Jump to content
BC Boards

Working Border Collies


Pam Wolf

Recommended Posts

The discussion ongoing about the cattle dog trials has prompted this. What is the future of the working Border Collie? Is it to be a working dog that can work cattle or sheep or is it to be divided (yet again) into those dogs that work cattle and those that can only work sheep? I fear a split will not be in the best interest of the breed. I can see those dogs being called cow dogs loosing many of the traits that make the Border Collie so special when it comes to working livestock and the sheep trial only dogs getting to a point where they are not good farm/ranch dogs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But isn't it a generalisation to assume that all BCs work sheep exactly the same?

Surely the fact that there are dogs bred to specialise in working different terrain and distances with different breeds of sheep means that there are variations already? As it is, not every dog needs a huge outrun to do its job.

My friend's BC that works his Shetland sheep hasn't got a clue with "normal" sheep. That's training in his case, but if Shetlands were common I suspect we'd be seeing more dogs bred that could cope with sheep that don't flock in the usual way, probably at the expense of conventional working style.

I'm not sure there is a box they can be forced into even now.

Or am I missing the point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a "sweet spot", that I believe that some of us are looking for when we are breeding and selecting for stockdogs, where we have been blessed with a dog that on his/her own can make the adjustment and handle what ever livestock they are asked to handle with little to no adjustment time or maybe with a little aide from the handler.

 

We have worked with other breeders/clinicianers that have pointed it out to us, telling us that not only is it possible to have but that they have had it, maybe only once in their lives, or maybe just in part, but that it is not easily attained and maintained via breeding. But breeding, selection and testing via different types of work on different livestock will be the only way to know for certain how close you are or if you have it.

 

 

Maybe some will say it is myth or fable, but it is what drives a few, provided they don't give up after years of discouragement, seems to be mostly due to not finding quality outcrosses or partnering with other breeders that have the same vision and goals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stock is variable and the dogs are variable. My feeling is that a good dog can read and work stock, and the best dogs can read and work a variety of stock, while dogs with less ability and presence or differences in temperment may be more suited to certain types of stock (species and/or breeds).

 

My "weak" and not-self-confident dog can work our cattle very well while my "strong" and very self-confident dog is struggling to find the right balance between his enthusiasm and his inherent power (and to realize that he can move my stock readily with little effort from a distance and with deliberation, instead of having to get "up close and personal" and make a mess of things that should have been very simple to accomplish).

 

I think there are working-bred Border Collies that can be used on virtually all sorts of stock, and the variability of the breed is one of its strong points because it is not too narrowly bred - however, breeding should not take the dogs away from what makes the Border Collie inherently so useful, the ability to gather, think, read stock, and work as a partner with its handler.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But isn't it a generalisation to assume that all BCs work sheep exactly the same?

 

Yes, but working the same way and requiring the same basic skill set are 2 different things.

 

Surely the fact that there are dogs bred to specialise in working different terrain and distances with different breeds of sheep means that there are variations already?

 

I've never heard that before, unless you are trying to refer to different breeds. Border Collies can work a wide variety of species in a wide variety of locations. My dogs have worked in frigid winter weather with blowing snow as well as in the scorching summer heat. They have worked high in the mountains, in deep ravines, rolling hills, terraced fields, flood plains, the desert, deep woods, and tall grass. They have worked sheep (Cheviots, Katahdins, Shetlands, Barbados, Karakuls, Dorpers, Scottish Blackface, Suffolks, Border Leicesters, etc), goats (Boer, Angora, Alpines, etc), cattle (Angus and cross bred), ducks, geese and chickens. I do not and will not have a dog bred specially for each of those situations.

 

As it is, not every dog needs a huge outrun to do its job.

 

I wouldn't agree with that. An outrun means two things to me. 1) the dog knows to search for stock when sent by the handler until it locates them 2) the dog can read/understand stock and therefore knows how wide it needs to run in order to get behind them

 

With these points in mind, every dog needs a good outrun, regardless of the distance. The ability to do long outruns comes with experience as long as the dog has the basic skill set.

 

My friend's BC that works his Shetland sheep hasn't got a clue with "normal" sheep. That's training in his case, but if Shetlands were common I suspect we'd be seeing more dogs bred that could cope with sheep that don't flock in the usual way, probably at the expense of conventional working style.

 

The very nature of the Border Collie should be to keep the flock together, so I am not sure what you are trying to get at. Are you saying that people are breeding poor quality dogs that don't gather well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The discussion ongoing about the cattle dog trials has prompted this. What is the future of the working Border Collie? Is it to be a working dog that can work cattle or sheep or is it to be divided (yet again) into those dogs that work cattle and those that can only work sheep? I fear a split will not be in the best interest of the breed. I can see those dogs being called cow dogs loosing many of the traits that make the Border Collie so special when it comes to working livestock and the sheep trial only dogs getting to a point where they are not good farm/ranch dogs.

 

Should a man be a carpenter or a plumber (and feel free to substitute woman for man where ever you see it)?

 

All things being equal, a man blessed with average intelligence, could be either. Some, either by talent or by inclination will make better plumbers, some better carpenters. Most men, given a bit of training in both, can do both.

 

I guess what I'm saying is it's a false dichotomy. A stockdog is a stockdog is a stockdog. A good one will pretty much work anything that could be classified as stock, and our job is to keep and breed the good ones.

 

All of this other crap has nothing to do with the dogs. It's human politics and human ego. A Border Collie DOES NOT CARE ONE IOTA if it ever runs in a sheepdog trial or a cattle dog trial be they sponsored by USBCHA, NCA, AKC, AHBA, or the Lord God Almighty. Put it in a field with a bunch of something with four legs and a tail, ask it to work, and it is happy as the day is long.

 

From a practical perspective, there are 5 million sheep in the US and 100 million cattle. Even accounting for a good proportion of those cattle being raised in feedlots, there's a lot of cattle out there for stock dogs to work. We need stock dogs that can work both.

 

Why is sheepdog trailing more popular? Easier for hobby herders with the time and money to spend to get into it (most farmers and ranchers can't afford the time or money to travel 500 miles and spend a whole weekend trailing most of the year), cheaper to run a sheep trial than a cattle trial, less skilled help needed to put on a sheep trial (try sending a novice hand up to help move cattle through the set out pens - you need cowboys for a cattle trial).

 

The sheep dog or cattle dog is a futile an argument as the trial dog or ranch dog one. The argument is good dog or mediocre dog. Stick to the former and all the other arguments become moot.

 

Pearse

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never heard that before, unless you are trying to refer to different breeds.

 

If I were I would have said so.

 

Border Collies can work a wide variety of species in a wide variety of locations. My dogs have worked in frigid winter weather with blowing snow as well as in the scorching summer heat. They have worked high in the mountains, in deep ravines, rolling hills, terraced fields, flood plains, the desert, deep woods, and tall grass.

 

All apparently involving independent distance work such as dogs working the fells here would need.

Maybe you don't get the small field set ups that we have in some parts of the UK where a dog is working at much closer quarters.

I live on the coast where the sheep graze the salt marshes or in enclosed fields. 20 miles away we have the Pennines and the Lakeland fells where the sheep are free to roam. Could you take a dog from the coast and expect it to work the fells? Maybe in an ideal world but in practice from the dogs I know from both locations I don't think it's a given.

 

I wouldn't agree with that. An outrun means two things to me. 1) the dog knows to search for stock when sent by the handler until it locates them 2) the dog can read/understand stock and therefore knows how wide it needs to run in order to get behind them

 

With these points in mind, every dog needs a good outrun, regardless of the distance. The ability to do long outruns comes with experience as long as the dog has the basic skill set.

 

You have your own requirements though according to your situation.

An adolescent bitch was taken to the vet a few months ago to be put to sleep because she was said to have no outrun. She was rehomed on another farm and settled into working as that farmer wanted straight away. Hearsay on my part, of course, but I have no reason to doubt the source who was personally involved. So many "failures" rehomed elsewhere to work.

 

The very nature of the Border Collie should be to keep the flock together, so I am not sure what you are trying to get at. Are you saying that people are breeding poor quality dogs that don't gather well?

 

I am saying that people will breed according to the task they want a dog to do, whether it be sheep on the fells, sheep in the paddock, a herd of milkers, a herd of beef cattle on the range or, as in the case I quoted, stroppy little Shetland sheep that just don't flock together. The average British farmer seems to be pragmatic to the end IME, and I have lived in rural areas in different parts of the country for most of my life, so have come across a lot of them.

 

Your definition of "poor quality" would not be universal, I'm sure. Your "poor" may be someone else's "perfectly adequate for purpose". When I get the opportunity to talk to people in the business I check out the opinions of those on here determined to preserve the "perfect" border collie and so far I haven't found anyone involved in working a dog with stock who is concerned with anything more than having a dog to do the job at hand - that's why so many pick up a dog at the local auction or get one from the next farm's litter if they like their dog. If you are striving for perfection you will deplore that way of doing things, I'm sure, but it's what happens in real life here more often than going to Skipton and paying £1000s for a dog. I expect in the rarified world of trials it would be different - I will try and find out. I had to miss the Worlds in September (but not the mud) but am hopeful of getting to the English Nationals this year that are being held within walking distance of my house.

 

I would not presume to contradict what you and others in the US say you need in a dog.

 

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but the impression I get is that you "generic you" want to preserve a type of dog that came to you more or less as it is now. Perhaps I see it differently as I look around me and consider how the dog you now see was developed in the first place and why. Needs are still changing here so it doesn't concern me over much that the process of manipulating a type of dog to fit those needs should continue. I think it's inevitable that there should be a divergence in function since nothing in life is static.

 

Perhaps the major difference between us is that I'm not breedist about the BC or anything else. I don't have an emotional involvement with them over and above any other type of dog. I'm sure I would feel differently if I worked them with stock, but that could hold true if I went shooting with a lab or a spaniel, or took my JR rabbiting. I'm just as interested in how other working breeds came about and where they are going. I have an interest in the BC because of my location and the fact that they comprise the majority of dogs with which I am most familiar. I'm not sure whether owning one makes me more interested, but possibly not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No Pearse, the dogs don't give a hoot about trials, just another day to work for them, but as conservators of the breed where do we want to go with these dogs for the future of the breed?

 

As you kindly provided cattle vs sheep numbers it would seem there is a greater need for cattle dogs in this country isn't it time we defined those traits that define the Border Collie and make it useful on cattle as well as sheep?

 

As Mum24dog noted, people will use a variety of working styles, but just because of different situations does this mean we should loose the outrun in the Border Collie? A dog with natural outrunning ability can be taught to just push stock forward, but a dog without an outrun is far harder to teach to gather large acreages

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe you don't get the small field set ups that we have in some parts of the UK where a dog is working at much closer quarters.

I live on the coast where the sheep graze the salt marshes or in enclosed fields. 20 miles away we have the Pennines and the Lakeland fells where the sheep are free to roam. Could you take a dog from the coast and expect it to work the fells? Maybe in an ideal world but in practice from the dogs I know from both locations I don't think it's a given.

If this were really true of good dogs how would they ever perform well at sheepdog trials held in places that are not like their home fields?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As Mum24dog noted, people will use a variety of working styles, but just because of different situations does this mean we should loose the outrun in the Border Collie? A dog with natural outrunning ability can be taught to just push stock forward, but a dog without an outrun is far harder to teach to gather large acreages

 

I've seen this idea pop up in a number of places that cowdog trials are going to take the outrunning ability out of the border collie and I just don't see it as being true. For one thing, as Pearse pointed out, there are way more cattle in the US than there are sheep and although a great many of them may be in feedlots they didn't start out in a feedlot. The majority of calves in a feedlot were calved in pasture and their mothers remain there (or another pasture) after they're weaned and gone to raise another calf. Weaned calves often don't go straight to a feedlot, they go to a backgrounding/preconditioning operation a huge number of which utilize pastures as part of their program. The majority of people get dogs to help them get their cattle out of pastures, not to push them around in some pens. It's easy to move cattle thru pens, you don't need a dog to help you with that, getting cattle out of pastures which may include a huge variety in the terrain is another story. People need dogs who can outrun and gather.

 

Here's another thing to keep in mind: cattle are expensive and much harder to keep than sheep. You need a lot more ground, a lot more feed, and lot more of everything. Sheep are easy for a hobby person who just wants to trial to keep and train on, cattle not so much, which leads us to the fact that the majority of people who trial on cattle are also cattle people. They're part of/work for/retired from/etc the cattle industry. They're people who need and want dogs that can gather pastures and the vast majority of them love trials that start with a gather in the open and then go on to some close up work.

 

Lets take for instance, this specific trial: http://tophandcattledogs.com/opentrial_2010.html

This was not a USBCHA sanctioned trial, neither was it sanctioned with any other association. Each person got two runs and the top scoring dogs ran in a final round. Over 300 yard outrun. I tried to find some photos of the outrun but there wasn't much than showed the whole thing, so here's a pic that shows some, as you can see there's a pond with a steep dam on one side, out of the photo on the left is a patch of woods and the trailers where the cattle were released from, nothing is flat. 40 dogs ran in the open, 20 in the maturity (basically a nursery class, these dogs made the same outrun as the open dogs). If you scan down the results and look at the list of people who competed you will only find a couple names who are USBCHA members, and only one person who competed in this trial who also competed in the USBCHA national finals.

 

On an interesting aside. I was told that the winner of the USBCHA National Cattle Finals in Open only received $800 in prize money this last year. Does anyone know if that's true? The winner of the open in that Top Hand trial in the paragraph above received $2,000, 2nd place $1,500, 3rd $1,000. The maturity class paid out $1,500, $1,000, and $600. In the Tulsa Maturity (part of the Tulsa Fair trials) the winning dog got $1,800, not sure what the Open and Futurity classes paid out. Who wants to compete for $800 when you can pay the same kind of entry fees and compete for a whole lot more money?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So trialing is for hobby people not the farmers if I get the gist of your comments and trialing is also about money more than improving and showcasing the dogs.

Disclaimer, I speak for the Icelandic sheepdog world.

There is no money in trialing here, and people with stockdogs are all, with very few exceptions, sheep farmers.

Trialing is mostly "showing off" your dogs to fellow handlers ;) And of course there is where people make their breeding decisions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So trialing is for hobby people not the farmers if I get the gist of your comments and trialing is also about money more than improving and showcasing the dogs.

 

I actually said that most of the cattledog trialing people are farmers.

And like it or not money is an important issue. I haven't seen a class at a cattle trial that was less than $50 to enter in years. Most of them are more than that. The last trial I ran at entry fee was $65, I ran two dogs in open over a two day trial. That's $260 in entry fees before you even add on the travel costs.

 

What are the average entry fees on sheep classes now days?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

As you kindly provided cattle vs sheep numbers it would seem there is a greater need for cattle dogs in this country isn't it time we defined those traits that define the Border Collie and make it useful on cattle as well as sheep?

 

 

 

Those traits were defined long ago by people who knew a lot more about moving stock with dogs than I ever will. They include; a natural cast, balance, the ability to gather and drive stock, the ability to cover, the ability to shed and hold stock, endurance, courage, heart, and willingness to work with a human partner.

 

I think that about covers it whether you want to work beef cattle or ducks.

 

Breed the best of them for those traits and the breed will be in good shape. Start breeding for "capable of winning trials on light eastern hair sheep" or "best suited to working cattle in alleys and pens" or any other "custom" need and the breed is well and truly banjaxed, in my humble opinion, because getting the basic principles right is hard enough.

 

Pearse

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lets take for instance, this specific trial: http://tophandcattledogs.com/opentrial_2010.html

May have been a nifty trial, but when the winners' prizes are shock collars (or "electronic training devices") just how relevant is that to Border Collie trials and what we are trying to do to prove the best Border Collies for breeding for the future? I don't think you picked a very good example at all for this reason, but just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

May have been a nifty trial, but when the winners' prizes are shock collars (or "electronic training devices") just how relevant is that to Border Collie trials and what we are trying to do to prove the best Border Collies for breeding for the future? I don't think you picked a very good example at all for this reason, but just my opinion.

 

 

Right on Sue!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

May have been a nifty trial, but when the winners' prizes are shock collars (or "electronic training devices") just how relevant is that to Border Collie trials and what we are trying to do to prove the best Border Collies for breeding for the future? I don't think you picked a very good example at all for this reason, but just my opinion.

 

Whether you like it or not a great many people train with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Nicole,

You described what sounds like an interesting trial. My question is why wasn't it sanctioned with USBCHA? How was the trial advertised? I guess I still don't understand why the people you describe are so anti-USBCHA, or, for that matter, why they would be pro-NCA? So they're real cattle owners. It seems to me that many of the people who participate in the USBCHA cattle trials are also people who keep/raise cattle. How are those people (Lana, Anna, Roy Johnson, Richard Brandon, Steve McCall to name a few) different from the people who would attend the trial you described but WOULD NOT attend a USBCHA trial? That's a serious question. I wonder what's different about those two sets of people.

 

And like it or not, I think it's sad that shock collars are considered prizes at cattle trials. Maybe that's one way those trials are different? Sounds like at the very least there are some serious differences in training philosophies.

 

Oh, and the open class at sheepdog trials runs $37 here in the east, and more (up to $50) at some larger trials. If you consider the Bluegrass, for example, (and I don't know if they raised the price), it used to be $150 to run in open. That guaranteed you two runs. If you did well, you could get into the semis and finals for no extra money, but if you didn't make it to the semis, then you effectively paid $75/run. So given that cattle are so much more expensive to keep or bring in for trials it doesn't seem as if the entry fees are correspondingly that much higher.

 

But that still doesn't answer the question about the apparent animosity among some cattle folk toward the USBCHA.

 

J.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Nicole,

You described what sounds like an interesting trial.

 

The trial Nicole described has an entry fee of $300/dog. It advertises $2000 in added money, and pays out about $10,000 in prize money. So, about $8500 in prize money comes from entry fees. At $300/run that's about 30 entries.

 

 

The USBCHA National Cattledog Finals entry fee was $250. Paid $7000 in prize money from the USBCHA and $5000 in prize money from the ABCA for a total of $12,000 in prize money.

 

Sounds pretty much the same set up. Maybe the HA spreads the money around a bit more but it costs about the same to put on a trial regardless of who's putting it on.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether you like it or not a great many people train with them.

Just because "a great many people" do something, doesn't make it right or mean it produces good results. If shock collars are the future of cattledog training, then I'll throw my hat squarely in with the "sheepdog people". A good working Border Collie doesn't need to be trained with a shock collar. Your mileage may vary but I think you will find that to be the thinking on this board and in the vast majority of working Border Collie handlers, both in North America and the UK, as well as around the world.

 

You and I have been in the same place, watching the same dogs be trained. Initially, most had been trained with shock collars. They tended to be nervous, reactive, grippy dogs. Six months after the different clinician that trained without the collars, at the next clinic/trial that I saw them (and the few following clinics/trials), the dogs were calmer, more confident, rarely gripped, and worked with much better style and demonstrated much better skills and ability, working with more precision and a better relationship with their handlers. That's what made me realize that the collars don't take the place of knowledgeable, more "traditional" methods of training, but actually produce much poorer results.

 

Just my opinion - you have yours, but I'll bet the people I respect as trainers and handlers in the stockdog world would agree with mine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes Sue, collars are no good when used poorly. Same as any other tool. Really this isn't the place to be having this discussion.

 

Julie, you want to know why there's so many people who trial on cattle that don't participate in USBCHA stuff? Probably for the same reason I haven't visited this forum in years. I came here a few days ago because of a link posted on facebook to the new association discussion. I came here a few months ago after being given a link to a post talking shit about a video of Chris Knight dog breaking some cows when it was actually very good stock work done by some damn fine dogs. When I posted my opinion and Chris Knight himself posted in the thread several people flip flopped what they were saying and the rest never posted again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what the posts on Chris Knight have to do with the USBCHA? Are you using it to illustrate attitudes? And if attitudes are a problem *within* the USBCHA (vs. on this one forum), then why isn't that being discussed within the USBCHA (that is, by the directors)? Are you saying that the folks working within the USBCHA misunderstand cattle dog folk (training, trialing, attitudes, outlook on life, etc.) and it's causing friction, or are you saying something else?

 

I'm really trying to understand this. I don't have regular interactions with the USBCHA board (other than with directors as individuals--just not the board collectively), so I don't know how the cattledog people are treated or if they are in fact treated differently than the sheepdog people. And if it's not being treated differently, then I still don't understand where the anti-USBCHA stance is coming from within the ranks of that vast, apparently silent, majority of cattle folks who apparently abhor the USBCHA. I do know some members who raise and trial on cattle, and I certainly haven't gotten the sense from them that the cattle people are mistreated within the USBCHA, but then maybe it's not mistreatment at all, but something else?

 

I keep asking not to be a pest but from the POV of someone who would like to understand the problem, because without understanding, one can't find solutions.

 

J.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...