Jump to content


Photo

Barbie Collie Herding


  • Please log in to reply
116 replies to this topic

#61 geonni banner

geonni banner

    blabbermouth

  • Registered Users
  • 3,712 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Pt. Richmond, CA, USA
  • Interests:Photography, dog training, samurai movies, anime, illustration

Posted 22 September 2010 - 08:59 PM

Competition is just that...competition. Self promoting, ego stroking activities that satisfy some competitive urge from within, are usually performed under the guise of being "fun" and to use Diana's words, have "no true lasting value in the real world". Competitions are events that require voluntary entry into with or with out entry fees and include but are not limited to, Obedience, Rally, Tracking, Agility and Herding.


Coming from someone (me) who neither trials nor works stock at home, even I can say that this ain't necessarily so. It is true that much of competitions are about ego, even stockdog competitions, I'd guess, but there is a very good reason for trials. They can be very instructive to a person who has a talented dog that they want to breed. It can showcase abilities and working styles which make it easier to find a suitable line of dogs to choose a mate from.

I would imagine that there is much to be learned at trials about dog handling and stock handling as well.


What would Rainbow Dash do?


My blog is atpeacewithpink dot blogspot dot com


With%2Bthe%2BBarbados.jpg


#62 brndlbc

brndlbc

    Senior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 226 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 September 2010 - 09:23 PM

What we are arguing here is mostly semantics. I have a very narrow opinion of "work" and "working". Competitions are recreational activities. Neither you nor I ever "have" to enter a competition, we do so voluntarily.

And to answer the USBECHA question...no, never have. My dogs don't work our stock, our stock comes when called (horses).

#63 Pearse

Pearse

    Senior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 999 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 September 2010 - 09:32 PM

Well it seems that I have struck a nerve....so sorry competition folk...no offense was intended. So that you have a better understanding of the way I think. This is what I posted in another thread:
This has been interesting. In my opinion, working dogs are dogs that actively participate in the daily goings on of and in which assist in making the lives of the people they “serve” easier (ranch work) or in which society derives some sort of benefit i.e. SAR, TDI, etc. All other dogs fall into a competition and or companion category.

Competition is just that...competition. Self promoting, ego stroking activities that satisfy some competitive urge from within, are usually performed under the guise of being "fun" and to use Diana's words, have "no true lasting value in the real world". Competitions are events that require voluntary entry into with or with out entry fees and include but are not limited to, Obedience, Rally, Tracking, Agility and Herding.

Do I have a problem with competition events? Not at all and certainly not as long as the people who participate in them keep everything in perspective, that being that society derives " no true lasting value" from the top placing dogs in any competition and treat the results as such. My border collie is an agility champion and no one other than myself (and my ego) got anything out of that. All it proves is that I took the time and put the effort into the training needed to get the "job" done.


You are right and you are wrong.

Competition events can be self-promoting ego-stroking events, and many are.

You are also correct that no one but yourself gets anything out of your dog being an agility champion (other than those who derive pleasure from watching agility competitions).

Some people participate in stockdog field trials purely for their own entertainment. Some don't have sheep. Some wouldn't have sheep if they didn't have sheepdogs that they wanted to run in sheepdog trials.

But, and it's a big but, if one looks at the origin of sheepdog trials, and the reasons they have endured they do serve a more practical purpose. Trials (and there is a reason they are called "trials" and not "competitions") are an opportunity to evaluate the work of a large number of dogs on unfamiliar sheep on unfamiliar ground. If you had been to enough trials to see the same dogs run on different kinds of sheep, on different terrrain, in different weather conditions, you would see how the work shows the strengths and weaknesses of the different dogs. A useful dog is good on his home flock in his home fields. A good dog will do well on certain kinds of sheep. The great dogs can work anything, anywhere, any time. These are the dogs that produce the good farm dogs and ranch dogs.

You don't need trials to do this, but trials make it easier. They bring dogs and handlers together in one place at one time. And they do more. As Tea eloquently pointed out, sit at a trial and watch a hundred runs in a weekend and you will come away with a better understanding of dogs and sheep. Some of that you will learn from just watching, and some you will learn from someone with decades of experience pointing out something you would have missed.

I was at a trial a few weeks ago. I was seated beside one of the world's top handlers as he described what another of the world's top handlers was doing on the trial field. I learned more in fifteen minutes about sheep and dogs than I would have in a month of stumping about a pasture on my own.

So, yes it can be about stroking your own ego, but it doesn't have to be about that unless you allow it to.

Pearse

#64 DeltaBluez Tess

DeltaBluez Tess

    Senior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 2,048 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Carnation, WA

Posted 22 September 2010 - 09:32 PM

>>>>>>

QUOTE(brndlbc @ Sep 22 2010, 09:06 PM)
But your dog did not have to trial to learn how to bring you a sheep. You took a competition dog and turned it into a working dog and I applaud you for that. Trial dogs are not working dogs, they are competition dogs. Sorry, I am very old school in my thoughts here. Getting older and crabbier by the day....

<<<<<<<<<<<<

Top Open Dog of the Year for the WASH Club....doing real work

http://deltabluez.bl...g-of-reins.html

Retired and was one of the top Open dogs...also doing real work....saving livestock in a flood

http://deltabluez.bl...d-part-one.html

my dogs are working dogs....without them, we would not have the farm.

When I go out to the post or to the farm gate, my dogs don't know if it is work or a trial...they know we are doing a job.
*************************
Diane Pagel
DeltaBluez Stockdogs
www.deltabluez.com
www.deltabluez.blogspot.com

Carnation, WA
************************

#65 jdarling

jdarling

    Senior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 2,058 posts
  • Gender:Female

Posted 22 September 2010 - 09:42 PM

brndlbc, the thread you posted with your two blue-eyed brindle dogs ... they're gorgeous dogs. What is the breeding behind them? It's not often you see a fully brindle Border Collie, no less two of them with two blue eyes. So glad to hear they aren't working your horses. What is the breeding behind them?

#66 Pearse

Pearse

    Senior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 999 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 September 2010 - 09:43 PM

What we are arguing here is mostly semantics. I have a very narrow opinion of "work" and "working". Competitions are recreational activities. Neither you nor I ever "have" to enter a competition, we do so voluntarily.

And to answer the USBECHA question...no, never have. My dogs don't work our stock, our stock comes when called (horses).



You are arguing semantics based upon your own, by your own admission, very narrow definition of "work". The rest of us have a broader definition so there is no dichotomy in our view between work done on the trial field and off from the point of view of the dog (who doesn't care if it's a competition or morning chores - it's all the same work to him).

You also admit that you have no personal experience of your dogs working stock.

No one has to enter a competition it's true. However, that's hardly a strong argument against the idea that there might be good reasons to do so.

No human has to train to a level where they can compete in Olympic endurance events, but the people who have done so have advanced our understanding of human physiology and biomechanics.

No one needs to run their dog in a sheepdog trial, but the ones who have done so have expanded the range of work that farmers and ranchers can expect from their dogs by showing what is possible, and by providing the breeding stock who can make it possible.

#67 brndlbc

brndlbc

    Senior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 226 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 September 2010 - 09:44 PM

I never said that working dogs couldn't trial and that trial dogs could not work. My point is that, in my opinion a dog used strictly for trialing purposes is not a working dog by my definition. That dog is no different, again in my opinion, than an obedience dog, disc dog, agility dog etc. Society does not gain anything from a dog's performance in a trial anymore than society gains anything from an obedience dog turning in a perfect 200, an agility dog running clean or a distance catch in frisbee. I am not willing to separate competitions by "task". That is just a little too George Orwell for me.

If you would not have your farm with out your dogs, then you have "working" dogs.

#68 stockdogranch

stockdogranch

    Cowgirl in the sand

  • Registered Users
  • 2,147 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Western Nebraska
  • Interests:Training stockdogs (duh), particularly for everyday, practical work. I trial my dogs on cattle when time and money permit. I published Working With a Stockdog in 2009 (Outrun Press), and am working on ideas for a second book...

Posted 22 September 2010 - 09:51 PM

Brndlbc: As others have so articulately pointed out, trialling and working are often very intertwined (no, not always, but often). Here's one side of it: I have some friends who sheep trial. They keep a few sheep for training their dogs, but to them, yes, trialling is strictly a sport. But now here's the other side: I have a good friend who runs a lot of cattle--at any given time, he runs somewhere between 8,000 to 10,000 head. Pairs, feedlot, bulls, the full gamut. He has used working bred border collies for many years. A number of years ago he started going to some (USBCHA cattle) trials. Why? To see what else was out there that others were using on cattle so that he could improve his breeding program. The result? Better dogs and better handling all the way around (and some wonderful friendships along the way). Actually, I know a number of people in similar situations--they have lots of stock, use their dogs every day, and yet, given the time to do so, thoroughly enjoy trialling. So how would you classify these dogs?

I'm not sure how you get that "real work" and "competition" are mutually exclusive, nor how that is "old school."
A
"Life's too short to work bad dogs."
www.stockdogranch.com

#69 C Crocker

C Crocker

    Senior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 384 posts

Posted 22 September 2010 - 10:02 PM

What do you guys think about Hob Nob Riding High?
Apparently from what I've read she's from 2 conformation dogs and did fairly well in USBCHA Open.

Opinions? Comments?
I don't support the conformation borders because I hate their structure, and heavy bone + coat, I just want some opinions.
Edit: You can see her points in open if you just google her registered name. I think it's on the Hob Nob website.





I will try to educate you if that is possible. First of, I do not care why you ask what you do or why you think how you do, but here are some facts , if you are interested in facts.

Harley was shown years ago by the McFaddens in AKC conformation shows to get her CH. She was not built like any of the AKC show dogs of today. The showing was done more for daughter who Harley actually was bought for when the daughter was a young girl.

Harley was reg AKC, with quite a few ISDS dogs in her pedigree, so do not try and use her for a "show" dog example of "herding". She was not strictly "showline" bred. She was lightly started , then retrained and fully trained by a USBCHA trainer. Harley competed successfully in USBCHA trials , up to going to the Natl's in 2006.

I have not read what the breeder has said about dog and don't care to, but I will hazard a guess Harley is by far the best working stock dog to come from her barn, along with Harley's full brother. Both dogs had excellent training by the same trainer. And they both can and could go ranch work, so don't go down that road.

So I ask you start a discussion about something of which you know, which is not this dog.

And a word to the wise, if for some reason your horses do not come to your whistle in the future, please do not send your poor border collie out to fetch them.

#70 brndlbc

brndlbc

    Senior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 226 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 September 2010 - 10:03 PM

brndlbc, the thread you posted with your two blue-eyed brindle dogs ... they're gorgeous dogs. What is the breeding behind them? It's not often you see a fully brindle Border Collie, no less two of them with two blue eyes. So glad to hear they aren't working your horses. What is the breeding behind them?


Both are ABCA and loaded with dogs like....Molly and Ben and Bob LOL. I am learning from here that it is nothing special but I am a horse person....you don't ride their papers. Neither is a working dog.

#71 C Crocker

C Crocker

    Senior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 384 posts

Posted 22 September 2010 - 10:06 PM

Both are ABCA and loaded with dogs like....Molly and Ben and Bob LOL. I am learning from here that it is nothing special but I am a horse person....you don't ride their papers. Neither is a working dog.



I am a horse person as well, and you may not think you ride their papers, but you do. Some may perform beyond their pedigree, but I sure as heck never based my breeding program on that theory.

#72 brndlbc

brndlbc

    Senior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 226 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 September 2010 - 10:06 PM

And a word to the wise, if for some reason your horses do not come to your whistle in the future, please do not send your poor border collie out to fetch them.


If this is meant for me....OK I won't....I'll send the shepherd

#73 BenjaminButton

BenjaminButton

    Junior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 23 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 September 2010 - 10:11 PM

So I ask you start a discussion about something of which you know, which is not this dog.


I didn't not say I know this dog in and out. I said I READ from random internet pages. For all I know those people could be trolls, cat people, kids, I have no idea. That's why I was here to ask you people that actually know this dog, know BCs lines, etc.

I'm just here to learn and hear opinions and no I will not start discussions on topics I already know because then there is no point of a discussion if I know everything and have a definitive answer.

#74 brndlbc

brndlbc

    Senior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 226 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 September 2010 - 10:16 PM

I am a horse person as well, and you may not think you ride their papers, but you do. Some may perform beyond their pedigree, but I sure as heck never based my breeding program on that theory.



I would hoped that you wouldn't breed a horse if it couldn't ride rather than breed it just because it had papers which said it should

#75 jdarling

jdarling

    Senior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 2,058 posts
  • Gender:Female

Posted 22 September 2010 - 10:18 PM

Both are ABCA and loaded with dogs like....Molly and Ben and Bob LOL.


Cool. I've never seen a brindle border collie with blue eyes. What state are you from? Which agility venue do you compete in? AKC? NADAC? Which one is the agility champion?

#76 brndlbc

brndlbc

    Senior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 226 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 September 2010 - 10:24 PM

We should move this to the agility thread...I'll post it there

#77 Eileen Stein

Eileen Stein

    Moderator

  • Administrators
  • 5,486 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Shady Side, MD, USA

Posted 22 September 2010 - 10:33 PM

However, by completely not caring about aesthetics I fear that bcs will no longer be a breed and be more like a type like Alaskan Huskies. Alaskan huskies are bred only and solely for working ability and conformation wise, there is a huuuge variation. More than what is acknowledged in a breed of dog so to me A. huskies is just a type.


I think border collies ARE a breed like Alaskan Huskies. They are like Alaskan Huskies in that they are bred to a working standard rather than an appearance standard, and they are a breed rather than a type in that they have been bred to that working standard long enough that they almost always meet that workiing standard better than any other kind of dog. I don't really understand why you think dogs must be bred for aesthetics, or must have no significant variation conformation-wise, in order to be a breed.

Alaskan Huskies don't have a registry and border collies do -- that's the only significant difference. And probably that's the only thing that has kept the AKC from going after them.
Support the ABCA Health & Education Foundation by using Amazon Smile

#78 geonni banner

geonni banner

    blabbermouth

  • Registered Users
  • 3,712 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Pt. Richmond, CA, USA
  • Interests:Photography, dog training, samurai movies, anime, illustration

Posted 22 September 2010 - 11:09 PM

I didn't not say I know this dog in and out. I said I READ from random internet pages. For all I know those people could be trolls, cat people, kids, I have no idea. That's why I was here to ask you people that actually know this dog, know BCs lines, etc.

I'm just here to learn and hear opinions and no I will not start discussions on topics I already know because then there is no point of a discussion if I know everything and have a definitive answer.


Ok, for me, there are very few absolutes when you are dealing with complex subjects like the genetics of a breed or type of dogs. If you want the "definitive answer" you had better prepare yourself to do a lifetime of hands-on study or take someone else's word for it. I don't recommend the second course. There are a number of people right here on the Boards who have devoted large chunks of their lives to study the major topics touched on in these threads, and they are still coming here - to share their knowledge, yes, but also to learn. There is a lot of useful information on these Boards, and there are also about six billion ways to misunderstand it and misapply it.

You want to know about that dog? Go meet his breeder, owner and trainer. Go see the dog work. See his parents, cousins, siblings in action. Then make up your own mind. Reach your own definitive conclusion - but you can give up on knowing everything. The wisest old-timer that ever worked a dog, bred a dog or just loved a dog will tell you that there's always more to learn - more conclusions to be drawn.

Come back and share your observations. There is always a point to discussion if you only know enough to know that you don't know everything.

You want absolute, definitive answers? Go study math.


What would Rainbow Dash do?


My blog is atpeacewithpink dot blogspot dot com


With%2Bthe%2BBarbados.jpg


#79 BenjaminButton

BenjaminButton

    Junior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 23 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 September 2010 - 12:02 AM

Ok, for me, there are very few absolutes when you are dealing with complex subjects like the genetics of a breed or type of dogs. If you want the "definitive answer" you had better prepare yourself to do a lifetime of hands-on study or take someone else's word for it. I don't recommend the second course. There are a number of people right here on the Boards who have devoted large chunks of their lives to study the major topics touched on in these threads, and they are still coming here - to share their knowledge, yes, but also to learn. There is a lot of useful information on these Boards, and there are also about six billion ways to misunderstand it and misapply it.

You want to know about that dog? Go meet his breeder, owner and trainer. Go see the dog work. See his parents, cousins, siblings in action. Then make up your own mind. Reach your own definitive conclusion - but you can give up on knowing everything. The wisest old-timer that ever worked a dog, bred a dog or just loved a dog will tell you that there's always more to learn - more conclusions to be drawn.

Come back and share your observations. There is always a point to discussion if you only know enough to know that you don't know everything.

You want absolute, definitive answers? Go study math.


LOL I don't want a definitive answer, that's why I want people's opinions. I'm just saying I don't have a definitive answer and that's why I'm here. If I did have a definitive answer, I wouldn't be hear hearing all your opinions.

I didn't mean to be so snappy but the person that replied to me made me kind of pissed off. I get the feeling that because I'm not an expert on that particular dog, I shouldn't talk about her which to me is just rubbish.

If I had knowledge to share, I would share it but I really don't know that much about the BC world so I'm here to learn.

#80 smithydog

smithydog

    Member

  • Registered Users
  • 42 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 23 September 2010 - 12:37 AM

this post removed by author


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Copyright: All posts and images on this site are protected by copyright, and may not be reproduced or distributed in any way without permission. Banner photo courtesy of Denise Wall, ©2009 CDWall. For further information, contact info@bordercollie.org.