Jump to content


Photo

McCallum


  • Please log in to reply
43 replies to this topic

#1 Tea

Tea

    Senior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 1,169 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Pacific Northwest
  • Interests:Wildlife, horses, sheep farming, sled dogs, falconry

Posted 15 October 2011 - 07:32 AM

So I am confused about the McCallum border collie thing?



Even though my Taw is from those dogs. Where did they come from? How are the Reg with ABCA?



And they got their own reg too?



#2 Debbie Meier

Debbie Meier

    Senior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 2,324 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Alden, Iowa
  • Interests:Pretty much all stockdogs...for now

Posted 15 October 2011 - 08:55 AM

Based on conversations with Tony McCallum this is what I have gathered, to get the whole story you would need to speak to him personally, it is a treat. Tony teaches via parables vs. giving people the answer to their questions directly. Tony McCallum is from Australia where he was breeding and raising dogs for his own personal use, one of the jobs that he told me about was to go out with his dogs and gather hard to capture cattle when other means of gathering failed. He would do it over a series of days, first just sending the dogs out to get the cattle to move off them, eventually leading to the last day where he would send the dogs out and the cows would just come in yielding to the pressure of the dogs. He has in his mind what he wants in an ideal dog, did intense line breeding and culled hard.

Eventually he came over to the states, Texas I beleive and brought some of his dogs along. The dogs were eligable for ABCA papers and when he registered the dogs he placed McCallum in front of their names. The dogs you see now with McCallum on their pedigrees or in their names are offspring of his breeding program or line of dogs, he mentioned that very few that have McCallum dogs purchased them from him. IMO, based on that, it is not likely that many would be a representative of what Tony wanted in a dog, he spoke of destroying entire litters if the dogs did not meet his standards regardless as to how good the parents were. One of his policies that he shared with me was to not sell a dog that he himself was not willing to use. Anyway, breeders that found themselves with his dogs or offspring of his dogs tend to maintain the McCallum previx and market them as McCallum bred.

We had the pleasure to have Tony stop in last winter, stay with us followed by a clinic that we through together last minute. He has family up in Minnesota and occassionally will pay a visit to a breeder that he is intrigued by so that he can see their dogs for himself. He is passionate about good working dogs that are able to handle any type of livestock in a proper fashion with little training.

As for their own reg, here is a link to a registry that I beleive he formed himself, I have no idea how active it is or if most just are with ABCA here in the states, after speaking with Tony it would be pretty difficult to get a dog in via ROM registry, like I would'nt even bother to try with our dogs at this point even if they were from McCallum lines, I know the answer would be something like "keep breeding and come back after you have a good one in a few more generations". According to Tony there is no such thing as bad livestock, so if you have a dog that can't handle stock in certain situations you don't have a good dog, does not matter how much winning the dog can do. http://mccallumk9.com/mcregistry.html
Posted Image


http://leaningtreebcs.blogspot.com/

"Every poor one you continue to work with equates to a good one that you never get the opportunity to own"- M. Christopher

#3 Tea

Tea

    Senior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 1,169 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Pacific Northwest
  • Interests:Wildlife, horses, sheep farming, sled dogs, falconry

Posted 15 October 2011 - 11:50 AM

Ok...now this makes more sense to me in my kinda dim brain.



I actually must have e-mailed Tony McCallum and talked to him about his dogs. Got McCallum and McNab confused.


Taw is from Stimatze's

Her father is Hoss.


Thanks for the info



#4 Smokjbc

Smokjbc

    Senior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 1,036 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Las Vegas

Posted 15 October 2011 - 01:19 PM

Tea, I have a McCallum-related female whose sire was from the Stimatzes breeding. He was very McCallum type- big male, short coat and not a lot of eye but boy could he move cattle! A lot of dog. Trialed on cattle where he got kicked and it broke ribs/bruised his lung and they didn't know until the next day when his sides swelled up. Watching the video, you could see he got rung real hard but there was no quit in him. My Nellie works like that, not as strong and kinder to her sheep, but does have a good bit of push.

That was the first clinic I ever went to (McCallum) and I'd still say that he was the most generous with information and the most enthusiastic about the (good) dogs.

I took my first pup to that clinic and she was tiny - maybe four months. He handed her back to me and just said with a wink, "You might want to give this one to me. She'll be a champion if I run her but for you, she'll just be a dog." He was right- I don't believe I could have started out with a worse prospect for a first-time sheepdogger. He knew that from day one what it took me two years and help to figure out.

#5 Tea

Tea

    Senior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 1,169 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Pacific Northwest
  • Interests:Wildlife, horses, sheep farming, sled dogs, falconry

Posted 15 October 2011 - 01:56 PM

Ah yes, the steep steep learning curve....how well I know that......in fact the more I know.... the less I know I know.......



Sweep has been much harder for me as he is zippy.



But Taw.....there is something about Taw, something......


the dogs have taught me so much...each of them.



#6 Kelleybean

Kelleybean

    Senior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 277 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:GA
  • Interests:agility, running, cooking

Posted 18 October 2011 - 06:03 AM

"he spoke of destroying entire litters if the dogs did not meet his standards regardless as to how good the parents were"

Oh my. :o
Kelley

#7 C Crocker

C Crocker

    Senior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 380 posts

Posted 18 October 2011 - 10:55 PM

"he spoke of destroying entire litters if the dogs did not meet his standards regardless as to how good the parents were"

Oh my. :o



I agree--Oh my.

Don't know if I really want to know the answer, but I wonder at what stage of life this person decides these dogs don't meet his standards --when they are born, after weaning or does he actually try to train them up first?

The few dogs I know of this breeding were sold by breeder without ABC papers. Don't know if they could not qualify to get them or if breeder didn't care if they had them when sold. The two I saw ( before working age) seemed to be pleasant dogs.

#8 Gloria Atwater

Gloria Atwater

    Talksalot

  • Registered Users
  • 1,624 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:northern Nevada
  • Interests:Sheepdogging!

Posted 19 October 2011 - 12:20 AM

I agree--Oh my.

Don't know if I really want to know the answer, but I wonder at what stage of life this person decides these dogs don't meet his standards --when they are born, after weaning or does he actually try to train them up first?



That's why I've never been able to feel very warm or fuzzy towards Tony McCallum. I can't fathom being that fixated on and mercenary towards a goal. Just how many dozens/scores/hundreds of lives did he create and then destroy? Gah! He may have developed the premier cow dog, but his manner of getting there? No thanks, not for me.

~ Gloria
You ask of my companions. Hills, sir, and the sundown, and a dog as large as myself that my father bought me. They are better than human beings, because they know but do not tell. ~ Emily Dickinson

To sit with a dog on a hillside on a glorious afternoon is to be back in Eden, where doing nothing was not boring - it was peace. ~ Milan Kundera

#9 Maralynn

Maralynn

    Senior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 3,985 posts

Posted 19 October 2011 - 06:07 AM

Playing devils advocate - how was the Border Collie developed? It just happened to be 100 years ago instead of today? FWIW I don't like the idea at all either and couldn't support it, but I don't think its uncommon in creating a breed/type
Mara
Kipp & Kenzi
Missy, my good girl 1999-2011
K9 Knitter Woolie Dog

#10 Smokjbc

Smokjbc

    Senior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 1,036 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Las Vegas

Posted 19 October 2011 - 08:35 AM

Playing devils advocate - how was the Border Collie developed? It just happened to be 100 years ago instead of today? FWIW I don't like the idea at all either and couldn't support it, but I don't think its uncommon in creating a breed/type


I have to echo this. I don't personally know what Mr. McCallums breeding methods are and while I did get alot out of my few times meeting him and even more out of the dog of his breeding, I don't know him well enough to vouch that his practices are ethical or not. However, especially as cattledogs, I have seen a very distinct McCallum type that is excellent at its job. I don't know that many breeders could duplicate the consistency of that quality without culling strictly.

I do feel breeders should evaluate whole litters and make sure that the ones that don't cut it don't reproduce or the ones that don't produce good workers don't go on to have litter after litter with just the occasional good one. I doubt the environment where these dogs were originally were developed had pet homes lined up to take the dogs that didn't measure up.

I couldn't do that type of culling myself, but I am not a breeder and don't have my name attached to a line of dogs that will reflect on my breeding efforts. Personally, I find it more responsible to keep control over everything you produce rather than pander to the AKC sport/"herding" crowd and produce dozens of sub-par, dual-registered dogs.

#11 Kelleybean

Kelleybean

    Senior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 277 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:GA
  • Interests:agility, running, cooking

Posted 19 October 2011 - 09:32 AM

Why not just spay/neuter the litter then place them in pet homes? I don't understand how someone can kill an entire litter of puppies! :o
Kelley

#12 Liz P

Liz P

    optimistic realist

  • Registered Users
  • 4,248 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:somewhere inside my brain

Posted 19 October 2011 - 09:37 AM

Not saying I agree with it or would do it...

He was probably keeping entire litters until they were 2 years old and fully trained. Placing adult dogs bred for cattle work in pet homes can sometimes be a disaster waiting to happen (dogs left without work can become bored, destructive and if managed incorrectly, aggressive).

Posted Image
Dangerous Dreams Farm


#13 juliepoudrier

juliepoudrier

    Poseur extraordinaire and Borg Queen!

  • Registered Users
  • 14,709 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 19 October 2011 - 09:38 AM

Kellybean,
I imagine it's because there weren't plenty of homes lined up for them. I think it's a fairly common practice among old-time breeders to destroy dogs that don't measure up. We may not like it, but at least the dogs aren't being dumped somewhere.

J.

I know nothing with any certainty, but the sight of stars makes me dream.

~Vincent van Gogh



mydogs_small2.jpg

Julie Poudrier
Oxford, NC
Willow, Farleigh, Boy (3/1995-10/2010, RIP), Jill (8/1996-5/2012, RIP), Twist (the troll), Katty Rat, Little Miss Larky Malarky, Phoebe (the rabid possum), Pipit (aka Goober), Kestrel (aka Messy Kessie), and Birdie!
Willow's Rest, Tunis sheep and mule sheep



Visit me on Facebook at Poudrier and Crowder, Set Out Specialists (P&C, SOS)


#14 C Crocker

C Crocker

    Senior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 380 posts

Posted 19 October 2011 - 10:41 AM

Kellybean,
I imagine it's because there weren't plenty of homes lined up for them. I think it's a fairly common practice among old-time breeders to destroy dogs that don't measure up. We may not like it, but at least the dogs aren't being dumped somewhere.

J.



Well actually they are being dumped somewhere--it's just out in the back forty, dead.

While it may have been and maybe still is a "practice' to kill off the ones that meet the "standards', it seems remarkable that there are today lines of Border Collies , talking only working , not show/agility, that have a consistent work style, a look of that specific line, without resorting to terminating the pups/started dogs/trained dogs that didn't make it. Breed best to best, I get it. Just spay/neuter the rest if necessary. I have raised horses for over 40 years and somehow mangaged to produce a line of working cowhorses from my breeding program that are a type/style, recognizable as that line. None were killed in the process. If , after being started, they did not lean to the type to carry one the lines, they made good trail horses, show horses for another discipline and enjoyable horses for their new owners. They were castrated before they left, if stallions.

This breeder could sell/give them away hopefully to a good home, without papers, assuming these dogs have papers to begin with. They do not to carry his name officially. while I treasure tradition in the equine world, I am glad this is one that has not continued, as I suspect there are horse people that years ago thought not unlike this dog breeder.

I am not soft hearted , just think there is a more inventive way to creat a line of any animal. Selective breeding does not have to be fatal.

#15 Kelleybean

Kelleybean

    Senior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 277 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:GA
  • Interests:agility, running, cooking

Posted 19 October 2011 - 11:07 AM

We all are horrified at the number of dogs that are euthanized in kill shelters, well, how about "kill breeders"? I can't buy the excuse of "old-time breeders". Wrong is wrong, then and now. Period.
Kelley

#16 Journey

Journey

    Happiness is not having what you want but wanting what you have.

  • Registered Users
  • 2,514 posts
  • Gender:Female

Posted 19 October 2011 - 12:23 PM

I don't know....with the way society is today culling may be the lesser of all evils for all involved. Remember, old time breeders depended on the dogs, they were/are a commodity, not a luxury.
Karen & the growing pack of spoiled mutts!
Posted Image

#17 PSmitty

PSmitty

    Socially awkward nonsense babbler

  • Registered Users
  • 9,035 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:St. Petersburg, FL

Posted 19 October 2011 - 12:53 PM

We all are horrified at the number of dogs that are euthanized in kill shelters, well, how about "kill breeders"? I can't buy the excuse of "old-time breeders". Wrong is wrong, then and now. Period.


Ditto. :(
Paula
Lilly, Jack, Alex & Will

#18 Debbie Meier

Debbie Meier

    Senior Member

  • Registered Users
  • 2,324 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Alden, Iowa
  • Interests:Pretty much all stockdogs...for now

Posted 19 October 2011 - 12:58 PM

So I guess I wonder if a breeder who breeds for the exclusive purpose of producing working dogs for their own use is any more wrong to destroy the dogs that do not suit the purpose of their intended breeding then a no-kill advocate is for destroying a dog that does not suit the purpose of being a pet as they would be a hazard to society.


In speaking to people that rescue I've heard mixed opinions, some feel that dogs with poor temperments and severe health issues should be destroyed while others believe that all should have a chance of rehab and if unable to be integrated into society should be housed in a safe place until they need to be euthanized. Well is that right by the dog, or would that dog have been better off euthenized when they failed to be rehabbed? My thoughts also go to the resources spent on that one dog that could have help countless others.


I don't know that there is a perfect answer but it seems that most agree that eventually there is a time where they feel that euthanization is the right thing to do. Does it really matter if it is when the breeder decides the pup does not suit the purpose in which it was bred, or when a dog shows it can not be suited as a pet, or when diagnosed with a terminal disease and destroyed before they become wrought with pain or when the day comes where it is obvious they are suffering from pain and we can no longer give them any relief? Regardless, in most cases we are deciding, not nature.
Posted Image


http://leaningtreebcs.blogspot.com/

"Every poor one you continue to work with equates to a good one that you never get the opportunity to own"- M. Christopher

#19 PSmitty

PSmitty

    Socially awkward nonsense babbler

  • Registered Users
  • 9,035 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:St. Petersburg, FL

Posted 19 October 2011 - 01:11 PM

So I guess I wonder if a breeder who breeds for the exclusive purpose of producing working dogs for their own use is any more wrong to destroy the dogs that do not suit the purpose of their intended breeding then a no-kill advocate is for destroying a dog that does not suit the purpose of being a pet as they would be a hazard to society.


Wow. Are you serious? I'd say there's a pretty big difference between "destroying" a healthy dog that does not work stock to a certain caliber vs. euthanizing a dog with a dangerous temperament who is a danger to himself and others. Are you really comparing the two?


In speaking to people that rescue I've heard mixed opinions, some feel that dogs with poor temperments and severe health issues should be destroyed while others believe that all should have a chance of rehab and if unable to be integrated into society should be housed in a safe place until they need to be euthanized. Well is that right by the dog, or would that dog have been better off euthenized when they failed to be rehabbed? My thoughts also go to the resources spent on that one dog that could have help countless others.


I do not agree that all dogs can be saved, or should be. Dogs with a dangerous temperament or an incurable illness should most likely be humanely euthanized, as sad as that is, so that others can be saved. But what this has to do with a breeder destroying entire litters of dogs just because they didn't work to his liking, I don't know.


I don't know that there is a perfect answer but it seems that most agree that eventually there is a time where they feel that euthanization is the right thing to do. Does it really matter if it is when the breeder decides the pup does not suit the purpose in which it was bred, or when a dog shows it can not be suited as a pet, or when diagnosed with a terminal disease and destroyed before they become wrought with pain or when the day comes where it is obvious they are suffering from pain and we can no longer give them any relief? Regardless, in most cases we are deciding, not nature.


Again, BIG difference in the scenarios you present here. And yes, to some of us, it obviously matters when and WHY dogs are destroyed.
Paula
Lilly, Jack, Alex & Will

#20 juliepoudrier

juliepoudrier

    Poseur extraordinaire and Borg Queen!

  • Registered Users
  • 14,709 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 19 October 2011 - 03:07 PM

Well actually they are being dumped somewhere--it's just out in the back forty, dead.

While it may have been and maybe still is a "practice' to kill off the ones that meet the "standards', it seems remarkable that there are today lines of Border Collies , talking only working , not show/agility, that have a consistent work style, a look of that specific line, without resorting to terminating the pups/started dogs/trained dogs that didn't make it. Breed best to best, I get it. Just spay/neuter the rest if necessary. <snip> This breeder could sell/give them away hopefully to a good home, without papers, assuming these dogs have papers to begin with. They do not to carry his name officially. while I treasure tradition in the equine world, I am glad this is one that has not continued, as I suspect there are horse people that years ago thought not unlike this dog breeder.

I am not soft hearted , just think there is a more inventive way to creat a line of any animal. Selective breeding does not have to be fatal.

I'm not going to get into some long, drawn-out debate about the rightness or wrongness of heavy culling that involves destroying vs. neutering. None of us here does it, but it does happen, whether we like it or not. I don't personally know what Tony McCallum does/did, so it seems a bit pointless to argue about it. I think it's also pretty apparent that none of us would take that approach, but it's naive to think it didn't happen in the process of developing the border collie breed (or any other breed, including livestock, for that matter). Our sensibilities have changed over time, but I think it's a bit odd to impose those sensibilities on what people have done historically. There was a report on the local news the other day about a landfill worker that happened to hear a noise in a bag of trash at the landfill. He decided to investigate and found living puppies inside. They were rescued. How many others face a similar fate, or worse? I'm not trying to diminish the apparent wrongness of that type of culling, but I'm pretty sure it goes on all around us every day--we just don't see it or hear about it.

I have raised horses for over 40 years and somehow mangaged to produce a line of working cowhorses from my breeding program that are a type/style, recognizable as that line. None were killed in the process. If , after being started, they did not lean to the type to carry one the lines, they made good trail horses, show horses for another discipline and enjoyable horses for their new owners. They were castrated before they left, if stallions.


I think your horse analogy is a bit flawed, though, since the number of offspring a mare can produce over her lifetime is much, much smaller than the number of offspring a dog can produce. Also, you have no control over the mares that leave your place, and if they are nice or have fancy markings or colors, it's entirely possible that they are being bred and your breeding is being used as a selling point, even though they're your culls. Again, I am NOT saying you should have killed them to prevent that, but I'm guessing it is at least part of the reasoning being used by McCallum and others like him.

J.

I know nothing with any certainty, but the sight of stars makes me dream.

~Vincent van Gogh



mydogs_small2.jpg

Julie Poudrier
Oxford, NC
Willow, Farleigh, Boy (3/1995-10/2010, RIP), Jill (8/1996-5/2012, RIP), Twist (the troll), Katty Rat, Little Miss Larky Malarky, Phoebe (the rabid possum), Pipit (aka Goober), Kestrel (aka Messy Kessie), and Birdie!
Willow's Rest, Tunis sheep and mule sheep



Visit me on Facebook at Poudrier and Crowder, Set Out Specialists (P&C, SOS)



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.