Barbie Collie Herding

[geonni banner]

I recognize BC-ness in the movement, myself. I used to do Border Collie rescue and I had a friend who did Aussie rescue and we used to compare each others dogs, because sometimes that dog in the shelter could be a BC with a docked tail or an AS without a docked tail...I always saw a certain slinky-ness, dropped head at a run kind of movement in the Border Collies that I did not see in the Aussies.

 

Theres also something in the way the face is shaped to me...they way a dog looks when its looking, if that makes any sense. Maybe it has something to do with distance vision? I dunno.

 

The breed-ring people call it "expression." It's highly prized there, but unfortunately, the expression in the breed-ring is all about facial bone construction, ear set, eye shape and even creative grooming. In other words, it's a mask worn by the show dog (I'm thinking of Rough Collies here, but it applies to other breeds as well.) On a working-bred Border Collie you get that characteristic expression from what's going on in the dog's mind - regardless of the shape of its face, the set of its ears or the distribution of haircoat. That eye is showing the intelligence and mental quickness that has been lost by the average show-bred dog. This explains why dogs, even Border Collies, have that sort of vacuous, half-bright look. The clunky conformation only reinforces this "nobody home in there" look.

 

I think that that is one of the clues that people see when they are evaluating whether a dog of unknown ancestry is part or all Border Collie. It's true for me anyhow...

[geonni banner]

Well, there always some of us--the wet blankets, I suppose--who will point out that the only way you might more definitively say it's a border collie is to take it to stock and see what it does. Of course that presupposes that the dog would have breeding that might predispose it to work (and as we well know there are plenty of purebred border collies who wouldn't look at livestock even if they were slathered in peanut butter). That's why I often tell people that it doesn't NOT look like a border collie and that if they want to call it a border collie they should go ahead and do so.

 

Humans like to categorize things. When you get an unknown rescue and someone asks what breed it is, you want to be able to label the dog something other than mutt. So if the dog doesn't have any specific physical traits that scream NOT border collie to me, then I tell folks to do ahead and call it a border collie.

 

On the other end of the spectrum is a person I had come her for lessons who was convinced her dog was a border collie. The dog didn't say border collie to me, and then to top it off, the dog had no real working instinct. Livestock were play time. I told her after a month or two (~6-8 lessons) that I didn't think the dog was going to progress in training, and so we stopped. I imagine she still tells people the dog is a border collie.

 

I get that you're asking how we can on one hand so there is no standard look to the breed and on the other tell people their dog looks like a border collie, but I think if you've seen enough border collies--and all the variety that entails--then you probably can look at a generic dog and tell that it *might* be a border collie.

 

J.

 

All true, and it is why I am so surprised at how often people look at a dog's photo and say, "Looks like Border Collie to me!" When it would be perfectly feasible for a dog that was say, Shetland Sheepdog and Greyhound to look remarkably like a Border Collie, and have no Border Collie blood. Seeing the dog in motion would help, as Rushdogie says, but the real test would be its reaction to stock. And, as you pointed out, that isn't even 100% reliable. But heck, for the average pet owner - if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck...

[Debbie Meier]

That eye is showing the intelligence and mental quickness that has been lost by the average show-bred dog. This explains why dogs, even Border Collies, have that sort of vacuous, half-bright look. The clunky conformation only reinforces this "nobody home in there" look.

 

 

Possibly your describing intensity and focus. Something that I have noticed with our better dogs, they always have a look of intensity, not just when they see stock. They are very serious and intent. Yes, you can get them silly and loose, but typically it does not last long.

[juliepoudrier]

in conformation lines than in working lines.

 

Form follows function not the other way around.

 

Pearse

Hear, hear. The conformation folks seem to think that they can define a form and any dog with that form will be able to do the work it was originally created for. In the beginning that might even work, assuming they define the form based on examples of the breed that actually did the work the breed was supposed to do. But as happens in any conformation show ring, individual judging bias comes into play and the next thing you know, forms are being changed and exaggerated (regardless of the actual standard) to suit those personal preferences, and voila, suddenly function starts to follow form (that is, they actually start to believe that their dogs can still do what they haven't actually been doing with them for generations, and even though the form has changed over that time).

 

A non-dog-related example. I raise Tunis sheep, which are supposed to be a dual-purpose breed (meat and wool). Because sheep showing seems to require ever-larger sheep, the show Tunis are now as a group much larger than the more traditional Tunis. Recently there was a discussion on the Tunis list about a yearling ram that *won* at a show, even that at a year old he was *oversized* compared to the standard. When some "traditionalists" questioned how an sheep larger than the standard could win the grand championship, the explanations were amazing, though the one that stood out was that a sheep in show condition is of necessity heavier than a sheep in breeding condition. Of course that didn't explain how an oversize yearling, with growing to do--even if you chose to believe the show condition/breeding condition argument--could be considered a prime example of the breed.

 

I could come up with a gazillion examples like this. Eventually conformation showing twists standards around until the show winners create the standard and not the other way around. The ram in question was apparently so large as to have difficulty getting up. One wonders if he could possibly even physically breed a ewe, and yet, he's still considered the best example of the breed....

 

Pure craziness....

 

J.

[geonni banner]

Possibly your describing intensity and focus. Something that I have noticed with our better dogs, they always have a look of intensity, not just when they see stock. They are very serious and intent. Yes, you can get them silly and loose, but typically it does not last long.

 

Yes, intensity. Border Collies don't own it, think terriers for example, but it does seem to come with the working lines. It's why I think that Sugarfoot is very likely all or mostly Border Collie. In all other respects you could probably come up with a dog that looked exactly like her by mating a Shetland Sheepdog to a Flat-Coated Retriever. But it wouldn't have her mind - and that intensity. Someday I would dearly love to see how she reacts to stock. But with my limitations - financial and otherwise, it will probably never happen. Oh well. She's a good dog, for all that.

[Debbie Meier]

Yes, intensity. Border Collies don't own it, think terriers for example, but it does seem to come with the working lines. It's why I think that Sugarfoot is very likely all or mostly Border Collie. In all other respects you could probably come up with a dog that looked exactly like her by mating a Shetland Sheepdog to a Flat-Coated Retriever. But it wouldn't have her mind - and that intensity. Someday I would dearly love to see how she reacts to stock. But with my limitations - financial and otherwise, it will probably never happen. Oh well. She's a good dog, for all that.

 

Oh boy, if you only knew what all different breeds she could be and still manifest intesity and be black and white and built like a dog (GGG)

[Gloria Atwater]

Thanks for the response................

 

I haven't actually met any show line BC yet and I've never seen someone try to work one. Are they really severely lacking in instinct and drive?

 

Hello BB ~

 

I've been away from the computer for a couple days and only now see your posts. I labeled you a troll initially because your post read, at least to my inner "ear," as baiting. My apologies if I was mistaken.

 

I've only seen a single but remarkable demonstration of Show vs working BCs in a side-by-side comparison. An all-breed sheepdog trainer held a "fun-day" on her farm and among those who came were a group of 4 or 5 strictly show bred border collies. They instinct tested I think 3 of them ....

 

And there was no instinct to be had. None. Each one of those dogs just trotted around, sniffed the odd little pellets on the ground, and cast the sheep only the most passing curious glances. "I wonder what those things are? Oh, never mind, here's another interesting smell."

 

To my mind, if that's what happens when people breed for an artificially cosmetic breed "standard," I'd prefer they stay well away from our working dogs.

 

The other thing is that when you Google for images of Show border collies, most are of a very distinct "look." Pretty, poofy, often rather boxy-looking, tip-eared darlings with blankly alert expressions and matching head shapes. They bear scant resemblance to the hard-muscled, eager, coiled-spring look of the BCs I know, whose ears go any which way and whose eyes blaze with fierce intelligence.

 

The thing is, working lines may turn out dogs who could do well in conformation, but judging goes to that "look." When breeding for work and athleticism, things like head shapes, coat types or ear set must fall at the very bottom of the selection process. That's where working and show lines tend to part ways.

 

Oh I didn't know that! That's quite interesting. So basically from what I gather of this thread BCs are just like Alaskan huskies and are not really a defines breed other than being able to do certain work at a certain level.

 

Have you researched the history of the border collie? The "shepherd's dogge" of old was just that: a compilation of dogs that resulted in a dog that was capable of helping the farmer at his work. The whole crux of the AKC vs working lines debate is that the border collie is a definable breed, yes, but they conform to a type more than a concrete aesthetic standard. It's only in the last 150-200 years that the "Border Collie" emerged from the melange of British Isles sheepdogs as the breed we recognize today.

 

Even so, if you were at the Sheepdog Finals right now, you'd see a wonderful physical variety on that field. Furry, slick coat, halfway in between, rangy, compact, long-nosed, cute-faced, pointy ears, tipped ears, floppy ears, dogs with ears that don't match, golden eyes, brown eyes, blue eyes, one of each, and coat colors? Lots of black and white, but also reds, merles, black-and-tans, mostly-whites, mostly-blacks, and so forth. Some demonstrate lots of style and eye, some are more workmanlike and upright. But they all share an innate and powerful instinct to do the job.

 

The definition of the border collie should not reside in any arbitrary physical standard. It should reside in the dog's instinctive drive to work, and his physical ability to do so.

 

And believe me, if you take a purebred border collie and put it to work beside an Aussie/BC mix, those who know the working BC will be able to tell which is which, just by watching them work. Nothing moves like a BC except a BC. Even the loose-eyed upright ones.

 

....... I'm just questioning the different breeders of border collies. I want to know why a show bred dog can't herd and why working folk are so vehemently opposed to any other breedings other than a working dog. Sure the simple answer is a BC is a working dog but trialing is more along the lines of sports than working anyways. It's just another form of competition, so why is it superior to other forms of competition like agility, obedience, etc. etc. And how does one decide what kind of work should be done by a BC? any kind of herding whether it be ducks, emus, sheep, and cows or only sheep?

 

Show dogs can't handle livestock like the working dogs because they are not bred for it. In fact, some show breeders deliberately select their breeding stock from dogs with low working drive. Someone gave me a book (that I no longer own) in which a show breeder described her selection process in great detail. The reason she chose sires and bitches with minimal work ability? Because the working lines' intensity tended make the dogs too distract-able, too reactive for pacing sedately around a show ring.

 

And THAT deliberate selection AWAY from working ability is why so many protest so stridently against it. In the AKC's (or at least their show judges') zeal to award BCs who fit conformation specifications, they are encouraging breeders to omit the heart and soul of the BC to attain a physical ideal.

 

For myself, I have no problems with someone competing with their BCs in agility, flyball, rally, obedience, or whatever. Go for it, have a great time, knock yourself out. But deliberate omission of those qualities that separate the BC from every other breed in the world ... is a crime against the breed, in my book. The border collie is a sheepdog. Put him to any task you want and more power to you, but don't premeditatively breed that working ability OUT.

 

As for who decides what stock a BC can work on, that depends on the owner, the dog and the stock available. Not all BCs can work cattle. Not all BCs want to work ducks or geese. Not all BCs are good with or even like goats. And some BCs are better with goats or cows than they are with sheep. That kind of decision depends on the dog's abilities and again, what's available for use in training.

 

....... From what I've learned in this thread I think the show BCs should possibly start a different breed (I mean consider their show bred BCs a different breed) and call their dogs something else and go from there.

 

As others have noted, that's certainly been suggested ...

 

All the above are simply my opinions, and I do not claim to be an expert at anything.

Cheers ~

 

Gloria Atwater

[Gloria Atwater]

Huh?

 

I thought I went to the trials to have fun and to relax????

 

I like to watch all the dogs

 

Work some new sheep.

Get some advice

 

Sell some mutton hotdogs

See some friends

 

Make new friends

 

Have Bob tell me the fetch gates are for me to go through not around.

 

Have George remind me where to stand to remember where the drive is going.

 

Dian gets a bunch of leaves together and shows me some complicated thing.

 

Carolyn tells me everything about every type of dog known. She is very smart about the dogs.

 

And Ben brings Brownies!!!!!

And I get to watch all this and then think of poetry

 

While Sweep the Horrifying Broom works........

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

That. Right there. That's why to trial. It's not ego or whateverthehellyoucallit. It's the magic of celebrating Border Collies with other, like-minded souls. And having a damned good time doing it.

 

~ Gloria

[Gloria Atwater]

How would folk here describe the "recognizable, defining characteristics of the Border Collie," in terms of appearance? (Excluding coat color)

 

 

Wow, that's liable to be an interesting and subjective discussion!

 

For me, it's in their movement and attitude. There's a fluidity to their movement, a commonality to the slinky way they carry themselves, an intensity in their expression and an electric air of, "I'm ready! Let's do it! Say when!" They exude a readiness to go, a coiled-spring preparedness to do something, and almost perfect stillness in that instant before they explode into motion.

 

Even my old Jesse, who is a more upright, loose-eyed BC, shares those traits in his measure. A thousand dogs may manifest a hundred different ways of saying, "Look! I'm a border collie!" But there will be that almost indefinable "something" in each one which, to the knowing, sets these dogs apart.

 

They are magic, and it's why they are the dog for me.

Cheers ~

 

Gloria

*done spamming the boards now, honest*

[ejano]

Yes, - the absolute beauty of their movement - the coiled crouch, - the delicacy of balance, the flat out run, and those moments when they stretch wide out out, or turn and for instant, seem to hang, suspended between earth and sky, between the in and out of a breath, then the motion explodes again.

 

And the brains...the willingness to be a partner in anything....the devotion...the mischievous bent....the patience...the persistence, their determination to communicate with you.

 

What's not to like about this dog?

 

 

 

For me, it's in their movement and attitude. There's a fluidity to their movement, a commonality to the slinky way they carry themselves, an intensity in their expression and an electric air of, "I'm ready! Let's do it! Say when!" They exude a readiness to go, a coiled-spring preparedness to do something, and almost perfect stillness in that instant before they explode into motion.

 

They are magic, and it's why they are the dog for me.

Cheers ~

 

Gloria

*done spamming the boards now, honest*

[Maja]

Hear, hear. The conformation folks seem to think that they can define a form and any dog with that form will be able to do the work it was originally created for. In the beginning that might even work, assuming they define the form based on examples of the breed that actually did the work the breed was supposed to do. But as happens in any conformation show ring, individual judging bias comes into play and the next thing you know, forms are being changed and exaggerated (regardless of the actual standard) to suit those personal preferences, and voila, suddenly function starts to follow form (that is, they actually start to believe that their dogs can still do what they haven't actually been doing with them for generations, and even though the form has changed over that time).

 

Eventually conformation showing twists standards around until the show winners create the standard and not the other way around. The ram in question was apparently so large as to have difficulty getting up. One wonders if he could possibly even physically breed a ewe, and yet, he's still considered the best example of the breed....

Julie,

I couldn't agree more, and that's exactly what happens, and that's what I was trying to say in relation to BB's claim about the usefulness/necessity of a standard of appearance. To give one more example: all my dogs tend to trot in the ring with their feet close together (including the Bernese) and they get points off for "places feet too close together", also the BC is supposed to have and "efficient trot", well, my older BC got to be so efficient that one judge said "she hasn't the extended trot of a border collie" which was because at that stage I would have to kill myself galloping like a maniac around the ring in order to get her to speed necessary for her to extend her trot. Except, while I wouldn't mind dying at the handler's post, I would hate to drop dead in the show ring while running like an idiot. I could multiply such examples, but the point is that whatever appearance standards there are, if the purpose does not have higherpriority, it gets twisted, as Julie said.

 

[disclaimer #1 - these comments are not aimed at the OP. disclaimer #2 a bit cranky over these same things over and over through decades with no apparent increase in understanding from the non working sector]

Seriously, why do the uninitiated, unrealistic, or pretenders think they're coming up with some new idea that no one has ever thought of or tried? You can have it all!!! No, you can't. Laws of genetics. End of story.

Well, a friend of mine said that once exasperated with his "Introduction to Literature" class, he had said, "I've been teaching you this for 20 years and you still don't remember!"

 

However, I think that key thing about the appearance standard is that it is so misleading, and I think that's why people don't understand the hackles when they mention appearance. Honestly, when most of the working BC people say something about appearance the impression is that if the dog has an AKC look, it will not herd, or "horror of horrors - she is a conformation champion - definitely lowers the estimation of the dog's ability in your eyes. The dog is suspect. Please do not get offended - I know you don't think that, but often you sound that. And now please read the AKC standard, and tell me what's wrong with it:

 

http://www.akc.org/breeds/border_collie/index.cfm

 

The answer to those who are not much into conformation would we - "well, nothing at all!" The standard is written in a way that you should take you top notch working dogs off the trial field, throw them in the show ring, andwin, win, win!

 

fragments:

The Border Collie is a well balanced, medium-sized dog of athletic appearance, displaying style and agility in equal measure with soundness and strength. Its hard, muscular body conveys the impression of effortless movement and endless endurance. The Border Collie is extremely intelligent, with its keen, alert expression being a very important characteristic of the breed. Any aspect of structure or temperament that would impede the dog's ability to function as a herding dog should be severely faulted. The Border Collie is, and should remain, a natural and unspoiled true working sheep dog whose conformation is described herein.

....

 

The Border Collie is an agile dog, able to suddenly change speed and direction while maintaining balance and grace. Endurance is its trademark. The Border Collie's most used working gaits are the gallop and a moving crouch (stealth) which convert to a balanced and free trot, with minimum lift of the feet. The head is carried level with or slightly below the withers. When shown, Border Collies should move on a loose lead and at moderate speed, never raced around the ring with the head held high. When viewed from the side the trot is not long striding, yet covers the ground with minimum effort, exhibiting facility of movement rather than a hard driving action.

 

Now tell me whose dog here does not meet the standard? Nobody's . And here is where the confusion is partly on the conformation end of people who are not very much into conformation: they do not realize that the standard is to a large extent misleading - forgive me the euphemism. Because in reality, things work more in the way that Julie was describing about the sheep, and the working dogs would not vanquish competition in the show ring.

 

BenjaminButton,

In Europe both show and working BCs are more common, because there are lots of sports people who want to attend KC events. Here is an example of a German breeder who has dogs from various backgrounds - but they all work stock, and they do not breed their dogs with dogs that do not work stock. Their dogs are from full ISDS parentage, partial ISDS, to a very show line BC. Finn who is ISDS ROM.

 

http://www.fromshepherdsown.de/

 

Maja.

P.S. Julie, I won't say what I think about your Ranger's appearance, because you would kill me on the spot and never talk to me again .

[juliepoudrier]

P.S. Julie, I won't say what I think about your Ranger's appearance, because you would kill me on the spot and never talk to me again .

Well he is my "Barbie Boy," and he does answer to "Fluffy"! (And grooming him is a PIA.)

 

J.

[Maja]

(And grooming him is a PIA.)

Just include him in the spring shearing program .

Maja

[Tea]

Ok

I will tell this story one more time.

 

we run a wildlife rehab and education facility. We have a pack of wolves that were rescued and are unreleasable, poor old souls.

 

Anyway an intern was giving a tour to a group of folks, one of whom was a breeder of, I assume, AKC dogs. I think she said German Shepherd but this was now years ago and I cannot remember.

 

She was looking at a wolf. Wah a big black brooks range male, I believe.

 

And made a comment that he was very poorly put together.

 

She asked the intern why was he built like that?

(Cow Hocked, knock kneed, legs coming out of the same hole, long back.....

 

The intern replied

 

Because in Nature if he was not built like that he would die.

 

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

IF The wolf holds up to the work, If he is a good wise hunter, is resistant to parasites and disease, good parent- he lives asnd reproduces himself if not- he dies the first year. And believe me, most young wolves 50 to 75% die that first year.

 

It is an excellent wolf that lives to 12

 

 

 

Anyway for what its worth- there is my story

 

[mjk05]

I've only seen a single but remarkable demonstration of Show vs working BCs in a side-by-side comparison. An all-breed sheepdog trainer held a "fun-day" on her farm and among those who came were a group of 4 or 5 strictly show bred border collies. They instinct tested I think 3 of them ....

 

And there was no instinct to be had. None. Each one of those dogs just trotted around, sniffed the odd little pellets on the ground, and cast the sheep only the most passing curious glances. "I wonder what those things are? Oh, never mind, here's another interesting smell."

 

To my mind, if that's what happens when people breed for an artificially cosmetic breed "standard," I'd prefer they stay well away from our working dogs.

Not to disagree with most of what you've said, but the above scenario doesn't really say anything much about "show vs. working" to me. It just says that those dogs hadn't switched on. This is why 'instinct testing' is such a crock. On a pup/new dog's first time on stock, it might seem disinterested, it might go feral and have a good chase, it might do some really stupid things and some nice things, or it might (rarely) look like a total natural. The total naturals are a good bet (although I've heard it argued that they often don't live up to that early promise, for a range of reasons)- but the rest of them- who knows? An expert might be able to predict something from a dog's first moves when it starts on sheep, but many dogs mature, develop confidence and change dramatically in their work as they go on, so I don't think they'd argue that it's set in stone.

 

And until a dog 'switches on' to sheep, how can we say anything except that they are interested in livestock? There are some very good dogs who are late starters, and some very average dogs who are late starters. You can't tell until they've started. At 'fun days', many dogs are adults, with little exposure to livestock, and probably more likely to be a bit more inhibited about letting their instincts take over. Most of the show-bred collies I've seen on sheep were interested in them, started off with chasing, and often even showed some crouch and eye and tried to balance them to the handler, especially after a few sessions. It's the part that comes after the instinct testing that they've struggled with.

[Maja]

Good story

Maja

[Smalahundur]

Cool story Tea.