dump in freezing weather. Given that it's a small community, it wasn't hard to find out where the pups came from. Where is the AKC fault in that? Again, I'm not disputing the AKC responsibility in this, I agree with you, I simply see another side to it that needs addressing as well, but it somehow seems that anyone who uses their dogs for work is somehow exempt from criticism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue R Posted February 20, 2006 Report Share Posted February 20, 2006 Maria - I think you make some excellent points in both these posts. I am very much opposed to conformation showing/breeding and the entire kennel club culture that accompanies it. I think it is detrimental to the Border Collie as a breed. That said, I really think that the biggest threat to Border Collies is the "enemy within". Those are the people that breed irresponsibly as puppy millers, backyard breeders, don't-bother-to-spay/neuter breeders, etc. They produce mediocre pups at best, often in abysmal conditions, and market them to a gullible, ignorant, and sometimes selfish public. And they do it all while proudly flying the flag of "working-bred". And, when it doesn't work out because the pup nips at the kids, is destructive in the house or yard, harasses the stock, or whatever - it's the dog that pays the price with a one-way ticket to the shelter ("they'll find a good home for it") or being dumped along a country road (because it needs "room to run") where it will be hit by a car, or shot by an irate stockperson or hunter. The working stockdog culture is dependent on personal integrity rather than a plethora of regulations. It is a shame that so many people are motivated more by greed and selfishness than integrity and the desire to benefit the breed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eileen Stein Posted February 20, 2006 Report Share Posted February 20, 2006 > Well, that's certainly true. I see AKC as the greatest threat to our breed, but its impact on rescue is a very tiny part of that threat. There would certainly be border collies in rescue even if there were no AKC. But "dogs in rescue" is much more of a harm to individual dogs than to the breed. I don't think conformation showing per se has had much impact on the number of border collies in rescue. I do think AKC recognition has had a big impact, just because it brought the breed so much more into the public eye. Yes, a lot of people saw "Babe" and read Stanley Coren, but most people when they decide to get a dog start by "researching," however minimally -- and the way they research is to consult a dog book, and the dog books list only the AKC breeds. The dog magazines deal with the AKC breeds. If they go to a dog show, it'll almost certainly be an AKC dog show, and the dogs they will see being shown will be the AKC breeds. The public as a whole, one way or another, looks to the AKC to see what the possibilities are. Popularization of the border collie has been a gradual process, but it took a huge jump with AKC recognition. And popularization is the start of the road that leads dogs into rescue. There are bad breeders in all spheres, including conformation showing (I have a couple of specific BC conformation folks in mind) and livestock working, though most bad breeders are involved in neither. ABCA registers more than ten times the number of border collies as AKC does each year, even now, and there are a significant number of BCs who are not registered anywhere, so of course many more non-AKC BCs are going to come into rescue than AKC BCs, for a long time to come. I do know of a specific breeder who was dual registering at the time she came under fire in the ABCA for dishonest breeding practices, and who did not contest the charges against her, apparently because she could simply shift all her dogs into the AKC through open registration. As the percentage of BCs who are AKC-registered grows, then so will the percentage of AKC-registered BCs in rescue. If there's an upside to open registration, I guess that's it. One other point. AFAIK, there are no good statistics on how many BCs come into shelters or rescue, or whether they are a higher percentage than would be expected given their overall numbers in the dog population. I wish there were. It is often said, and widely believed, that border collies are over-represented in the shelter/rescue population, but are they really? I suspect it's a regional thing -- with lots of BCs coming into rescue in some areas, and few in others. If you judged by the dogs coming into my local shelter, you'd think there was no problem with border collies at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyrasmom Posted February 21, 2006 Report Share Posted February 21, 2006 If I understand correctly what you're saying is that the breeding of mediocre working dogs is not a detriment to the breed. And I suppose you're right under a certain logic, but the topic was whether or not there are more BC's in rescue because of the AKC. I believe I clearly stated that the AKC type dogs would eventually catch up to rescue as the numbers increased so I guess I don't really get what you're trying to say. That there are bad AKC breeders? Of course! With few exceptions, I'd say that the vast majority of them are, and that's of course excluding the principle of breeding solely for working drive which still makes them bad breeders in the ABCA viewpoint, which I do respect. But it still doesn't change the fact that there are far too many working farms breeding just for the sake of breeding. Reliable statistics would be impossible to have, and of course rural farm communities will have a prevalence of working dogs over say NYC (maybe). I visit my shelter once a week and there are always at least 3-4 American type BC's, there are also always at least twice the number of pit bulls so perhaps it's not as serious a problem, but they're still there. I don't know that they're registered, but I do know they're from working stock. While it may not be an AKC problem, or an ABCA problem, I think it is a BC community problem with a very "good ole boy" mentality that doesn't seem to want to change or even accept responsibility. I can respect the ideals of the ABCA, but not if it apparently closes an eye on bad breeding practices practices (and let's not even consider the actual living conditions of soem of these animals) much in the same way the AKC pretends to abhor puppymills. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eileen Stein Posted February 21, 2006 Report Share Posted February 21, 2006 > I think you don't get what I'm trying to say because you assume I must be arguing with you. Basically, I'm not. I merely gave my take on the subjects raised, not in opposition to anything you or anyone else said. The one sentence I quoted from you I was agreeing with. If "the topic was whether or not there are more BC's in rescue because of the AKC," I would say there are, because AKC recognition increased the demand for BCs, which both AKC and non-AKC breeders are way too eager to satisfy. > This seems to be injecting a new issue into the conversation, but maybe I just perceive it that way because I didn't realize your previous posts were intended as criticisms of the ABCA. In what way do you feel the ABCA "closes an eye," and what exactly do you think it should be doing? Bear in mind that specific proposals are preferable to general "alas and alack" criticism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue R Posted February 21, 2006 Report Share Posted February 21, 2006 Eileen - I don't the authors of previous posts (including mine) mean to point a finger at the ABCA, which I feel is an organziation of great integrity, devoted to maintaining honest and accurate pedigree information (and contributing in several other ways to the betterment of the Border Collie breed). I think we all realize that there are irresponsible people who register with ABCA. They market pups to the gullible and ignorant who are looking for farm/ranch dogs, sports dogs, or companion dogs. In addition, there are people who breed irresponsibly who do not register (or use one of the many puppy-mill/back-yard-breeder bogus "registries"). I think that, what several people have said (including myself) is that poor breeding practices exist in those who associate themselves with the "working-bred community" (breeding dogs that are either ABCA-registered or unregistered, but from stock-working parents or farm/ranch situations). AKC recognition and exposure of Border Collies is a threat to the breed, but aren't the people who breed irresponsibly outside of AKC just as much a threat? That includes those that produce and market puppies irresponsibly and register ABCA, as well as those that don't register at all or use one of the new, bogus registries. And, if this is the case, I wonder what can be done about it? You ask for specific suggestions and I don't have any. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eileen Stein Posted February 21, 2006 Report Share Posted February 21, 2006 > That's the way I read their/your posts also, right up to the one that said, "I can respect the ideals of the ABCA, but not if it apparently closes an eye on bad breeding practices . . ." I took that one to be pointing a finger at the ABCA. Right, yes. > Not in my opinion. I do agree that the people who breed irresponsibly outside of AKC are as blameworthy as the people who breed irresponsibly inside the AKC, and there are currently more of them. But the threat to the breed presented by the AKC goes far beyond that. Bad breeders outside the AKC simply aren't in a position to have the same impact on the breed, despite the harm they may cause to individual dogs, because they are negligible in terms of their influence on shaping the breed. I'm not minimizing the harm they do -- I care very much about the fate of the dogs they produce and the dogs they use to produce them. But I can't agree that they are "just as much a threat" to the breed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue R Posted February 22, 2006 Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 Sorry, Eileen, if you thought my posts were meant to criticize the ABCA, because they weren't. I did miss (twice) the comment about a "closed eye" (the original post and your quote). My concern was not about ABCA, which I believe fulfills its mission admirably, but about those who are irresponsible as breeders using ABCA registry (and obviously useless "registries" or no registry at all) and supposedly aligning themselves with the working-bred community. I have mainly been viewing the AKC threat as being one of breeding dogs for something other than the work, and not in terms of the bigger picture of the AKC influence in the "dog world" and the world of people who enjoy and/or own dogs. Of course, as long as the AKC studbooks remain open, the threat will be even greater. I do feel that there are significant issues that plague the breed and threaten its future, that can be traced to irresponsible breeding and marketing of supposedly working-bred Border Collies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eileen Stein Posted February 22, 2006 Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 > No, I realize they weren't, and I didn't take them that way. > I agree. I wish we could eliminate them, and I think we should do what we can to address them. One of the things I hope these Boards do is try to persuade people not to support that kind of breeder. But I don't think those issues should be used as a reason not to address other issues that are equally or more serious. I realize you weren't doing that, but it's done all the time: "You've got no business criticizing the AKC when there are bad breeders registering with the ABCA!" Statements like that make no sense to me, but there are lots of people who don't seem to see the illogic in them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyrasmom Posted February 22, 2006 Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 I have no beef with the ABCA but I don't think it can guarantee good breeding practices anymore than the AKC can. It's a registry, with good and bad breeders just like any other I suppose. By closing an eye, I just mean that of course there are going to be ABCA bred dogs that are the result of bad breeding and the ABCA must be aware of the fact even if not of the individual breeder...just as the AKC is aware that many puppymill puppies are AKC registered. I wish I had a solution or proposal to offer, but some truths are just what they are. Mine is not a specific criticism of the ABCA, it's just something that I know happens, and if I know, then so must others. For example, the little bitch I talked about earlier that is bred at every heat, is proudly touted as ABCA, as is the stud dog and the puppies. If you could see her, worn, older than her years, and kept in barely humane conditions (but she has fresh water and food so animal control can't do anything) maybe you would better understand what I'm trying to say. And of course, none of the kept pups are ever spayed and neutered so who knows what's next. As for your quote: ""You've got no business criticizing the AKC when there are bad breeders registering with the ABCA!" Statements like that make no sense to me, but there are lots of people who don't seem to see the illogic in them. " That is not at all what I said, you can criticize the AKC all you like, justifiably even, my point was that bad breeding extended beyond JUST the AKC when a poster above laid the blame of BC's in rescue at only the AKC's door. 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.