Reputable breeders in my area?

[MrSnappy]

I must say that it is in my experience that people in the sheep herding world breed just as indiscrimitely as a breeder breeding sport dogs.

 

I agree with you.

 

Saying that sport dogs are good 'only' because of training could be said about herding dogs also to some degree. Lots of people breed very similar lines to Amanda's dogs and buy her puppies to trial but we don't see them going out and kicking her butt do we! Yes her dogs may be good working dogs but they are WINNERS because 'she' is a great handler.

 

This is partly true. However, there is no "instinct" for sport like there is for stockwork. I continue to disagree that you can breed *for* flyball or agility. I think what happens is that people who buy dogs to work stock work them seriously on stock, therefore, the dogs show a greater degree of skill on stock. People who buy dogs for sports work them seriously in sports, and therefore go on to to show a greater degree of skill in sport. Sport breeders are just breeding dogs who get purchased by people who are more serious about their sports and therefore self perpetuate the idea that the dogs are bred for it. Those same handlers could easily get a dog from you, or me, and turn it into a great sport dog.

 

However, in many cases, I am more impressed with the sports people as many of them WILL go the rescue route where stockdog people will frequently not (read: never). I have had very excellent working prospects (like Lewis) languish in rescue because stockdog people ask one question: "What's his breeding?" If I can't answer that question, they aren't interested. And what's ironic about it is that 90% of these "stockdog" people are doing it FOR SPORT. I don't care what you call yourself, if you live in a condo in urban Vancouver, you aren't a farmer and you do not need a stockdog. End of story. It's your business if you buy one of course, but call it what it is - a sport purchase.

 

What makes me really saddest is stuff like a thread I read on another forum where a bunch of owners of rescue dogs were going on about how they have been "bitten by the herding bug" and were considering buying puppies so they could "get into" herding. That's the saddest and most self serving thing I have ever heard, since several of them are involved in rescue and know the severity of the problem.

 

One thing I will agree with you on Cindy is this ... in the cases where I have been able to locate the breeder of the dog in my rescue (which has not happened often), 90% of them were stockdog breeders. And of those 90%, less than a handful took the dog back. In many cases, they ignored my phone calls and emails altogether. I have never, to my knowledge, had a known "sport bred" dog in my rescue. They are either BYB dogs or CBCA / ABCA dogs.

 

RDM

[AllieMackie]

A quick reply because I'm going to a wedding this afternoon.

 

A sincere thank you to all of you who posted since my last response. I wasn't trying to sound harsh, or defensive, or rude, in my last post, as I stated. I ask you all to think about the whole situation from my end.

 

I ask: "I'm looking at these breeders. What do you think?"

 

Everyone: "Oh goodness no I wouldn't recommend them but I won't say why. Instead, look for working breeders but I have no names for you."

 

I understand that a lot of you have way more experience with this than I do. That's why I came here. So far, though, I've felt that I have to take your answers with a grain of salt, simply because I was given no reasons -why-. How am I supposed to learn what not to look for if people won't tell me?

 

I've gotten a few PMs from people who would rather not mention breeder names in public, and that's perfectly foine and acceptable. I appreciate it! I'm second-guessing some of my choices now, simply because I got a -detailed- reason why they feel the breeder is incorrect for me.

 

Perhaps I'm posting this as constructive criticism for all of you, not intending to be rude. But when someone new comes to this forum and gets bombarded with the same arguments with nothing to back them up, it can get a bit frustrating.

 

That said, thanks again for the more specific responses. I've learned some about different lines of breeding and background experiences with these breeders.

 

I'd still like to ask all of you, possibly, if you could give me any sort of contacts to working breeders in Ontario, or know of anyone who might know some. I find it difficult to find them on my own, and I do intend on going to the Kingston sheep trials. I'll be meeting with Amanda Milliken sometime in June, as May is busy for her, so I've taken up that contact. Thanks!

[Rebecca, Irena Farm]

Everyone: "Oh goodness no I wouldn't recommend them but I won't say why. Instead, look for working breeders but I have no names for you."

 

I, and Northof49, and mosstheboss, all had specifics or offered to discuss them in private. Hardly "everyone."

[Eileen Stein]

If you look at the people breeding in Ontario ALOT of their lines are the same whether they do sports or sheep herding with the dogs. Amanda Milliken for example has the Rambo Waifer line and so does one of the top breeders for sport dogs Linda Verna. Both of them have dogs that excell in their venue's and this has been proven over time. . . .

 

Saying that sport dogs are good 'only' because of training could be said about herding dogs also to some degree. Lots of people breed very similar lines to Amanda's dogs and buy her puppies to trial but we don't see them going out and kicking her butt do we! Yes her dogs may be good working dogs but they are WINNERS because 'she' is a great handler. . . .

 

When you talk about the Rambow Waifer line, you are going back five generations or so. It is a basic principle of breeding for livestock work that you must exert selection pressure at virtually every generation to maintain the complex balance of traits that make a good stockdog. "Lines," although they can be informative about the traits a dog may exhibit, are not guarantees of anything. Saying "my dog goes back to Rambow and Waifer" (or, in other words, "two of my dog's sixteen great-great grandparents were Rambow and Waifer") says very little about the quality of your dog, because of the dilution that may have taken place in the meantime. Nearly all border collies have great working ancestors if you go that far back in their pedigree. If Linda Verna has bred her descendants of Rambow and Waifer without regard to their livestock working ability, I would expect the dogs she is producing now from that line to differ greatly from the dogs Amanda is producing.

 

I totally disagree with you that breeding and training/handling play the same roles in a dog's livestock abilities as in a dog's abilities in sports like flyball or agility or obedience, and totally disagree that Amanda's dogs are winners because she is a great handler. Amanda is certainly a great handler, but she would be the first to say that she could not make an open trial winner of a dog who did not have the right stuff. And the right stuff in a working trial dog, or in a working livestock dog in general, is a much more extensive complex of traits than is required for flyball, agility or obedience. Sport dogs must be fast, agile and capable of being motivated. Those qualities and much, much more are necessary for a dog to be a useful stockdog. That's why I would expect that the offspring of good stockdogs with suitable physical structures would be successful in the sports venues, but would not at all expect the opposite to be true. Many trialists seek out Amanda's pups because of their high quality, and yes, they occasionally kick her butt with them.

 

I will not comment on the rest of your post except to say this: (1) I know Amanda is willing to sell to pet homes, or I would not have recommended her to the OP -- that is not a bad thing IMO; (2) I personally know quite a few of Amanda's dogs and pups she has bred, and all of the ones I know have ideal temperaments; and (3) in my experience most good working breeders do not breed to have multiple litters on the ground, although some people who breed to have multiple litters on the ground may claim to be working breeders.

[AllieMackie]

I, and Northof49, and mosstheboss, all had specifics or offered to discuss them in private. Hardly "everyone."

 

You did! And I very much appreciate it. This was, however, after I posted asking for specifics. I also was referring to "Everyone" as "everyone across several forums and email", because I've been trying to research in a lot of different places.

 

Just clarifying!

[Eileen Stein]

I'd still like to ask all of you, possibly, if you could give me any sort of contacts to working breeders in Ontario, or know of anyone who might know some.

 

To locate working breeders in Ontario, a good first step would be the Ontario Border Collie Club. This link was posted earlier, but here it is again. You could contact an officer, or click on the "Trials" section and contact any of the people listed under "Contact Information." I expect that any of them would have suggestions for you.

[AllieMackie]

To locate working breeders in Ontario, a good first step would be the Ontario Border Collie Club. This link was posted earlier, but here it is again. You could contact an officer, or click on the "Trials" section and contact any of the people listed under "Contact Information." I expect that any of them would have suggestions for you.

 

Thank you! I've contacted Amanda already as I said, but I'll contact the others and see what they have to say.

[mosstheboss2000]

When you talk about the Rambow Waifer line, you are going back five generations or so.

 

I realize this... I am using it as a example.

I just thought I would use this as it is a well known breeding and a great example of breeding the same lines, one selling as herding dogs the other as sport and all being exceptional.

 

There are people currently breeding for sport and herding and breeding the same lines.

The point being that I have seen dogs from breeders promoting their dogs for working dogs go on to become GREAT sport dogs and also dogs from breeders promoting their dogs for sports to go on to be great working dogs.

 

I may have the BEST bred puppy in the world if I don't have the skills, time - money to find and work the sheep or resources... I may never have a open trial dog on my hands.

I have seen puppies bred specifically for work ability and temperament get destroyed in the wrong homes...

 

Clearly breeding ethics, purposes, morals ect.. are very much a personal thing and very political!

 

I am not a breeder,

I do see the worst of it because I am in rescue and lots of people call us before they call their breeders sadly, no breeder who wants to sell a dog is going to tell you about the ones with health problems and temperament issues.

[mosstheboss2000]

I also agree Mr Snappy it is ALL sport!!!

[Eileen Stein]

"When you talk about the Rambow Waifer line, you are going back five generations or so."

 

I realize this... I am using it as a example.

I just thought I would use this as it is a well known breeding and a great example of breeding the same lines, one selling as herding dogs the other as sport and all being exceptional.

 

There are people currently breeding for sport and herding and breeding the same lines.

 

But you don't seem to be getting my point at all. You are saying they're breeding "the same lines" because the dogs they're breeding now have 2 out of 16 ancestors in common five generations back, or 2 out of 32 ancestors in common six generations back. That level of "sameness" is meaningless. You cannot conclude from that that the dogs those two breeders are turning out, after five or six generations of breeding for different things, are at all similar in terms of working ability. That's what I thought you were claiming, and that's what I am disputing. I won't dispute that plenty of dogs from breeders promoting their dogs for working dogs go on to become great sport dogs. I will definitely dispute that more than a handful of dogs from breeders who are breeding for sports and not for working ability go on to be great working dogs.

 

But then again, I guess I am missing the point of much of what you're saying too. For example, I certainly agree with you when you say, "I may have the BEST bred puppy in the world if I don't have the skills, time - money to find and work the sheep or resources... I may never have a open trial dog on my hands." But so what? What does that prove? Of course you're not going to have an open trial dog if you don't train it. I also agree with you when you say, "I have seen puppies bred specifically for work ability and temperament get destroyed in the wrong homes," but I would expand that to say that I've seen dogs bred for all different things and for nothing at all get destroyed in the wrong homes. Again, what does that prove? Are you assuming that these posters who are looking for a pup are "wrong homes"?

 

Clearly breeding ethics, purposes, morals ect.. are very much a personal thing and very political!

 

What do you mean by political? I agree that ethics and morals are implicated in dog breeding, but a lot of people care about the ethics and morals of dog breeding who are not politically minded or politically involved, be it dog politics or any other kind of politics.

 

I do see the worst of it because I am in rescue and lots of people call us before they call their breeders sadly, no breeder who wants to sell a dog is going to tell you about the ones with health problems and temperament issues.

 

Well, many will not -- I certainly agree with you there -- but some will. There are some honest, ethical breeders -- really.

[ErinKate]

You guys are really amazing. So much great info. As usual, I didn't read all the posts, but still I say go RESCUE. I have two great BC rescues and wouldn't trade them for the world! People totally underestamate rescue dogs.

Good luck!

[mosstheboss2000]

Eileen clearly I am just preaching to the choir.

The only real point I am trying to make is...

There are both side of the coin breeding VERY close bloodlines.... I can buy a puppy from breeder A and breeder B both who have successful open trial dogs and a great reputation for their puppies as working dogs, train them for agility breed them together and promote my puppies to sport homes. This doesn't make these dogs genetically any different then the ones that breeder A and B are breeding, selling and trialling as working dogs. These are the same lines I am producing. I just haven't trained or promoted them to work livestock. Doesn't mean they don't have that ability or don't have good temperaments and if I did OR someone else did they would be unable to do so? Would this mean someone wouldn't buy a puppy from me because my dogs don't work sheep? Even though their littermates are open dogs?

If this were the case then working homes would not breed dogs that didn't work out as open dogs or working dogs. Which we know they do of course. Maybe dogs from breeders promoting their dogs for sport don't usually become successful open dogs because they are not usually purchase by these types of homes or people with the desire to do this... Just a thought.

NO dog politics? LOL!

[Eileen Stein]

The only real point I am trying to make is...

There are both side of the coin breeding VERY close bloodlines.

 

The example you gave, which you called "a great example," is not a case of very close bloodlines. It's a case of very distant bloodlines.

 

I can buy a puppy from breeder A and breeder B both who have successful open trial dogs and a great reputation for their puppies as working dogs, train them for agility breed them together and promote my puppies to sport homes. This doesn't make these dogs genetically any different then the ones that breeder A and B are breeding, selling and trialling as working dogs. These are the same lines I am producing. I just haven't trained or promoted them to work livestock. Doesn't mean they don't have that ability

 

If you buy a puppy from breeder A and breeder B, out of good working dogs, and train them for agility, those pups (C and D) would have just as good a chance of having good working ability as their littermates who went to working homes. However, if you train and use them only for agility, their offspring will have less chance of having good working ability than pups out of C and D's littermates who are bred by working breeders. This is because genes recombine at every generation. A breeder who is trying to breed good working dogs has to exclude from breeding those dogs who have serious faults or cannot be trained to be useful stockdogs. So only the littermates of C and D with demonstrated working ability (the ones who inherited the right combination of genes) will be bred by good working breeders; the others will not be. This is not to say that C and D might not have some pups with good working ability, or that C and D's work-tested littermates might not have some pups that are lacking. Just that the ODDS of getting good working ability are higher with the working bred pups, because for all you know C and D are not just untrained for work, but are actually untrainable to a standard of usefulness -- they may be lacking in stock sense, lacking in balance, lacking in power or courage, etc., and you would never know. In the next generation of pups bred from agility performers untrained for work, the odds get worse, because a second round of gene re-combination has occurred with no testing and culling for working ability. The odds get worse again in the next generation, and so on. If this were not so, Rough and Smooth Collies would have the same level of working ability as border collies, because they come from the same stock -- the same "lines" -- if you go back far enough. But they don't, because quite a while back they ceased being bred for working ability and began to be bred for other things. Of course there are exceptions and I am oversimplifying this, but in general what you breed for is what you get. And you can't breed for working ability without training and testing for it.

 

Would this mean someone wouldn't buy a puppy from me because my dogs don't work sheep? Even though their littermates are open dogs?

 

Well, yeah. I wouldn't, for example.

 

If this were the case then working homes would not breed dogs that didn't work out as open dogs or working dogs. Which we know they do of course.

 

Some do, no doubt. A dog who doesn't work out as an open dog may nevertheless have some important things to contribute to a working breeding, which a very knowledgeable breeder could recognize. Breeding a dog who doesn't work out as a working dog at all can't be justified IMO, and it would be a very odd thing for a breeder to do if his/her aim was to produce good working dogs.

 

Maybe dogs from breeders promoting their dogs for sport don't usually become successful open dogs because they are not usually purchase by these types of homes or people with the desire to do this... Just a thought.

 

Oh, hey, it's a thought we hear all the time. "My dog has great herding ability and would be a top open dog, except that I don't have sheep and don't have time to train him and herding doesn't interest me and so he does agility instead."

 

NO dog politics? LOL!

 

Not sure what you mean by this. I never said there was no such thing as dog politics. It just bothers me when moral and ethical issues are categorized -- and thereby dismissed -- as "politics."

[Rebecca, Irena Farm]

If this were not so, Rough and Smooth Collies would have the same level of working ability as border collies, because they come from the same stock -- the same "lines" -- if you go back far enough. But they don't, because quite a while back they ceased being bred for working ability and began to be bred for other things.

 

Additionally, there is the important point that when you breed for other things besides working livestock, you might be selecting against traits that are vital to being a useful stockdog. Like impulse control, or stock sense. Or, you might be concentrating traits that are undesireable in large doses for a working stockdog, in your line. Like reactivity or pressure sensitivity.

 

This is another reason that you can't just say, "Oh, their dogs are 'working line' dogs and therefore have as much potential as the dogs bred like them, to be working dogs. We don't need to actually work them."

 

The total package has to be fine tuned in every generation, or it goes to hell in a handbasket in a big, big hurry. Working lines recombined in a random manner or with thought only to the fastest, most responsive dogs, or the prettiest dogs (or worse, both) don't produce Border Collies that are just a little lacking in something, or a little less athletic, or a little less biddable. They become something totally different very quickly, not recognizable, to the extent that even those outside the breed notice it.

 

Thus, it amazes me that this is so difficult to understand. AKC breeders across the board would bristle at a Golden Retriever breeder that was specializing in black coated dogs, or Dane breeders that were producing special downsized Danes for sports and apartment dwellers. Why don't the alarm bells go off when the conformation, sport, and pet breeders all are producing something that is so different from what a Border Collie has always been?

 

Funny thing is, AKC people from other breeds, do understand many times, if you put it right. I often post this picture:

 

 

And this one:

 

 

-together in the same post to help them understand the widely varied goals of working and AKC breeders. I point out that the second dog, a founding sire of the modern Border Collie, would have to be culled from both sport lines (too laid back and too much impulse control) and conformation lines (too many faults and weaknesses to list, all of which are stamped strongly on subsequent lines and just keep popping up - breeding to Roy here would be death to any modern conformation line).

 

I also have a picture of Open trial dogs relaxing at their handlers' feet at a sheepdog trial, off leash, to help them see the difference between the frothing at the mouth sport dogs they are familiar with, and the ideal for a working dog.

 

Nine times out of ten, they say, "Wow, I see what you mean."

[mosstheboss2000]

I am not saying that Border Collie breeders should be selectively breeding for being pretty or small, no need to bang your head against the wall over this one. I am just making the observation that if as a herding person you have already written off a dog because it is not coming from a breeder who is working their dogs and yet another dog from the same litter may be a open champion then of course you are not seeing any dogs from a breeder breeding the same dog but using their dogs for agility in Open trial homes.

 

I agree some sport breeders are breeding outside the norm I have seen some scary looking dogs around town... but not all are not as far out of it as it is being made out.

 

As for laid back and impulse control... sport people still like a off switch and impulse control is without question needed.

 

Even culling the dogs from breeding programs that aren't thought to be the best you are culling them from litters that you are breeding because you think it is the best breeding and still producing weakness' .. working dogs are rehomed everyday for their lack of workability and these are dogs from reputable breeders who work their dogs to a 'higher' level.

There have been many great working champions that have only produced crap for working dogs. I wonder if a dog in the hands of a talented handler may be a dog that another may cull for 'weakness' ' that may actually be handler weakness' OR that can be handled by a talented handler but not one with fewer skills?

 

Chris trialled my rescue girl who hung out under the fence during trials but was always ready and raring to go at agility and flyball....

They definitely learn to understand the difference in the job that they are doing.

Just because drive is not supressed doesn't mean the dogs can't still shut it down outside of the venue.

 

The biggest issue we have with dogs coming into rescue!! IMPULSE CONTROL!! And probably

%75 of these dogs are from Breeders promoting working dogs.

 

Anyways... I probably will never buy a puppy... I have no need or desire.

I have taken all my dogs from rescue and had them be successful in all sports(including herding).

 

I think the important message is that you really need to research your breeders and your dogs.

Even people breeding well bred dogs and out working on the fields or trialling at higher levels may not be the best breeder to buy from and vice versa with a person breeding for sport.....

 

I guess being a rescuer I would never buy a puppy or promote a dog from a breeder that did not commit to dogs that they had put on the ground. Whether it be from their bitches or promoting their dog for stud to other breeders who are not responsible.

 

Workability means nothing regardless of tested or not if you are over breeding, selling your dogs inappropriately, having health issues and then not taking responsiblity for them.

 

So I that note I will take my pack of mis-fit kids to bed with me!

Cheers

Cindy

Border Collie Rescue Ontario

http://www.bordercollierescueont.com

[AllieMackie]

Hey everyone.

 

Thanks very much to everyone who's been PMing me with advice, thoughts, shared experiences and anything else that might help. It's appreciated and I'd like to keep chatting with you.

 

Unfortunately, more than one person has been upset by what's been posted in this forum, and that makes me really unhappy. So I'd like to politely say thanks to you guys, but I think I'm going to stay out of the forums for a bit (save for PMs). The internet tends to get people wrapped up in opinions a bit too easily sometimes, and it hurts feelings just as easily as the real world, sometimes, as I've just experienced. I feel it's my fault for bringing it up in the first place.

 

I will say this.

 

Take all internet opinions with a grain of salt. If you are curious about a breeder's motives, methods or anything else you overhear, please contact them and ask them yourself. It's unfair for the breeders to get slandered without the person actually knowing what might have happened, or why. Verify a rumour instead of spreading one.

 

Thanks everyone.

[Eileen Stein]

This seems like it might be a good time to repeat the policy here regarding questions and comments about breeders. I believe that one of the services these Boards can provide is an opportunity to request, and to provide, facts and opinions about breeders. In this cyber age, a lot of breeders are selling dogs via internet websites. It's very easy for a bad breeder to make himself look good on a website, and many people have bought from bad breeders and bitterly regretted it afterwards. It's in the best interests of the dogs as well as the buyers for information about these breeders, other than what the breeder chooses to say about himself, to be freely available. NOTE: I am not saying that any of the breeders discussed in this thread fall into that category; I am just saying that this is the reason for the policy permitting discussion of breeders by name. It is also my policy not to permit anonymous criticism of breeders. If I discover that someone has posted negatively about a breeder, and that poster's identity is not already known to me, I will ask them to identify themselves privately to me, and will delete their post if they refuse to do so.

 

If breeders feel they have been wronged by anything said here, they can join the Boards and refute whatever is said and/or they can contact me and tell me why they feel something that was posted should be removed. If it appears from whatever information they provide that what was posted about them was untrue, I will delete the offending post. If it's unclear whether what was said is untrue or not, I will give the poster an opportunity to support their statement, but if they are unable or unwilling to do so, I will delete their post. If what was posted is not factually incorrect, but is simply an opinion of the poster with which the breeder disagrees (for example, that breeding for sports is bad for the border collie breed), I will let the post stand. Again, I think the free exchange of information and views is most likely to allow the truth to surface, and is most likely to be of benefit to the dogs.

[Pearse]

I am not saying that Border Collie breeders should be selectively breeding for being pretty or small, no need to bang your head against the wall over this one. I am just making the observation that if as a herding person you have already written off a dog because it is not coming from a breeder who is working their dogs and yet another dog from the same litter may be a open champion then of course you are not seeing any dogs from a breeder breeding the same dog but using their dogs for agility in Open trial homes.

 

I agree some sport breeders are breeding outside the norm I have seen some scary looking dogs around town... but not all are not as far out of it as it is being made out.

 

As for laid back and impulse control... sport people still like a off switch and impulse control is without question needed.

 

Even culling the dogs from breeding programs that aren't thought to be the best you are culling them from litters that you are breeding because you think it is the best breeding and still producing weakness' .. working dogs are rehomed everyday for their lack of workability and these are dogs from reputable breeders who work their dogs to a 'higher' level.

There have been many great working champions that have only produced crap for working dogs.

 

OK, see these last two statements that you just made: "working dogs are rehomed every day for their lack of workability [sic]" (by which I think you mean pups whose parents were working dogs), and "there have been many great working champions that have only produced crap for working dogs". Well, those two statements (which are true) completely contradict your earlier argument (" if as a herding person you have already written off a dog because it is not coming from a breeder who is working their dogs and yet another dog from the same litter may be a open champion") that dogs from working lines who have never been worked and who have been trained for agility or flyball are worthy of breeding to because they have siblings that are good working dogs. Basically, you are making Eileen's argument and agreeing with her that not all dogs from working parents will make good working dogs, and therefore the only way to tell if a dog is worth breeding is to try to train it to a decent working standard and see if it has what it takes.

 

Why is this? It's because working ability is based on complex genetics and doesn't breed true. If that were the case, take any two champions, breed them and get litter after litter of world beaters. It has never happened. That is why it is critical to test for working ability in every generation. Who your dog's great-great grandparent was is of little consequence (that' only 1/16 of the genetics). Whether it's parents can work is a better indicator but no guarantee. Only if your dog can work stock to better than average level is it worth considering breeding.

 

My brother and sister are national caliber soccer players. I'm crap. If someone had seen my siblings play and fixed me up with Mia Hamm in the hope of producing the next David Beckham, they'd have been sorely disappointed as, most likely, would Ms. Hamm.

 

Pearse

[mosstheboss2000]

YES!!!!ALL I am trying to say is clearly breeding 2 proven dogs doesn't guarantee anything either!!!!!

And YES you would not know if ANY of them would work unless you tried! Now I am hitting my head against a brick wall.

You could have the littermate that is the herding Champion throw dogs that wouldn't herd and the littermate trained ONLY for agility throw the most incredible working dogs. Nuture of the parent into a sport dog will not change that fact that this dog comes from the same litter.... but as 'nobody' would even try for god forbid that if this dog was NOT trained to higher levels of herding, this on it self has apparently reduced the chances so much that you would now probably NOT get a true to breed working Border Collie OR at least not take a chance.

 

As I said the only point that needs to be made here is that you need to research your dogs and your breeders.

 

We took one of our rescue dogs at the age of 4.5(accomplished sport dog BTW from unknown origin) and started her on sheep, told by everyone we were silly to think she would actually trial and do well... hitting the trial field 8 months later and finishing 3rd overall that year against just 2 other handlers dog teams that had already trialled the previous year. Only to then be told OH well she is special and one in a million. I think it was more that nobody else would of even bothered to try....

 

Cindy

[Eileen Stein]

If you buy a puppy from breeder A and breeder B, out of good working dogs, and train them for agility, those pups (C and D) would have just as good a chance of having good working ability as their littermates who went to working homes. However, if you train and use them only for agility, their offspring will have less chance of having good working ability than pups out of C and D's littermates who are bred by working breeders. This is because genes recombine at every generation. A breeder who is trying to breed good working dogs has to exclude from breeding those dogs who have serious faults or cannot be trained to be useful stockdogs. So only the littermates of C and D with demonstrated working ability (the ones who inherited the right combination of genes) will be bred by good working breeders; the others will not be. This is not to say that C and D might not have some pups with good working ability, or that C and D's work-tested littermates might not have some pups that are lacking. Just that the ODDS of getting good working ability are higher with the working bred pups, because for all you know C and D are not just untrained for work, but are actually untrainable to a standard of usefulness -- they may be lacking in stock sense, lacking in balance, lacking in power or courage, etc., and you would never know. In the next generation of pups bred from agility performers untrained for work, the odds get worse, because a second round of gene re-combination has occurred with no testing and culling for working ability. The odds get worse again in the next generation, and so on. If this were not so, Rough and Smooth Collies would have the same level of working ability as border collies, because they come from the same stock -- the same "lines" -- if you go back far enough. But they don't, because quite a while back they ceased being bred for working ability and began to be bred for other things. Of course there are exceptions and I am oversimplifying this, but in general what you breed for is what you get. And you can't breed for working ability without training and testing for it.

 

Cindy, do you understand at all what I was saying in the above quote? The complex combination of traits that make a good working border collie cannot be "fixed" in the breed, the way you can "fix" color or ear set. That's why not every offspring of a good working pair will be a good worker -- because they are not getting the same genes. Genes are recombined and genes are lost from one generation to the next. Therefore, if you keep breeding without testing and culling for working ability, with every new generation you move further and further away from that good combination of genes you started out with. You are literally throwing away the herding ability of the dogs you breed, generation after generation, if you do not train them and test them and breed only the good workers, until ultimately you will have nothing left.

 

We took one of our rescue dogs at the age of 4.5(accomplished sport dog BTW from unknown origin) and started her on sheep, told by everyone we were silly to think she would actually trial and do well... hitting the trial field 8 months later and finishing 3rd overall that year against just 2 other handlers dog teams that had already trialled the previous year. Only to then be told OH well she is special and one in a million. I think it was more that nobody else would of even bothered to try.

 

Does "from unknown origin" mean that you don't know what this dog's breeding was? If so, how can that prove anything? She could have been the daughter of good working dogs. I don't see why anyone would say you were silly to try -- why not try? (What class of trial was it, BTW?)

 

I've been trying to figure out why we seem to be talking at cross-purposes, and I wonder if it may be that we're not talking about the same thing at all. Maybe you're just saying, "Why not give a rescue dog a chance?" If that's what you're saying, I don't disagree with you at all. Why NOT give a rescue dog a chance. But if you're saying that a breeder can start with working-bred dogs and then breed for generations without training and working their dogs on stock as a basis for making their breeding decisions, and they will still have the same level of working ability in their current generation as they did when they started, you are just wrong. The laws of genetics say otherwise, and that is why sports breeding (or color breeding, or conformation breeding, or any other non-working breeding) is bad for the breed.

[mosstheboss2000]

If herding ability is not tested how do you know what you are or are not throwing away.... *this is not a question just a comment.... YES I understand that if it not tested you believe it should not be bred.

 

I understand about working ability and genetics ect.. and this is my point. I am not talking multiple generations down the road of people breeding for specifics as colour and ear set but sport homes that are breeding pups from a bitch from the same litter of the bitch down the road owned by the open handler. I understand that in doing this you 'may' be breeding inadequate workability(untested so unknown really) ..... that is not the point I am trying to make.

I just can't believe that people can be so quick to think that if a dog does sports and a breeder sells to sport homes they must be breeding the workability out of their dogs. and YES I am not so slow to think that many don't!! Because I know they do and I do see the results of this everyday with what I do.

 

Many sport homes actually still work their dogs but mainly promote them as sport dogs including herding ... just most are sold to agility or flyball homes as this is where the market is. This is why I say it is so important to research your breeder and their dogs.

 

Please note this does not mean I am promoting people selling or breeding dogs for agility, size or color I am just saying the possibility of getting a nice working dog for ANY sport from this breeder IS POSSIBLE!!!!!

 

As for my girl yes un-know heritage.

The point was that only once she was good... was it assumed she 'must of been' from good working parents the

It was the Ontario Border Collie Trails, just novice So yes.... maybe she wouldn't of gone on to be a talented open dog but I guess we will never answer that question as we didn't put it to the test. But she did it pretty and got the job done and that was why she did well, ended with a pro novice run at the end of the year and then we of course did the unthinkable and retired her back to dog sports! Wanted to do Nationals that year!!!!

Renting sheep is far too expensive... perhaps when we are retired with some space for sheep we will dive further into this world. It is a pretty incredible feeling working with a dog like this.

[Eileen Stein]

I just can't believe that people can be so quick to think that if a dog does sports and a breeder sells to sport homes they must be breeding the workability out of their dogs.

 

I'm not saying they are breeding the workability out of their dogs on purpose. I'm sure they don't think they are, and their buyers don't think they are. That's why they can say things like I quoted earlier: "My dogs are descended from herding champions and so they have great herding ability and would be great open dogs, except that I'm not interested in herding so we do agility instead." That statement sounds very plausible to lots of people, apparently, judging by how often it's said. It sounds ridiculous to people who actually train and work dogs to the open level and breed for working ability. Remember the scene in Pride and Prejudice where the arrogant Lady Catherine de Bourg says something like (can't quote it exactly--all my books are packed away) "It's a pity you can't play [the pianoforte] well. I should have been a great proficient if I had troubled to learn"? It's a very funny line, because we all know that you cannot know you would make a high-quality musician if you haven't even tried. It requires a lot of inborn talent to be a concert pianist, and the fact that you can sing "Happy Birthday" on key does not prove you have that talent. There's only one way to know.

 

What I AM saying is that it's the inevitable result of breeding without regard for working ability that "workability" will be lost, because you can't keep the right genes, in the right combinations, unless you test and cull at every generation. You seem to be focused on the individual dog. Is it possible that there could be one or two exceptions? Yes, it is. But I'm concerned about the breed as a whole. The more people breed without regard for working ability, the more working ability will be lost from the breed. And since breeding for working ability is what made the border collie what it is, without working ability its nature will change over time and future generations will not be the border collie we have known and loved and depended on. When you buy from breeders who don't breed for working ability, you are facilitating that downward spiral.

 

BTW, what is your opinion about testing for hip dysplasia? Do you think it's a sign of a good breeder that they x-ray their breeding stock and have them evaluated to make sure their hips are not dysplastic before breeding them?

 

As for my girl yes un-know heritage.

The point was that only once she was good... was it assumed she 'must of been' from good working parents

 

Hmm. Suppose you heard about a stray dog that had been found. You knew nothing about the dog except that she had been found wandering on a country road. You can't deduce a single thing about her parentage from that. But then, when you see the dog, you notice that it has a large hound-like body on extremely short legs, short hair, lots of loose skin, huge floppy ears, droopy jowls, mournful eyes with droopy lower lids showing red haws, etc. At that point you could begin to assume that she was probably from basset hound parents and not from borzoi parents. Why? Because basset hounds are bred to look like this and borzois are not. Basset hounds come from parents who look like this and borzois do not. By the same token, it's not unreasonable to make no assumption about the working ability of a stray border collie's parents until you see how the dog can work, and then if you find that the dog has good working ability it bcomes reasonable to assume that it was probably from good working parents.

 

It is a pretty incredible feeling working with a dog like this.

 

Yes, it is a pretty incredible feeling working with a dog with inborn working ability, and a discouraging struggle trying to work with one who has little or none.

[mosstheboss2000]

BTW, what is your opinion about testing for hip dysplasia? Do you think it's a sign of a good breeder that they x-ray their breeding stock and have them evaluated to make sure their hips are not dysplastic before breeding them?

 

Yes I do think this is important proving soundness in the dogs you are breeding. I also KNOW having seen it that you can have breed 2 dogs with EXCELLENT hips and still get a dog with horrible HD sadly.

[Denise Wall]

Cindy,

 

#1 Breeding for whatever is all about odds. Whether it's 8 in 10, 1 in 100, 1 in 1000, 1 in 1,000,000, there will normally always be one. You (the generic you) just need to decide how important it is to you to have that one, whatever it is.

 

#2 Obviously many people who have not actually experienced it, do not really understand what is meant by "working to a high standard."

[mosstheboss2000]

THANK YOU!! This all I have been trying to get accross!!!!!!

 

#1 Breeding for whatever is all about odds. Whether it's 8 in 10, 1 in 100, 1 in 1000, 1 in 1,000,000, there will normally always be one. You (the generic you) just need to decide how important it is to you to have that one, whatever it is.