the more insidious dangers to the bc...(and all breeds for that matter)

[kelpiegirl]

This may be a touchy subject- and hardly seems logical coming from someone who was once such an avid agility person- but the topic of my post is the effects of agility on the BC and other working breeds. Agility is a wonderful sport- a great activity to do with your dog. It gives dogs who wouldn't otherwise have anywhere to let out their energy an outlet. That all said, it is pretty amazing the dominance of the BC in agility. The dominance in both performance and sheer numbers running. Numbers is what I am referring to. There are more and more "breeders" out there who's dogs have done well in agility, and the logical step is to breed them right? Well, that is what I am getting at. If I had a nickel for every new BC pup I saw in spring time- I would indeed have good money saved toward something I really wanted What of this? Is it a great thing that yes, since the BC is so great in agility, that it should the be produced en masse? I have done LOTS of agility, and used to have fun with it. Then, I "found" working sheep, and quite simply just don't feel the same about agility. Not because of noble aspirations, quite the opposite. I find that working dogs have SO MUCH MORE to offer than agility ribbons and accolades, and indeed my dogs do as well. I know agility is great for so many folks but I sure wish no more BC's were bred with that in mind. This is no treatise on what anyone can or can't do with their dogs...

Julie

[PSmitty]

I love agility. I train in it, compete a little and hope to compete more in the future. But, I don't think border collies should be bred specifically to do agility. And there are tons of sport breeders who do just that. It goes back to what you working dog owners are trying so hard to achieve: breed border collies only for their working abilities.

 

I'm thinking that "working dog" breeders may end up with a pup going to a sport home, and that's fine. But I bet they stipulate that the dog has to spay/neutered, though. Right?

[Rosanne]

As someone who has been doing agility rather seriously since 1992, seen organizations come and go, jump heights come and go, and competes at the top tier: I agree with you.

 

I did indeed buy my first BC for agility. She was agility-bred too, although both parents had some working dogs behind them. She was actually, to my novice eyes, pretty amazing on sheep - very natural outrun, etc, etc. BUT. . . she had other issues. She was also a merle, bred by someone who specializes in them (did I hear someone say 'red flag!'?). Anyway, just giving some back-ground on my experience.

 

There are several key factors involved with the whole sport-breeding front (and actually, flyball has some big breeders too - which confuses me even more, since that takes even LESS brains than agility). Some of these things seem very petty to some people, but agility is a large, growing sport with very dedicated competitors, and demeaning it does nothing to these people's pride. Is working stock with dogs who were bred to do it more interesting? Probably, and I do that as often as I can, BUT I am young and at this point in my life unable to get a place or stock of my own. Will I? I certainly hope so, but it will probably be 5-10 years before I can do so.

 

Anyway, things that agility people think when they breed or buy dogs proven only through agility: (these are NOT all my opinion, just what I hear and see):

1. Fluffy does well, and Fluffy's sister does well, thus if I buy Fluffy's brother I will do well too.

2. Those working breeders don't certify hips! You better not buy your agility dog there!

3. Working dogs are neurotic and try to herd everything.

4. *Working breeders don't consider epilepsy/dysplasia/OCD a big enough problem to stop breeding related dogs

 

And it has been my personal experience that while SOME working dogs do NOT make good agility dogs because they are too soft or thoughtful in a manner that makes them slower, it has also been my experience that SOME agility-bred dogs are too soft as well. And MOST confirmation-bred dogs stick to AKC agility and collect titles, rather than trying to really 'compete' - they are generally slower as well. Even the fast ones can't catch the fast working-type dogs.

 

Here's another thought: if working breeders supplied all the agility people (who are usually GREAT homes) with BC's, there would NEVER be enough, at this point. This does not condone the agility breedings, I just consider this to be of interest in a discussion such as this. It's something that's occurred to me, is all.

 

I try to balance it out. I want a dog that has the drive to work with me, is smart but not so smart that they get caught up in thinking and forget to DO; soft, but not so soft that they are afraid to be wrong; and built well enough to spend many years jumping comfortably. Structure DOES matter, to a point, in agility. It should NOT be the first, or even second, consideration in finding an agility dog though, unless the dog is so poorly built it can't compete.

My other issue is that I think many working breeders do not consider dysplasia to be as prevalent as it is. It would be wonderful if a working breeder could tell me the OFA/Pennhip status of almost every pup they've bred, AND the parents' siblings, ANd the parents' parents. Here is what really attracts people to AKC breeders, I think: they often CAN do this. Pedigree depth is very important in the genetics of dysplasia, especially, but I have encountered the attitude of "well my bitch's brother is dysplastic, but she hasn't produced it so far, so I think she's fine". My first 2 dogs were dysplastic, and I wish to have as good a chance as possible to avoid this.

 

Anyway, please don't think i am condoning breeding for sport, in fact, I have noticed most kennels that focus on agility begin to produce fairly lackluster dogs within a generation or two, and few can produce stellar agility dogs from multiple breedings.

 

It takes a special kind of dog to be a top competitor, and that can be tough to find. I'd say 98% of people who get a BC for agility, though, would be fine with a rescue or any working dog. Heck, most would be fine with a Golden Retriever! However, people like me, or other top competitors, are looking for a special dog, and sometimes it is reassuring to know that a dogs' relatives have the right mind to compete.

 

Sorry for the wordiness!

[Kat's Dogs]

I wish it was that way as well - no breeding for agility dogs!

Sure, Dazzle's breeder was very happy to have one of her pups going into a sport (and maybe hobby herding) home, and we actually made no arrangements for spay contracts - because she knew full well that I wouldn't ever breed this dog no matter how great she was in Agility. If she becomes some top agility dog in the world blah blah blah, rather then breed her (which I can't because she is spayed) I would know that the only reason she is so great was because she was from working parents, and so that is where I would go and get my next BC. And I wish more people would see that....

 

What I would find interesting is if you take a dog that has several generations of NATCH, MACH, or ADCH, C-ATE, or whatever agility titles before their name dogs and put one of their pups on sheep. I bet the dog wouldn't have a clue what to do.... it really can be as damaging as conformation dogs (although, at least these dogs have some kind of agility physically! )

[kelpiegirl]

I will take it one step further and assert that if in fact one does not approve of the AKC having anything to do with the BC, then they should NOT compete in AKC events. Period. I used to be active in AKC- obedience, and was a member of a club, but then I got my non akc dogs, and did non akc agility, and have never looked back- not ever. When, and I say this rather sadly, actually VERY sadly, my breed does get sucked in, it will be a very very bad day. AKC jumped on the agility bandwagon for $$. It is NOT auspicious, IMO to receive accolades by an organization which has ruined so many breeds.

Julie

[zenotri]

I love agility, it something that is easy for me to train, anywhere, anytime and something that I can be very successful in. But ... I prefer working sheep & so does my dog, even though it is harder to get to & MUCH harder to be successful in-competition wise. I bought my dog with agility in mind but I will forever be grateful that doing so introduced me to herding.

 

I think if you asked a Sports breeder for the specific traits that made their dog breedworthy, they would find it very hard to give you an answer. I think BC's excel in agility because of the balance of traits that are needed make them a good working dog. If they don't have that balance they are unlikely to excel in either, especially in subsequent generations. IMO, Sports breeders can in fact be as bad or worse for the breed than conformation breeders. Producing dogs that are over the top with no off switch, I think can be as/more damaging to the breed that one who is bred to look pretty on a couch. People can be very successful with these over the top dogs, especially when they are excellent trainers who put their heart & soul into training to this level. But what happens to all the other pups in the litters? They can't all go to expert handlers? My guess is that they are either injured or given up on b/c they are too much dog for an average handler or add to the shelter population. I know the specfic working traits that my dog was bred for & it drives me insane that people are constantly comparing her to sports bred dogs of the same colour. None of them are ever likely to see livestock in their lives and neither have their ancestors. They don't move in the same way in agility, their conformation is noticeably different and their temperaments and are completely different, both on & off the course...but still at least once a month, someone asks me if they are related.

 

I don't have a problem with people breeding dogs for work & selling to agility. The fact is that agility people mostly make very good owners. I will never breed but if I did I would be very careful about placing dogs in working homes here in Australia. Often they just don't treat their dogs well, they can be cruel and they don't have the same respect for their dogs that you guys seem to have. Since they often don't put the same amount of effort into training them, the dogs are replaceable. If they are bitten by a snake or die as a pup from a tick, then they just get another one. I once saw a guy, bring a working dog who obviously worshipped him into a vet. His word were "A shame, because he's the best dog I've ever had, but if you can't fix him up for $100, just let him go." It was one of the saddest things I have ever seen.

[SoloRiver]

What I would find interesting is if you take a dog that has several generations of NATCH, MACH, or ADCH, C-ATE, or whatever agility titles before their name dogs and put one of their pups on sheep. I bet the dog wouldn't have a clue what to do.... it really can be as damaging as conformation dogs (although, at least these dogs have some kind of agility physically!

 

It seems to me that the first thing that goes in sport breeding is impulse control, because there's little to no selection for it. This may be why the only Border Collies I've ever seen/heard of that were actually dangerous around sheep were Sport Collies. They were very interested -- in the wrong way. This is a stark contrast to the Barbie Collies I've seen that would half-heartedly chase the sheep for a few yards at a time, and then get distracted and go pee on some panels, or eat some poop.

 

Too much unspecified drive, no impulse control. Or, no drive at all. I'm not sure why anyone wants either, but I guess people must. I'll stick with my dogs who have the desire to DO and the brains to be able to direct and control it.

[Smokjbc]

One dangerous trend in both agility and flyball is the need (I guess) for smaller dogs. I had a lady with shelties come out not long ago. They were TINY.. like pomeranian size. She told me she purposely had these tiny dogs for agility purposes. This lady REALLY wanted her dogs to work sheep and a couple of them had a modicum of interest. However.. after a sheep, and at one point one of my dogs I was using to try to keep the sheep moving, ran over the little buggers, I had a heart attack about liability and that kind of thing and wouldn't have her out again. It would take very, very little to severely injure dogs of that size (they were maybe 10-12 lbs sopping wet). I should say that I did have the local kennel sheltie club out for "instinct testing" recently, and they were all normal size and even though 2 out of 15 did anything decent- nothing got even close to hurt or even scared.

 

About 10 years ago, I took my dog Rhett out to visit a friend at flyball practice- someone approached me almost as soon as I got there about breeding Rhett, who is really not THAT small but I guess leans towards the smaller size - at that age she was about 30 lbs. Now she leans more towards 45 in her old age but the point is that the first words out of this person's mouth was "would you breed her?". The kicker to that was that Rhett has never chased a ball in her life- the only thing she will chase are cows and sheep and everything else- balls, agility, even treats mean nothing to her. She's the dog that you can line the rest of the dogs in a row with her to hand out treats and she will let it bounce off her head every time and be still looking for it while some other dog is happily chomping it down.

 

Rambling as usual..but my point is that if I wanted to breed my dog that day to some flyball "stud" , I would have easily been able to sell the whole litter to this person based on my dogs size alone.

 

I will also mention that it seems in obedience/agility there is this "drive" premium which the users of such a term feel applies to all things. Out of the previously mentioned shelties that did not work at the sheltie club sheep day, at least half of them had owners that were surprised they didn't want to work because they "had such drive". If drive means standing in one place for ten minutes while sheep are moved in figure eights around you- I would have to quote Inigo Montoya and say "I do not theenk that means what you theenk it means".

[Kat's Dogs]

Demand for dogs is certainly what drives it all.

Although not a BC, my Shih Tzu is also a great example. We would take her to information booths and just about every person would say "are you going to breed her, if you do here is my contact info". They would say this just because they petted her for 2 minutes and she looked cute with bows in her hair!

The same is true with Dazzle when I take her out everywhere I turn "will you breed her?" just because she either does good at Agility or can do a bunch of those "stupid pet tricks". Not good.

[BayouBC]

I get a little of the "are you going to breed them" when I have Pith & Kodah out around here, but most of that's just the area. Around here, it seems like everyone with a purebred dog assumes their dog should reproduce. I'm generally tempted to respond with something like, "Well, if I do it will be something like the Immaculate Conception of Border Collies since they're both neutered." And...both boys (everyone thinks poor Kodah is a girl).

 

Anyway...I want to be clear from the beginning that I don't agree with sport-breeding. So whatever I say, don't misunderstand me in saying that I support them.

 

I don't know if part of it is, again, the area of being in southern LA where things like dog sports and such aren't quite as engrained in the mentality, but really the large majority of the dogs at our agility club are pretty "normal" for their respective breeds. Yes, we have some that are a little nuttier than others, and I'm sure there are a couple "over the top" ones that I just haven't met. But the shelties, the BC's, the Goldens...they're all pretty average for their breed. We do have a couple of Barbie Collies, and they're kind of amusing to watch in comparison to the "regular" BC's.

 

I only know of one sport-bred BC down here, though I'm sure there are others. This little female came a long way from a sport kennel I'd actually heard of, but never met a dog from. When I first met her, I didn't actually know that was where she was from. Figured it out later. But she's a sweet little devil, very smart and quick (mentally), speedy, but I wouldn't consider her over the top. She is, however, smaller than I would consider average for BC's. She was bought by an experienced agility handler specifically for agility. I'm far from an expert on the kennel, but what I know of their produced pups are great agility dogs WITH off switches and they're generally more average in size.

 

I would have to assume that within the sport breeding world, there's just as much variety as there is in the rest of the breeding world. You can't say that all sport-bred dogs don't have off switches or that they're all drive & no herding instinct, etc etc. You will have sport-breeders that are careful about producing pups that are functional in the agility or flyball fields but also still functional outside of competition.

[kelpiegirl]

Agility is a hobby sport. It is a fun thing to do with your dog. When you take it another level, and make it who your dog is, and who you are, you change your view on your dog- and future dogs. That dog must have super drive, be extremely athletic, and the rest isn't really that important. Hmmm. No where in there is the brains that the dog needs to handle his new and high high high way of living. You all know what I mean. Before someone runs, they are at the practice jump- working their dog. That dog must be able to do switches and directionals without fail. That dog then, if done right gets that tug toy, and is then "drug" to the gate. Dog does a nearly flawless run, and dog finishes, gets his tug toy, is rewarded, and then is done. It is all about an interaction with the human that is based on do moving, and being rewarded for clean speed. It is a great thing to watch, and I think the dogs love it, but there is so much more to a BC than just their speed and agility. Right? Then there are the other competitors who make a living from their dogs- no, not that the dog brings home a paycheck, but their performance does. Think about the seminars given by trainers, and how their bios list what they have accomplished. If you don't think that shades how they look at and treat their dogs, you are kidding yourself. I can list several top trainers who I have watched nail their dogs for not sticking a contact. Or, another one who sent the dog to the tunnel- handler error- dog ran to and stopped on the tunnel and received a whistle, so had to leave. And that dog KNEW the SPIT was going to hit the fan. That beautiful BC slunk behind said handler, and she yelled down at it several times. The dog complied, but she was spitting mad and and the dog was scared, so he moved away- and was yelled at again. I watched this tirade and looked at said handler in the eye, and she KNEW I was watching. In that same vein are the folks who use denigrating vulgarities to their dogs when they "screw" up. How does this tie in with the insidious dangers? Well, in putting these dogs in such stringent performance requirements, they are no longer Border Collies, bred to work sheep, they are dogs who's purpose in life is to be "drivey, fast, and flawless", brains are optional. Brains are what make the BC the BC, I have to say. Do not sell out your BC to win in agility. Win in agility, but allow your dog to use his innate thinking ability along the way. So, if you can't work sheep, please, if all you do is agility- as they say "Keep it Real" and remember this is but fodder for such a wonderfully intelligent animal.

[Rosanne]

I have just recently started teaching agility again after a several-year hiatus - I teach a small class one day a week, and am doing a few seminars locally on my method for teaching running contacts.

I am stunned at how many people don't want to let their dogs THINK things through. They turn to aids and props rather than stepping back and allowing the dog to think.

I have actually learned a lot about my dog from working stock with him (we could do basic AHBA, and maybe Novice/Novice at this point), but the greatest moments are when the little light goes on in his head and he fetches them out of the corner, or stops them from busting away down the hill, or lifts them 'ever so lightly', or learns to apply pressure without speeding up unnecessarily. . .

Yet in agility, people don't want to let the dogs figure out how to get on a flippin' dog walk unassisted. Present it slowly, I swear to you he'll figure it out!

My point is this: if we never let agility dogs THINK, you guys are correct, we'll never know what kind of mind they have! My dog's parents both work, but his mother is primarily an agility dog. His father never even saw equipment. He's coming along nicely and I'm proud of my 'agility dog'; I'm also VERY glad he's not a purely sports-bred dog. Was his mother truly 'proven' as this board might like? Maybe, but I doubt it. But he's turning out to be useful and I would like to trial him as I can (he's only 4). But more than trials, I'd like to learn how to use him in useful farm situations by helping out my instructor as much as possible! I'd like to see HIS MIND at work!

 

My instructor has never seen a dangerous sports collie, and in fact most of the sports collies I know who aren't decent on stock are more like Barbies in that they just sort of look at Mommy or eat sheep-doo. I can see how it would happen though.

Most sports-breeders I know of DO think that an off-switch is important. As someone mentioned, not ALL their pups can go to top handlers, and even top handlers don't want a dog that can't sit still.

 

Sorry I ramble, but I'm just trying to put my thoughts as a 'top agility handler' out there.

Marcus Topps' Juice has a littermate competing in Open, so there is a dog who does VERY well and is working-bred.

[Rebecca, Irena Farm]

I had a Border Collie bitch who was sixteen inches tall. I can't tell you how many times I had people involved in various sport venues ask whether I was going to breed her. I would say, "No, we spayed her. She's three and still not the least bit useful on sheep." Oh, the stares! the groans! Occaisionally I'd get a chance to discuss what I meant at length - usually when the person in question asked whether Jen's mother would be bred again. Then I'd explain that since her pups were a disappointment, the breeder had chosen not to repeat the breeding and the mother was in fact now placed as a pet and spayed also.

 

It's astonishing that invariably the response was "That's too bad." Not, "Oh, good - how responsible of the breeder."

 

Sports draw on the abilities of the working bred dog in a way that can be highly satisfactory to almost any participant and trainer. They can also distort those same characteristics in a way that they were never meant to be shaped.

 

Sometimes I'm a little disturbed when I see a Border Collie hit a tug so hard it swings shoulder high to the handler - but what disturbs me most is seeing the handler not even looking at the dog, but looking at the judge or talking to a teammate or watching the race. That dog has been shaped into a creature whose whole world revolves around that tug, rather than the handler. What is going to happen when that repetitive activity finally results in early retirement?

 

I agree with Melanie - the worst consequence of sport breeding is the shift away from an emphasis on impulse control. Blindly reactive dogs do no one any good outside the sport world where "Point and shoot" is highly valued. My Ann and Jen both lacked this piece and although they would have been fine in sport or active pet homes, they were harming livestock here.

 

The lowest common denominator of the Border Collie breed should be the farmer's dog. What makes a good farm dog? A good farm dog is well-balanced, so that the farmer doesn't have to spend a lot of time "training around" too much eye, not enough eye, not enough biddability, lack of balance, too much pressure sensitivity - the list goes on and on. A good farm dog is an endurance dog, not a sprinter. A good farm dog has the ability to act when needed without being told what to do, but doesn't have the desire to amuse itself when nothing needs doing. A good farm dog has the courage to meet challenge head on, but the patience to give way when relieving pressure would be more constructive.

 

I don't know what sport breeders are producing, overall, but I don't see how they could be reconciling their goals with the above ideals.

[PSmitty]

Just an observation...I have a friend looking to get a border collie pup this year. She found one breeder (sport mostly-only one dog trials at the open ranch level in herding) that looked pretty good (to her). Then she looked closer, and realized how small the dogs are. It actually says on the website that the breeder is "thrilled" with that, since they can jump 16" in AKC agility.

 

No, she's not just thrilled, she *breeds* to get them that small! There is only one dog among all of hers, that is over 18"! One male is 19 1/2, that's it. One male is 17". My puppy (who's a midget to begin with) is taller than that now!

 

Oh, yeah. My friend is not interested in the breeder, after all.

[Pat W.]

I agree with Roseanne that the majority of people who spectate at agility see the bc's run think to themselves "Wow! Thats cool I want to do it, guess I'll get me a border collie" They find a breeder of any kind or go to the nearest petstore and buy a pup.. Then they find out that yes you do have to train to get to the level those competitors were at. In the mean time they have a puppy that is untrained, unsocialized, unneutered/spayed, is neurotic or has other baggage and bing bang boom the pup is in rescue.

My Whim is a rescue supposedly from a "Sport Breeder" here in the Mid Atlantic area. His former owners bought him at 8 wks, kept him for 3 YES 3 days and decided that he was too much. Fortunately two brain cells rubbed together by accident and they contacted MABCR and they contacted me knowing I was looking for a pup as my future agility partner. Whim has seen sheep from a distance, the director of MABCR does trial her own dogs at REAL (read non ACK) sheepdog trials. According to her he has the potential to be good on sheep of course she only had him until he was 12 weeks old so theres alot of leaway there.

All I can say is that he is quick, smart as a whip, and willing to learn. Although he does seem to be on the more thoughtful end of things at times, but Im workng on that.

 

 

Roseanne who/where are you training with on sheep? I might be interested in trying Whim on them when he is old enough.

[PSmitty]

Pat, where are some pics of that boy?

[Rosanne]

Pat, I PM'ed you. Not sure exactly where you live, but I know I saw you at Green Lane so you can't be too far.

[Pippin's person]

I'm finding these last couple of threads pretty interesting. I have no intention of ever breeding one of my dogs (well, I'll hedge on the puppy since I would probably breed him if his breeder, an Open handler/sheep farmer, asked me to--but beyond that).

 

I don't really understand why people are breeding small agility dogs--those dogs are jumping the same proportionally as the larger ones---maybe they get a slight advantage (I don't know the range of heights-to-jump ration), but it can't be much. Am I missing something significant? What is the advantage of a 16" BC over an 18" BC?

 

Ditto on flyball. If I were looking for a BC to play flyball with, I'd actually want a big one since they have longer strides and benefit significantly from the height dogs on the team regardless--I haven't seen a big one yet who works harder to get over 9" jumps than on 8" jumps. The little BCs have to work a lot harder than the bigger ones--though of course the bigger ones have the crunch themselves up more on the box, I guess.

 

Having gotten interested in BCs through flyball (and then found working sheep through the BCs--and now no longer doing flyball), I have heard many folks who are breeding dogs like Border Staffies argue that these dogs have all the speed and drive, but less of the quirkiness, making them easier to live with than a straight BC--I have no idea about that since I don't find BCs hard to live with, but I have occasionally wondered if part of what they meant was that those dogs think differently than a BC and that makes them more suited to the kinds of things that flyball seems to particularly reward.

[kelpiegirl]

In agility the 22" class is LOADED with BC's, thus your chances of placing and winning are diminished. The 16" class is smaller, and therefore there is less competition, and the chances of placing/winning are increased. I don't do flyball, but I know the turns can be tough on a dog- so, perhaps a big dog is contraindicated. With regard to the border staffies, that really is a pig in a poke. I met some recently that were nasty little dogs- couldn't be around other dogs- that just won't work for either sport.

Julie

 

 

 

 

I'm finding these last couple of threads pretty interesting. I have no intention of ever breeding one of my dogs (well, I'll hedge on the puppy since I would probably breed him if his breeder, an Open handler/sheep farmer, asked me to--but beyond that).

 

I don't really understand why people are breeding small agility dogs--those dogs are jumping the same proportionally as the larger ones---maybe they get a slight advantage (I don't know the range of heights-to-jump ration), but it can't be much. Am I missing something significant? What is the advantage of a 16" BC over an 18" BC?

 

Ditto on flyball. If I were looking for a BC to play flyball with, I'd actually want a big one since they have longer strides and benefit significantly from the height dogs on the team regardless--I haven't seen a big one yet who works harder to get over 9" jumps than on 8" jumps. The little BCs have to work a lot harder than the bigger ones--though of course the bigger ones have the crunch themselves up more on the box, I guess.

 

Having gotten interested in BCs through flyball (and then found working sheep through the BCs--and now no longer doing flyball), I have heard many folks who are breeding dogs like Border Staffies argue that these dogs have all the speed and drive, but less of the quirkiness, making them easier to live with than a straight BC--I have no idea about that since I don't find BCs hard to live with, but I have occasionally wondered if part of what they meant was that those dogs think differently than a BC and that makes them more suited to the kinds of things that flyball seems to particularly reward.

[airbear]

In agility the 22" class is LOADED with BC's, thus your chances of placing and winning are diminished.

 

I'm confused on this as well. Is the idea that you (not anyone specifically, just the generic sport person) want a dog who measures into the 16" class? In USDAA, that means the dog is 16" or less at the shoulder? Or 18" in NADAC? That would be a rather small border collie! I've only met a couple who would be under 18", and NONE that would be under 16". Playing devil's advocate here, wouldn't it be easier to run in the 26" class? It's not as big or competitive as the 22", from what I've seen. I know at the larger USDAA trials, there are over 100 dogs in 22", but maybe only 60 in 26".

 

And don't even get me started on the sport mixes. BorderJacks, double borders, border-staffy-jack ... ugh! Can't you just play with the dog that you have? Do we really need to be breeding 'flyball' dogs??

[Rosanne]

The intention with the tiny BC's for flyball is that they ARE the height dog - see, the height dogs slow them down, so they are hoping that by finding small BC's or border-staffy-jacks or whatnot, they get a dog that is small enough to lower the jumps but doesn't slow the team down significantly.

 

In agility, yes, they would have to be under 16" to jump 16". In AKC and NADAC the cutoff is 18". I think there are plenty of BC's that are at or under 18". I have one. She looks small, but does not look midget-y or anything. In fact I jumped her 20" at the few AKC agility trials I went to last summer because 16 was just so ridiculously low. I want to be able to steer her, after all! Now she does 22", since I quit AKC.

 

I jump my male 26", but not because the class is smaller/easier. At most regionals and larger USDAA trials there is pretty stiff competition at 26" as all the world-team hopefuls jump that height; however, there are definitely more good dogs at 22". I jump my boy 26" because he is just over the cutoff for IFCS competition for 22" (the cutoff is 19.69" and he measures at just about 20"). I do hope to make the team someday, but if he gets along in age a bit, or it looks like I won't be trying out, I will drop him down to 22". He is plenty fast at either height. As far as competition goes, I'd rather be in the biggest class, because I love being able to prove my worth!

 

I think it's ridiculous to breed dogs for flyball. A dog needs even less for flyball than it does for agility. At least an agility dog should have SOME kind of brain to be competitive and learn the tasks.

 

The way I have come up with to balance it is to find working dogs who have relatives that have done well in agility, or seem to have that want-to-play-with-you attitude that would translate well to agility (off stock I mean). That's the thing, though, ability on stock is NOT the same as ability for agility.... my dogs have always been completely different on stock than they are in the agility ring. (except that they love both!)

I don't know what the perfect solution is, for people who want Great Agility Dogs; this is the best I can come up with, without supporting sports breeders. Other than that, it's rescue. Nothing wrong with that, but you have a different sort of foundation to deal with there.

[Kat's Dogs]

Eewwww!! Sport mixes!

 

I would have been happy if Dazzle could have jumped 16" in NADAC, because she would have BARELY been short enough so it would be easy on her. However instead, she is BARELY in the 20" class so that is higher for her (which is why I am running her in SKILLED! Yay for 16" on young dogs!). Dazzle's littler was smaller by chance, but breeding for small dogs? Ug. THAT doesn't make sense except for the winning thing (which does make sense to lots of people). And to me it only helps to jump 16" if the dog would ALMOST have to jump 20" or whatever 18" or whatever.

 

Just wanted to respond to Rosanne about thinking. When Dazzle started learning the obstacles I relied on her figuring them out herself, I was always so proud when she would just stop. She would stand there for a minute (thinking I assume) and then proudly go do the right thing! I love it! how can people want to breed that out! not to mention that it is super cute to watch in a young dog.

[Pippin's person]

I'm more or less agnostic on sport mixes. I wouldn't have one, but at some level they are "purpose" bred and all the breedings I've known about had longer waiting lists than puppies in litters.

 

I was thinking about this last night in the context of the thread involving Strider and Eileen and wondered (idly) if breeding sport mixes could be beneficial to maintaining the working border collie. In other words, these are dogs who are not considered border collies of any sort whatsoever (e.g. neither sport collies nor barbie collies), so there's no discussion about what's being diluted or lost by breeding for something other than working livestock. Of course, most of these crosses are done with border collies who *were* sport-bred, so it's probably a moot point generally.

 

Thanks, Julie, for the explanation on why one would want tiny BCs--it's about the range of competition more than anything specific to the sport. That at least has a kind of logic I can understand.

 

Like others have said in thread after thread, it seems to me counterproductive to breed border collies for any of these sports. I don't know about how the pedigrees work with agility-bred dogs--but is there an agility equivalent of a Winston Cap or Alasdair MacRae's Nan that seems to pass down agility ability ? I've heard conformation people speak about their dogs' lineage in these ways, but I haven't really heard my agility friends talk in this manner about their dogs. Is that y'all's experience as well or have I just not paid enough attention?

[Rosanne]

A lot of the recent sport BC's are actually sired by a confirmation dog (ick!!!).

 

I don't think there is one major dog that everybody talks about, although there are a few that are definitely having gentics passed on generation to generation. Winger is one that i can think of - also an AKC dog. Lots of dogs either have him as a sire or grand-sire. The one I mention above is Rip, owned by ComeBye (who will probably come yell at me for mentioning her dogs again).

Those are probably the 2 biggest ones I can think of, and gosh, they are both AKC dogs! Scary! I knew there was a reason I never wanted a relative to either one!

 

(Winger is the sire of both Linda Mecklenberg's Aweseome, and Terry Smorch's Remy, and others; Rip is the sire of Rhonda Carter's Blast, Lori Baker's Perk, Kathy Keats' Mojo, Jen Pinder's Cajun. . .)

 

Aside from that there are dogs that people know, but not as big as those two I can think of. And not every relative to both of those is amazing.

It is MY OPINION that both of these sires produced decent dogs, with decent drive, but I never liked the structure of either's offspring, and they just never really attracted me in general as far as the way they ran and looked overall.

 

edited to add: I don't know many 2nd or 3rd generation agility dogs. There are some, but I think mostly there's a few large kennels that breed the 'versatility' BC's and they include agility, and there's a few small-timers that breed their own personal dogs a time or two, but I can think of few agility dogs off the top of my head that go back several generations in the pedigree without hitting a working or confirmation or obedience or even flyball dog. I don't know what this means, I just wanted to mention it. Most of the sports kennels I can think of just happened to 'strike gold' with a particular cross of dogs that don't even do that much agility themselves.

 

Ok, I'm off to do agility!

[mjk05]

don't have a problem with people breeding dogs for work & selling to agility. The fact is that agility people mostly make very good owners.

 

That is true, but in terms of the "dangers to the breed", of losing working ability (even in tiny degrees), I don't think its good. I'm not even sure its possible to really "breed for work and sell to agility" as a consistent philosophy. Yes, we can breed from 2 working-bred dogs for agility homes, but that's not the same thing as "breeding for work".

 

For a start, if you sell most of your pups to agility homes, you don't have any way of assessing the working ability of the pups you are producing. Two fantastic working dogs bred together can produce less-than-great offspring. In agility homes, even with the odd bit of recreational herding on free weekends, those pups won't ever really be tested on their working ability.

 

Plus the sort of things agility people look for in dogs are somewhat different to those you consider when breeding purely for working ability. Structural features, "drive", nice colours etc - and the performance history of previous litters... So even if we try to resist it, if our total market for pups is agility people, that must have some effect on breeding decisions (even subconsciously). I know it works the other way- the specific market for pups (eg allround farm dogs, or 3 sheep trials dogs) does influence breeding decisions.

 

Personally I think that even if the parents of a litter are both working-bred, and even used for some stockwork themselves, if they are bred specifically to produce pups that will supply the agility market, its a sports breeding (albeit from working lines). Is there anything wrong with that? The pups are wanted, they supply homes that won't be filled from elsewhere (despite my best efforts, some people just don't want rescue dogs, no matter how great), and in many cases they will be sterilised (so not continuing to add to the gene pool). I don't know. We've had one pup in a litter go to pet or sports homes previously, and I'm happy for them. But now we're considering a litter (from 2 working, non-agility parents) where the waiting list is almost entirely agility people, and I'm thinking carefully about the implications... I think it makes them a sports-bred litter, even if both parents are full time working farm and trial dogs.

 

I will never breed but if I did I would be very careful about placing dogs in working homes here in Australia. Often they just don't treat their dogs well, they can be cruel and they don't have the same respect for their dogs that you guys seem to have. Since they often don't put the same amount of effort into training them, the dogs are replaceable. If they are bitten by a snake or die as a pup from a tick, then they just get another one.

I understand what you're saying, but that's also dependent on how much effort you put into selecting homes. I know of lots of cases of pet owners choosing euthanasia over vet bills for injuries like leg fractures or snake bite too.

 

The fact is that there are great working homes out there- maybe not by agility or pet standards, but it is possible to screen homes on factors like- are their dogs tied up/restrained when not working or on vehicles, do they sterilise if they don't plan to breed, what has happened to their previous dogs (training, vet care, supervision etc), and then take back any dogs that don't work out. The chances are those dogs won't be sleeping on beds, going to groomers or wearing funky collars- but they are working dogs, not pets, and just because they sleep in a kennel doesn't mean they aren't valued. I know of numerous simple farm dogs that have had multiple thousands of dollars of vet bills, many are on supplements (glucosamine etc), and live out their retirement in comfort. Its just a matter of being as careful in placing dogs in working homes as we would be in placing them in pet or sports homes.