167 replies to this topic

[juliepoudrier]

Originally posted by Columbia MO:
However, this would certainly not cause me to stop doing AKC events, anymore than the ABCA's hypocritical refusal to allow conformation champions to register on merit prevents me from competing in USBCHA.

Columbia, MO

Um, except that ABCA's "hypocrisy" affects very few dogs, which in NO WAY compares to the thousands of miserable lives that are the result of puppy mills, which AKC is now supporting. I'm sure you can see how comparing institutional support of puppy millers for the sole reason of generating income with disallowing a few dogs into a registry because they were bred for reasons that are antithetical to that registry's beliefs are not in any way even remotely equivalent.

And I think we can leave the "AKC conformation dogs make great herding dogs" discussion to another thread. We all know this board's philosophy on breeding for conformation, and one dog's success in non-open classes (even buddy brace classes) certainly won't convince anyone that AKC is somehow preserving working ability in the breed. In fact, I think one could say that with the whole Petland thing, AKC aficianados even lose their tired argument about the vast numbers of non-working dogs registered with ABCA, since it would seem that AKC is planning to register vast numbers of poorly bred puppy mill dogs (the only requirement being that they be AKC registerable).

J.

[Journey]

Kasper is indeed a littermate to one of only 26 (?) known carriers. My dog is a Kasper grandson, and I only found out about the CL deal after I got him--very scary. My dog and his dam (Kasper daughter) tested clear.

Thanks for the information Columbia. The original intent of the thread was to discuss CL and ways it could get into the ABCA studbooks. Now it could be that some of Kaspers' offspring were ABCA registered who knows. However, as well as you are doing with your dog I have to ask - Is he ABCA registered as well? That's the point, offspring from Kasper most likely went to AKC and bypassed ABCA or have since dropped their ABCA registering.

I suppose the only way to find out "for sure" would be to require testing of all immediate offspring of Kasper, registered with ABCA, to be checked for their status on CL (and or have papers recinded). Not realistic imo though. So, there is a way for CL to get into the working registry. This happened so long ago that running it down would be a marathon. It is nice to know though that your dogs dam is clear.

Karen

[Columbia MO]

Originally posted by Journey:
as well as you are doing with your dog I have to ask - Is he ABCA registered as well? That's the point, offspring from Kasper most likely went to AKC and bypassed ABCA or have since dropped their ABCA registering.

My dog is not ABCA registered and cannot be. The ABCA will not allow a conformation champion to attempt to register on merit. At any rate, he is neutered and has never been bred.

In the second part of the quote above, I'm not sure what you mean by bypassing the ABCA. The original pedigree that was posted shows that Kasper's offspring have ALREADY been ABCA registered, and that these offspring have ALREADY been bred to produce other dogs that are also ABCA registered. I would say that this already shows that Kasper (and potentially CL) are in the ABCA gene pool. In another generation or two, Kasper won't show up on printed pedigrees and anybody buying a decendent will have no way of knowing that they should be testing for CL.

I hope this will at least get people to stop denying that there is a possibility that the CL gene may already be in ABCA dogs. I know it has been rumored (I have no backup on this) that a totally-ABCA-lines dog was found to have CL in Texas, but the breeder refused to allow publication of the dog or bloodlines. Now here is another possible avenue for CL to have entered ABCA.

Now that Optigen has a DNA test for CL, I hope that all descendents of Kasper are getting tested before being bred. Everybody I know in the AKC with a Kasper descendent has done so...I doubt it is being done (or that breeders are aware of the test) in the ABCA. There is no reason to keep CL carriers out of the gene pool initially: with help of the test, carriers can be eliminated from the gene pool at the second generation with no risk of spreading the gene or having a puppy born with the disease. But they certainly should only be bred by breeders willing to pay to test each and every breeding dog & puppy and neuter all non-clear dogs in the second generation.

Columbia, MO

[Journey]

In the second part of the quote above, I'm not sure what you mean by bypassing the ABCA. The original pedigree that was posted shows that Kasper's offspring have ALREADY been ABCA registered, and that these offspring have ALREADY been bred to produce other dogs that are also ABCA registered.

Not exactly. While his offspring may have been registered their offspring may not. They may have elected to go with AKC only, by passing ABCA - meaning not bothering since they are not interested in ABCA.

Karen

[Columbia MO]

Not exactly. While his offspring may have been registered their offspring may not. They may have elected to go with AKC only, by passing ABCA - meaning not bothering since they are not interested in ABCA.

Karen

Karen,

Some history: Kasper was born in Australia, registered with their all-breed registry and shown to a conformation championship. He was then imported here and also shown to an AKC championship. He was then somehow registered in the ABCA. He would have HAD to have at least one conformation championship before getting in.

Kasper's owner was a former OTCH trainer, and Kasper was working on his UD when he was killed in an accident. By all accounts he was a lovely dog in structure, temperament and willingness, though I have no information about his ability on stock. As I understand it, his brother didn't produce a CL-affected puppy until after Kasper died--certainly nobody was aware it was in his bloodline during his lifetime.

Anyway, I believe that if the breeders and buyers involved in this pedigree were only interested in AKC sports and conformation, they would not have gone to the trouble of getting Kasper into the ABCA and breeding three generations (so far) of ABCA registered dogs from him.

Back to your point about his offspring only being of interest to AKC people:

Kasper was bred and produced an ABCA litter containing Indy. Indy was bred and produced an ABCA litter containing Blade. Blade was bred to Roo, a dual-registered dog from working stock and has either had or will have puppies soon.

Now that Kasper will be a great-grandfather in this pedigree, and assuming he produced 3 ABCA-registered breeding dogs in his lifetime who each produced 3 more breeding dogs in their lifetimes... it is likely there are currently about 100 ABCA registered dogs with Kasper as father, grand, or great-grandfather. Any one of these dogs could possibly be carrying the CL gene, which is why it is a good idea to do the Optigen test before breeding any BC from any registry.

Columbia, MO

[SoloRiver]

Or, de-register Kasper and all his offspring, since they shouldn't have been registered with ABCA in the first place? I don't see any reason why a registry can't retroactively correct an oversight. AKC seems to do that whenever they feel like it.

[Katelynn & Gang]

Originally posted by Columbia MO:
Any one of these dogs could possibly be carrying the CL gene, which is why it is a good idea to do the Optigen test before breeding any BC from any registry.

Why would I test my Border Collies for CL?

My dogs are Border Collies and Border Collies do not carry CL.

If a dog from AU Barbie Collie lines brought in CL into a few ABCA pedigrees, it is easy to fix. Have the dogs removed (I'm guessing its a mistake they are there anyway).

They removed dogs that were affected with CEA and that is a Border Collie problem.

CL is a Barbie Collie (totally different breed, being bred for different things) problem, so it'd just goes hand in hand that they'd just remove the dogs in question to keep the breed as a whole healthy, just as they remove Comformation Champions to keep the breed useful.

Katelynn

[Columbia MO]

Melanie,

I don't believe this would be fair to the buyers of the dogs, who believed at the time that they were buying registered or registerable dogs. As I mentioned, this could now be affecting around 100 dogs.

As I also mentioned, my own Kasper grandson works sheep and cattle, and his brother works on a cattle farm--both are CL-free by parentage. At the same time, I personally know dozens of ABCA dogs that have been tried and have zero interest in stock but are still bred and sold in my area by BYBs or by sport breeders. I don't know why in the world it would be of benefit to the ABCA to deregister a deceased AKC champion known to have produced working dogs when ABCA does not apply any type of working standard within their own registry.

I just do not see how deregistration would be practical or beneficial, except possibly from the CL angle. I would definitely agree to some type of sanction, such as Kasper descendents for the next 15 yrs. having to test CL-free before puppies could be registered.

Columbia, MO

[Maralynn]

Any one of these dogs could possibly be carrying the CL gene, which is why it is a good idea to do the Optigen test before breeding any BC from any registry.

Why? You have previously stated that maybe 100 dogs are related to that one. Wouldn't it just make more sense (and be more responsible) to neuter or de-register all the possibly affected dogs, and totally eliminate the disease?

[Katelynn & Gang]

What is not fair is that by Kasper being in ABCA pedigrees is that ABCA's bloodlines of healthy CL free dogs could be being damaged.

It would just be much more easy to de-register him and all offspring.

After all, they can always move to AKC.

Katelynn

[Columbia MO]

Why would I test my Border Collies for CL? My dogs are Border Collies and Border Collies do not carry CL.

Hey Katelynn,

I'm not sure if you're simply a political zealot or really have your head in the sand.

Whether you like it or not, Australian and New Zealand conformation lines dogs are 100% Border Collie from 100% ISDS dogs. My dog's great-great-grandparents are EXACTLY the same dogs on the pedigree of top working ABCA dogs (Blwych Taff, Wiston Cap, etc.).

The CL gene is HIGHLY unlikely to have been a mutation that just suddenly popped up in the past 20 years. This gene is virtually certain to have been in the BC gene pool since before the breed even had a name.

The gene was only discovered because the original gene pool from the conformation lines in Australia began with a limited number of ISDS dogs. Therefore, each pair of dogs that were bred were likely to have at least one of the same ancestors in the pedigree. All it would take is one "bad ancestor" from the ISDS to introduce CL.

The "conformation progenitor" dog that introduced CL to Aussie/NZ lines is almost certain to have working littermates that stayed behind in the UK and introduced the CL gene into working lines of the ABCA and ISDS.

The CL gene is rare in every line of BCs, but there is absolutely no reason to believe that it is not in ISDS and ABCA dogs right now. It is rumored that at least one CL litter has been produced in England (from ISDS lines) and another in Texas (from ABCA lines)--however, the working breeders are not as forthright as the AKC/Aussie/NZ breeders and will not let their names be released to the public (if the rumor is true).

In any case, until a cross section of at least 500 ABCA dogs get CL tested and every one is clear, I will have to assume that they have CL in their gene pool because they come from the same bloodlines that my dog does prior to 1980 or so.

Columbia, MO

[Journey]

It would just be much more easy to de-register him and all offspring.

I agree, however, do we know "factually" that he is ABCA registerd? Could be he is/was AIBC which enabled his get to be ABCA registered.

If sanctioning any dog with Kasper in it's lines - say they must "prove" with Optigen test that they are "clear" then I say leave them alone (unless they are Ch. after the deadline). If one does come up as a carrier though I agree de-register the lot.

After this much time and possibly many offspring I still don't think there are "that many" that have maintained triple or double registry. Hillcrest Kennel may be the exception just as Columbia's dog may be with regard to "work".

Karen

[Columbia MO]

just as they remove Comformation Champions to keep the breed useful.
Katelynn

Please explain how removing conformation champions keeps the breed useful?

Is my conformation champion dog that will work cattle and sheep all day long in 60+ acre pasture, in any type of weather (thunderstorms, blizzards, 105 degree heat) somehow less useful than the dozens of fully ABCA registered dogs I have met on farms that have zero interest in stock?

Please explain how arbitrarily deregistering a working dog because it has good structure is helping keep ABCA lines "useful."

What would help is to not give breeding rights to ANY Border Collie in the ISDS, ABCA or AKC until it has passed some sort of test similar to the ABCA ROM. This would also include NOT de-register working dogs simply because they have been successful in conformation.

Columbia, MO

[juliepoudrier]

Originally posted by Columbia MO:
Please explain how arbitrarily deregistering a working dog because it has good structure is helping keep ABCA lines "useful."

Not really wanting to get into the middle of this little fight, but the obvious answer would be that AKC's definition of good structure (the conformation championship) doesn't necessarily coincide with what we see daily at trials and on farms as good structure. You know as well as anyone that judging fads can quickly and easily change what is considered acceptable structure (I don't even need to list the various breeds that are now sad caricatures of their former useful selves), even when the standard still pays lip service to a more realistic structure. And I think that pretty much sums up the whole argument about why working breeders have so much antipathy toward AKC and its conformation standards. Remember, your exception to the rule doesn't prove anything, and even ROM requires that the dog work to a certain standard on stock other than its own and at locations other than the home farm. Any dog can look like a star at home.

As for the whole Kasper/Lancelot Lad line issue, I think it would be reasonable for ABCA to require any offspring capable of breeding be tested to determine if they are CL carriers and proven clear before being registered. That way you don't get rid of any possible good workers and/or non-CL carriers, but you limit the damage that could be caused by breeding carriers of the disease.

J.

[Maralynn]

deregistering a working dog because it has good structure

"Good structure" in this case is a matter of opinion. It is saying that the dog measures up to one organizations ideal of perfect looks. I'm going to look at a dog this weekend that may have excellent structure, but he sure wouldn't win in the conformation ring.

And they are not deregistered because they have "good structure" they are de-registered because they are activly engaged in a sport that is a proven way to cut out excellent herding genetics in the gene pool.

[Columbia MO]

ROM requires that the dog work to a certain standard on stock other than its own and at locations other than the home farm. Any dog can look like a star at home.

Julie,

Just to clarify... I don't have stock, so my two dogs get to practice at many different locations around Missouri, including three different farms with 60+ acre pastures of cattle and/or sheep.

I would not call Savvy a "star" compared to experienced Open level dogs, but he is a solid working dog that certainly equals 95% of the working ABCA farm dogs in this area for in putting in a good day's work.

I like the ROM program and plan to ROM my rescue dog when he is old enough and would have eventually tried to ROM Savvy if not for his championship.

As I have stated many times on the BC Boards, I believe that all dogs from all working/hunting/herding breeds should have to pass a working standard before they can get breeding-type registration. While the type of test is probably contentious, I would argue that any test (even obtaining a certain cutoff score in USBCHA Novice) would be better than the status quo where any BYB can breed dogs at will that have never even seen stock.

As for the whole Kasper/Lancelot Lad line issue, I think it would be reasonable for ABCA to require any offspring capable of breeding be tested to determine if they are CL carriers and proven clear before being registered. That way you don't get rid of any possible good workers and/or non-CL carriers, but you limit the damage that could be caused by breeding carriers of the disease.

I totally agree with this idea. I hope the owners of these dogs are already doing it. Many of the dogs that have been tested are sending their results here, but I don't have time to see if the dogs in question had done so or not.

Edited to read: In case anyone is interested, I just checked the site I referred to above. Out of 769 dogs on the site that have been Optigen tested, there are 18 carriers and no affected dogs. Of these, 13 carriers are in Australia, 4 in New Zealand, 1 in the UK and 0 in the USA.

Columbia, MO

[Columbia MO]

[quote]Originally posted by Maralynn:
[QUOTE] they are not deregistered because they have "good structure" they are de-registered because they are activly engaged in a sport that is a proven way to cut out excellent herding genetics in the gene pool. [/quote]How does "engaging in conformation" cut out herding genetics? I finished Savvy's conformation championship at 16 months old after about five weekends of showing. His entire conformation career consisted of a total of about 20 minutes of standing or gaiting around a ring and maybe an hour of training. At the same time, he has spent hundreds of hours working stock. I'm not quite sure how the 80 min. he spent "engaging in conformation" somehow ruined his ability to herd sheep.

Every USBCHA instructor & judge I have talked to about the issue tells me they see far more differences in dogs from the same ABCA litter or two litters bred by a single farmer than between ABCA vs. AKC dogs as groups.

Savvy is from a line of dogs that had not even seen stock for about 3 generations, but he obviously didn't have his instinct ruined. I do think dogs bred only for looks will eventually lose their working ability, but I have seen nothing to make me believe they lose it in just a generation or two as is generally cited on the Boards as "fact".

I could point out any number of working dogs that are bred and produce a litter of "duds." But I would not use this as evidence that "breeding dogs based on the presence of working ability" leads to the detriment of the breed. And conversely, I don't think that spending 80 minutes training for and gaiting in a conformation ring miraculously strips dogs of innate working ability, either.

If anybody out there can get hold of the current issue of Borderlines (BCSA magazine), you might read through the BOD biographies. You may be surprised to find that the president and BOD are all hard core working dog people that have conformation as about their 47th priority on the list.

Except for this list, I don't hear a bit of anti-AKC rhetoric at trials, etc. Everybody I know outside these boards gets along just fine and owns/breeds/trials working dogs without regard to registry. One of the top USBCHA competitors in Missouri (Nyle Sealine) is also one of the most popular herding judges in the AKC. One of the top AKC herding competitors (Robin Penland) represented the USBCHA at the 2005 ISDS Internationals, and was also chair of conformation at the AKC BCSA Nationals.

All of you should try to judge dogs on their abilities and not by making sweeping generalizations, such as "membership in AKC" meaning a dog can no longer work. Robin's AKC dog made it to the Internationals. How many ABCA dogs on the list got to compete? (Note: none of these comments are directed at Julie P. whom I greatly respect and who refrains from making generalizations, and whose dogs could kick either of my dogs' butts. )

Columbia, MO

[Kyrasmom]

Except for this list, I don't hear a bit of anti-AKC rhetoric at trials, etc. Everybody I know outside these boards gets along just fine and owns/breeds/trials working dogs without regard to registry.Columbia, MO [/QB]

I think that's by and large because we're not face to face, it's easy to be "harsher" or flat out rude under the guise of "frankness" when you don't have the other person in front of you. I think there is a deep passion for the breed on this board that occasionally get sidetracked into pettiness because that's just what message boards invite. There is not the benefit of facial expressions, heart, and tone. The same disputes in person would most likely be different.

Just a thought.
Maria

[Shetlander]

Originally posted by Kyrasmom:
The same disputes in person would most likely be different.

Gosh, I really hope so.

[Journey]

I like the ROM program and plan to ROM my rescue dog when he is old enough and would have eventually tried to ROM Savvy if not for his championship.

Columbia, why do you want to try the ROM program? Why do you want an ABCA registered dog?

Karen