bcnewe2

When I pass on I will have an outside wake and would like more dogs in attendance than people. I tend to like dogs more than people. If I wanted to be buried instead of cremated I would like a casket lined with say.....maybe a week of dog hair. That should be enough for a full lining. Thanks for the coldences, it's been a rough 6 months. Not looking to let up anytime soon. Thank God for the love of my sweet dogs, not to mention my parents dogs. They make these rough days bearable.

All I can say is it was my mom's funeral.

Yep, that is what I'm afraid of with Faye. She just turned 3 and blew her coat for the first time. We had to go somewhere dressed up yesterday. I wasn't home for final man inspection (husband and son) they were nicely dressed in their Sunday finest with a beautiful layer of hair all over their bums.

We live in central MO and vectra didn't do it for ticks here. Comfortis has worked and I tick pick every night. The lgd had a tick problem, seresto collar worked but the dog stayed listless for way to long. So still tick picking getting ready to try nexgard or the other new product. Just hoping it's winter and we'll have a tick break for a while.

Faye is just going on 3. Sometimes I think they get more coat the older they get or I'm just lucky so far. I'll keep hoping she stays that way. Faye just blew her coat this fall first time. I brushed her twice and it was gone. The old guys are still letting it rip. Mick and Dew are hairy little suckers. They're half sibs and both curly or wavy coats. Maybe that's why they're sill blowing coats. My favorite is smooth.....today anyways

I giggle to myself and proceed to let them tell me all about border collies and what they should look like and how they are working dogs. Anyone that doesn't know and would have the nerve to tell me about "my" dogs doesn't need me to inform or educate them. If they were truly interested in working dogs I could ramble on for hours. I have both, very rough coats and very smooth. I used to covet what I didn't have, a smoothie. Now that I have both I still love my smoothie as I can attest to the hair issues. I am not living at home for the moment, I come home about every 3 days to do laundry, check on sheep and play with my dogs. And sweep the floors.....let me tell you 3 days of not sweeping up after 2 very rough coated dogs still blowing coats will have you coveting smooth dogs too! I love them all and have never gotten a dog by coat preference but if I had the perfect choice of 2 equal quality dogs, rough or smooth, I'd take the smooth any day. I hate using hair as a condiment! Not to say my smooth girl doesn't shed but one good brushing and poof it's gone!

Well since I deal in bitches as my preference, I can't see how I could live with not knowing who was the sire of pups I was going to produce. Lying or not testing the dogs would drive me crazy in the end. Money wouldn't be the motivator it would be a serious desire to know what I bred. If someone thought 2 dogs were good enough to be bred, how could someone settle on always wondering? That is not withstanding all the nefarious people out there. Just the person wanting a good dog and taking the time to do it right. Never thought about the idea of using 2 males on purpose. It would stand to wonder or at least to me, if the bitch was good enough to be bred, why would she only be able to be bred one time? Very interesting topic

Could DNA testing be done to discern parentage if 2 sires were known to have mated with the same bitch?

I found this article easy to understand but not the iPad I'm using so best I could do is cut and paste the article. Here ya go by Carol Beuchat PhD The most common admonition of the geneticist to the dog breeder is to "avoid the Popular Sire Syndrome". At the same time, the most common advice from breeder to breeder is "breed the best to best". So the conundrum is obvious and the consequence predictable - the "best" dogs are the most sought after, so they sire the most offspring and become popular sires. The Popularity of Popular Sires Even a century ago Williams Haynes (1915) was writing about the "Effect of the popular sire", noting that in three terrier breeds that he examined - Irish Terriers, Scottish Terriers, and Fox Terriers - about 40% of the puppies were sired by only 20% of the sires. Back then, "popularity" was quite different than now - his "prolific" dogs sired 5-7 litters, which would be completely unremarkable today. And surprisingly, Haynes thought that popular sires actually benefitted the breed by contributing to the preservation of variability in type. Superficially it might appear that if approximately 40% of the puppies each year are sired by but 20% of the stud dogs this would eventually result in the greatest uniformity of type. The selected sires are all to a greater or lesser degree exceptional animals, but they are not selected by any uniform system. Most of them excel in some particular physical point, but they do not excel in the same points or in the same degree, nor even, in some cases, in the same direction. Here the personal equation, the ideals of different breeders, is at work, and the result is that since a few males not themselves of uniform type sire a greater-than-average number of offspring they disturb the race average of the following generation and introduce abnormal amounts of variation. The fact therefore, that artificial selection gives to certain selected, but not uniform, males an undue preponderance of influence must always keep the type of domestic animals in an unstable state. This seems to me an important factor in the great variability always noted among domesticated breeds. Haynes thought popular sires were a good thing, because he thought they were sufficiently different from each other that they prevented the breed from becoming too "uniform". How then did the popular sire go from contributing to the quality of the gene pool in 1915, to the source of a problem to be avoided by breeders 100 years later? What is this "syndrome" that today's geneticists are so concerned about? Breaking Bad: DNA To understand the problem, you must understand a bit of genetics. You probably know about mutations - bits of DNA that are not replicated perfectly or are perhaps damaged by some environmental toxin. If the mutation is dominant and affects some vital process, it is removed from the gene pool by natural selection when that individual fails to pass its genes on to the next generation successfully. But many mutations have no ill effects because their paired, dominant allele functions normally. These "recessive" mutations are silent in the genome and can be passed to the next generation the same as any other gene, and as long as the offspring has a copy of a normal allele the mutation remains silent. The mutation becomes a problem when an individual inherits two copies so is homozygous at that locus. Without at least one copy of the normal, unmutated allele, the gene does not function properly, and the consequence can range from something relatively trivial (e.g., a different eye color, or slightly shorter legs) to the catastrophic (e.g, blindness, disruption of a critical biochemical pathway, cancer). Mutations happen all the time. The ones with immediate ill effects are removed from the gene pool by natural selection, while the recessive, silent ones remain in the genome as the "genetic load". Every dog - in fact, every organism - has its own unique collection of damaged alleles that causes no harm as long as there is also a copy of a normal allele of each that can do the job it is supposed to. A Star is Born Now consider what happens in a population of purebred dogs. Let's pretend that this cute collection of dogs represents your breed, with the phenotypic variations among them representing the nuances of type that would be obvious to a serious breeder. We've given each dog a (typographic) recessive mutation, a bit of DNA damage that is not expressed so it has no detrimental effect on the dog. If each dog in our population has a litter of puppies this year, the frequencies of these various alleles in the population will stay about the same in the next generation. But what happens if one of these dogs wins big at an important event and becomes a star? If it's a bitch, she will have a litter of much sought-after puppies, and it will probably be at least a year before she is bred again. But if our star is male (let's call him "Hank"), he will be bred many times and produce dozens (or more!) puppies in a single year. Hank will pass half of his genes, both good and bad, to each of his offspring, so many copies of his recessive, silent mutations get distributed in his puppies. As long as Hank's deleterious mutations are paired with a normal allele in his puppies, they are not expressed and cause no ill effects. But if you could view the gene pool of the breed in the new generation, you would see that now it is markedly different. Hank's mutation has in just a single generation gone from being rare to common, and now lurks silently in the genomes of dozens of his offspring. In this generation, noone is any the wiser. The prized puppies that carry their sire's recessive mutation will appear to be no different than the ones that don't. The Next Generation... But in the next generation we start to see the first hint of trouble. Perhaps there were a few half-sib matings, or father-to-daughter, and some puppies are produced that are homozygous for Hank's mutation. Perhaps the mutation is lethal and these are stillborn pups, or maybe the puppies are born with a disease. But the breeders will be mystified - they have never had this problem in their line, or even in the breed, so maybe it's just bad luck? Nobody can see yet that this is just the tip of the iceberg. In one more generation, however, the trouble really begins. Carriers produced by the first generation will pass on the mutation to half of their offspring, and half-sib matings or line breedings back to the sire will begin to produce affected puppies. Even while the number of affected puppies is still relatively small, the number of carriers will by now be significant, and remember that our popular sire probably continues to produce more than his fair share of the offspring in each generation. You can see where this is headed. The seeds have been sown. Every litter produced by this popular sire is one less reproductive opportunity for any of the other potential sires in the breed, so the frequency of genes carried by those unused sires will decline in the population. At the same time, multiple bitches are producing puppies sired by Hank that will be half-sibs to the dozens of other puppies in their generation. The temptation to capture a bit more of that popular sire's star qualities will probably result in a few line breedings that will put carrier with carrier. Uh-oh, We've Got A Problem This is about the time breeders begin to notice that there is a "problem" in the breed. It won't take a pedigree sleuth to trace the growing population of affected dogs back to Hank, our popular sire who will now be blamed for introducing this new disease into the breed. Geneticists will be called in to hunt for the defective bit of Hank's DNA and to develop a reliable test. Then breeders will begin the mission of trying to eliminate Hank's formerly valuable genes from the gene pool, with proportional collateral damage to the genetic legacy of all of the bitches he was bred to. The genetic carnage resulting from attempts to purify the breed of the unfortunate mutation will continue for generations. The ultimate damage to the gene pool can be catastrophic. This happens over and over again in breed after breed. Of course, the problem isn't poor Hank. Wind back the clock, and if the judge had pointed to a different dog at that fateful show - let's say it was Rosco who got the nod - the trajectory of the breed would have been completely different but the consequences pretty much the same. Rosco will leave his genetic legacy behind in dozens of lovely puppies, half of which will have that one nasty mutation that will emerge a few generations down the road to bite the breed. Breeders will eventually catch on, sound the alarm, and the effort to identify and eradicate the offending mutation will begin. The gene pool will be purged, and the next time a big winner appears that happens to be male, the cycle will begin anew. The Unfortunate Legacy of the Popular Sire The really unfortunate thing about the Popular Sire is that the negative genetic consquences of his popularity don't begin to manifest for generations, by which time the breed already has a really significant problem. The large number of breed-specific disorders known to be caused by a single recessive gene (175 as of this writing; OMIA) is testimony to the prevalence of the problem (indeed, some breeds now suffer from multiple recessive genetic disorders). Of course, it is not just the recessive mutations that are disseminated widely by popular sires. Any genetic disorder can become quickly widespread, especially in the absence of any means of documenting the appearance of a new disease and if breeders are not willing to be completely transparent about issues they are aware of. Unacceptable aggression in English Springer Spaniels, which used to be one of the most popular family dogs in the US, appears to be genetic and has been traced to one popular sire from a prominant kennel (Reisner & Houpt 2005; Duffy 2008). Twenty-five percent of Bernese Mountain Dogs die at an average age of only 8 years old from histiocytic sarcoma (Dobson), a fatal cancer that apparently originated from a single dog in Switzerland, and the flames were fanned by a prolific great-grandson in the US that spread the malignant genes far and wide in the gene pool (Dobson 2013; Moore 1984; Moore & Rosin 1986). Many Dobermans die at an early age from sudden heart failure caused by dilated cardiomyopathy, which can be traced to seven popular sires in the 1950's, three of which died of heart failure (http://bit.ly/1anuinN). A serious - usually lethal - susceptibility of Miniature Schnauzers to infection by Mycobacteria avium (referred to as "MAC" for Mycobacteria avium complex) is thought to be traceable to a sire popular in the mid-1980s and is found now in dogs all over the world (http://bit.ly/1gZbGy7; http://bit.ly/1ciVxNP). There are no doubt many other similar examples that I am not aware of or have never been documented. Leroy (2011) has identified popular sires as the single most important contributor to the dissemination of genetic diseases in purebred dogs. Recognizing this, the FCI has issued a recommendation to breeders that no dog should have more offspring (presumably in its lifetime) than equivalent to 5% of the number of puppies registered in the breed during a five-year period, and a number of national kennel clubs have followed suit (e.g., Finland). But without cooperation of breed clubs, or in the absence of some authority that would oversee registrations and be in a position to police such a breeding restriction, it is hard to see how such a recommendation would have any effect at all on current breeding practices. (Which 5-year period? Which population of dogs - the worldwide breed, or just the dogs in your country? Who does the counting - the owner of the sire, the owner of the bitch, the breed club, the kennel club??). The only people benefitting from the explosion of breed-specific genetic disorders are the molecular geneticists, who have discovered dogs as an ideal research animal because many of the same disorders occur in humans (Ostrander 2012). But as useful and fascinating as dogs might be for their research, I suspect all would prefer to see dogs that are free of genetic disease, for they have so much more to offer in the family home than in the lab. Dobson, JM. 2013. Breed-predispositions to cancer in pedigree dogs. ISRN Veterinary Science 2013: (doi: 10.1155/2013/941275) Duffy, DL, Y Hsu, JA Serpell. 2008. Breed differences in canine aggression. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 114: 441-460. Haynes, W. 1915. Effect of the popular sire. Journal of Heredity 6: 494-496. Leroy, G. 2011. Genetic diversity, inbreeding and breeding practices in dogs: results from pedigree analyses. Veterinary Journal 189: 177-182. Leroy, G & X. Rognon. 2012. Assessing the impact of breeding strategies on inherited disorders and genetic diversity in dogs. Veterinary Journal 194:343-348. Moore, PF. 1984. Systemic histiocytosis of Bernese Mountain Dogs. Veterinary Pathology 21: 554-563. Moore, PF & A Rosin. 1986. Malignant histiocytosis of Bernese Mountain Dogs. Veterinary Pathology 23: 1-10. Ostrander, EA. 2012. Both ends of the leash- the human links to good dogs with bad genes. New England Journal of Medicine 367: 636-346. Reisner, IR. & KA Houpt. 2005. National survey of owner-directed aggression in English Springer Spaniels. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 10: 1594-1603. Wellman, R. & J. Bennewitz. 2011. Identification and characterization of hierarchical structures in dog breeding schemes, a novel method applied to the Norfolk terrier. Journal of Animal Science 89: 3846-3858.

I have seen this several times with other dogs but it's not easy to teach us old "dogs" new tricks. Wonderful that you were able to make the changes that you and she needed. I have a dog right now that I think is the same way. Such a reflection on my emotions and how I come across to her. Not all dogs really care. Love reading about your dogs

I wonder if she's hurt herself some how with the slipping. Have you checked her over for tender spots?

I had a dog that was to rough on sheep. Gave her to a pig farmer for a pet. He had no intention of using her on his pigs. She quickly showed him what a wonderful job she could do helping with the pigs. Way to hard on sheep but hogs were her forte. It did take a good grip to move his pigs. Best placement of a dog that wasn't working for me that I ever did. He still talks about her. She passed away at the age of 8. His mom was a vet, said she had a heart attack and died at the foot if his bed. Guy loved her so much he hasn't gotten another dog since

Good answer Donald! I've seen it as Donald says, seduction (we call that humpy ears) and I also see my younger girl do it to the older girl initiating play (without the ear set we call the humpy part). They have a game they play outside, it's a chase each other type thing. The younger one does it to the older one trying to engage her. sometimes the older one snaps or growls at the younger one if she's not feeling like playing that game but it's not really aggressive, just a means of communicating she isn't playing that game. Mine play together, they are rough and loud.

HA I have 2 private poopers but they are consistant as to when so watch for signs then you'll know when to let her have her privacy. I'd have be a ninja to see Mick poop!

Totally agree with the idea that she got it this time not meaning she's got it altogether. But I can't agree with the bottom statement. I compare them to children which I had 3 of. Each was different when it came to potty training. Some easier than others. But I can pretty much say all of them grew up and were potty trained! And I don't know any border collies that have grown up living in the house that didn't end up potty trained. Keep at it and one day you'll realize it's been weeks without an accident.

Everyone has answered so well I don't feel the need to add a whole lot on my opinions as I agree with many already stated. But wanted to write about is an experiment that a friend and I fell into while working our last dogs together which happen to be littermates with very similar qualities and working styles. I have Faye, bought when she was 4 months old, lived on the farm in a kennel till I got her. She came home with me and I turned her into a fun loving house dog who is a bit shy around strangers (didn't get socialized till after 4 months) but came along nicely learning how to be a house dog. Friend has Zeb. Sold as a pup to a guy that threw him in a kennel and did nothing till over a year old when my friend got him back being told the dog wouldn't work stock or do anything. (that is not really a normal kennel life for a dog but it's what it was so we went with it anyways) Zeb is now a normal kennel dog, He gets to interact with humans, is treated kindly and gets out to either work or be exercised. Now there is the point about Zeb and some not so good up bringing(really the lack of socialization and interaction as a pup) but this is about the difference between a kennel dog and a house dog not the other stuff. So they started about the same age. Zeb had no communication except on sheep. He took some time learning corrections were ok but I feel it was due to mishandling as a pup. Faye had a whole arsenal of communication due to her being the house dog. So right away there were big differences to be seen on stock. She had more nerve to question the handler. She had a bit more confidence and was a bit more bratty but really just puppy stuff. What really showed in difference was her ability to communicate with her handler. But it also could hinder her where her bro just took things in stride and didn't question as he never learned he could. Zeb if not corrected to harsh was quick to move on, not try bratty puppy stuff and just wanted to please. They are both biddable but you can see a difference in their working partnerships and human communication, it's amazing. It was the first time I really saw the difference in kennel dog or house dog. That being said, neither was better, just different. Some lessons were obvious as to the advantage being one sided but each new lesson presented either dog excelling for that day. This might be extreme because I'm pretty sure kennel dogs are interacted with more than what Zeb had in the beginning but he was able to bounce back from anything that might have happened to him being "kenneled" without socialization except with other dogs. And Faye well she has matured into a nice working dog who loves to lay on the couch, love me while in bed and does all the regular pet stuff, not city pet but country pet. No dog parks, or leash walks. Just country life. She is totally leash trained and can interact with city folk but we like our quiet country life. She is dog friendly but not with obnoxious in your face/butt dogs. Zeb is actually more dog friendly but I have a feeling that's cause he is not neutered and he would love to love some of the females he meets. Fay's is not spayed either. Either is ready and able to go to work at any moment. Serious about working like any nicely bred working dog. Faye has some habits that I wish she didn't but so does Zeb. His worst is his desire to mark things and his lack of cleanliness. But I have seen that run in lines of dogs. Faye's worst is, if I'm sitting on the couch she wants to be in my lap getting loved on ALL THE TIME. Faye is spotless and would never "pee" in public preferring to go off away from your leg. Zeb could care less. Zeb took to toys as soon as I gave him one. He doesn't understand fetch but who cares! Faye knows what a toy is and enjoys them, she plays chase/fetch with other dogs cause I do play a bit with some older dogs. I've never taught her to bring anything to me. The other day she brought me a stick when there were no other dogs out so I'm sure she could quickly learn to play fetch. What I concluded was either is good, just different. it's personal preference. If I had a dog that wasn't as keen as I'd like maybe kenneling would build keenness since they weren't getting pre-occupied with other things but if my dog was not keen enough that other things would be able to garner their attention over stock it would probably be a dog that wasn't going to cut it for me anyways. Interesting enough it seems most people who kennel only will tell me why I shouldn't have my dogs live in the house. Those that have house dogs might feel "bad" sometimes for those kennel dogs but don't normally express that to kennel only people. I think I might have fell into that camp before but didn't usually say anything to those that kenneled. Kinda like I was less than a serious working person since I let my dogs be pets. Of course not all people feel this way but it's definitely out there and sounds like the op's breeder/trainer is one of those opinionated people. Getting to know Zeb and watching both of them grow up to be great dogs, I have learned as long as a dog's needs are being met and it lives a quality life, it really doesn't matter to the dog. Even if you turn a house dog into a kennel dog, Faye has been away for training and lived kenneled, she came home unaffected. if treated well they adjust. Maybe not an older dog but one younger and not so fixed in their ways. And I know kennel dogs can adjust but sometimes not as easy as you'd think to living in the house. If not raised in the house I think it can be more stressful in the beginning. But then again I've seen dogs slide into house dog roles with ease so probably just a dog to dog thing. Just some observations on the differences that I've seen with these 2 pups. If I couldn't have my dogs live in the house I'd probably not be doing this. Taking care of some kennel only dogs, I found it's easier for me to have house dogs. I don't have to remember to take care of them. No kennel cleaning, or special exercising time although there is that hair in the house thing! They are always right in my face and I like it that way! LOL My dogs are my pets, my working partners and mostly my life. But I think most that post on these boards would say the same about their dogs.

Yes I agree if my dogs feast on rich lamb or beef meat (more meat than bones) they can get a little loose stools but chicken or turkey with bone seem to cause no issues.

The requirement for working parents, both actively working, will make your search a little harder, I would think, if you are not intending to work the dog on stock. From my own experience, breeders of working dogs will rarely/never sell to someone who does not intend to work the dog. End quote.. Not sure where your from but here in the US that is a normal breeding criteria. I and im pretty sure anyone looking for a working bred dog would only buy from working dogs. All my dogs except the first (steep learning curve) have come from dogs that work. Wouldn't have it any other way. Get involved with the moutain plains stock dog club. Or at least look for contacts through them. Or attend the finals coming up. They are in CArbondale CO. Good luck and if you want working bred, buy from working dogs. Health tests are a whole nother matter. You'll have to figure out what is more important, guarantees or a nicely bred dog. Im not sure who offers both but you mau find someone who does. I just dont know of any. The people who sell quality dogs dont want poor representations out there but don't offer written guarantees that I know of.

I use frozen raw.chicken wings. Or other frozen raw bones. Small enough to be chewed and consumed so they have to chew it up well. We also have.antlers but not sure about how well they clean teeth. My oldest is 12 never had hia teeth clean and there is no tarter or visible stains. They also work to clean dirty teeth. Only time it hasnt worked for us is we had a.dog who didn't like to chew. h Her teeth by far were the worst I've ever had. she had bad breath too.

Yep, never a dull moment! Down in AR my neighbors got so used to seeing me in their field collecting my sheep that they bought me a swimming pool ladder from a garage sale so I didn't have to crawl through barbwire each morning! gotta love um!

I have a fast flanking young dog. It's not the fast flank I want to slow down, it's the idea that she is rushing in the beginning just to get to sheep. Her distance is right but her mind isn't. She is slowing down a bit as she learns to relax a bit. But She was so fast in the beginning I couldn't mentally keep up with her.

darn dog. I wouldn't worry except the pancreatitis part. No more than watching poop for a couple days. It was New Years eve and we were celebrating with a roasted turkey. we finished dinner and went out for a bonfire to the barn. We had some friends over. I came in to see the pan all clean and no sign of the turkey carcass. I figured some kind soul had done the dishes and cleaned up the turkey. Nope, upon asking who was so helpful I got no response. We finally figured out an old dog had reached up to the back of the counter and took the whole thing off and demolished it. Then came back and cleaned up any leftover on the platter it looked as clean as if it had been washed and dried. It was a whole turkey and few guests. There were lots of leftovers. He didn't even act guilty! Had some soft poo for a day but lived to tell about it. I feed raw chicken and turkey all the time. it's the cooked bones that are the problem but lets hope he relished the bird and chewed for a long time! Hopefully it won't trigger anymore pancreatitis flair ups and he'll be fine! Yes the do some crazy things!

Gina I think you summed it up quite nicely. Mara I like the "sometimes" thing you talk about too and I agree that it is genetic about the OC behaviors but I also think it can be encouraged to "grow". I totally get the oc behavior that you speak about with your leaf staring or leaf shadow staring dog. I am discussing a similar issue with a guy that I work sheep with on a behavior my dog does off stock but when other dogs are working. I get it about being ball obsessive too. I have one that would be a bit obsessive if she had her choice but I just put the balls away or tell her no. End of story. .

Geonni I will say to you as I said to Teresa don't sell yourself short with the life you offer Sugarfoot. If she could talk I have a feeling she would sing your praises. In fact it sounds like you do more with your dog than mine ever get and mine seem pretty darn happy. If you love your dog, and the feeling is mutual I think you are doing fine, better than fine. I wasn't offended my Donald's statement at all either. He is speaking from his experiences, as we all are. Whatever works for him. But I won't be changing my ways due to some statements on here. And I hope the op gets a rounded version of experiences and can make a good choice for him and his dog. We have a chuck it too. I hate slimy balls. But I have to be careful how far I toss the ball, since it's a free for all sometimes they miss where it went. Oops, now who's fetching the darn ball!

This sounds pretty controlling to me. But you call it what you want. I already stated to Teresa that I now understand that is her way of working on a bond with her dog, her way of training. I won't say I'm wrong in my thinking but for her and I understand this now, it is a great thing for her to do. But ball for us is a pass the time sort of thing. It's a sit on the deck and toss a couple balls for the dogs. Do they pester me? well sometimes they might until I tell them to "go on" not a formal command but by my voice they know they need to find something else to do. In the manner that I stated is where my opinion of ball playing comes from. If you want to make it a "learning and training" thing you go for it. And are you really comparing training or playing with a ball to stock work? Really? In the statement I made I was meaning that we learn formal stuff from working stock and other more serious areas in their life. Again, for us ball is just for fun. In my original post one of the last things I wrote was put the ball up when you feel the game's over. No obsessiveness if there is no ball to play. Then pretty much retracted my little rant in answer to Teresa's post. I hope she understood better than you. You say you don't make rules for the sake of making rules? Why are rules needed when you play ball? The part about putting the ball in your hand or don't give in to pestering. Why? Why does the ball have to be in your hand not at your feet? Sometimes I'd rather have it at my feet or close to me than in my lap or hand. I don't like touching slobber balls that much. Why can't the dog find a ball and ask me to throw it? Why? Maybe I will maybe I won't but doesn't hurt to ask. if he's obsessive I'll take the ball and put it up, or won't leave it out, but for the life of me why can't my dog ask for me to do something? They ask for treats every time we come in the door. I don't mind saying no treats or just not answering them. They don't get upset. But maybe, just maybe they go to the treat jar and I think, hey, sure you can have a treat. I might not of thought of offering them one but I don't' see the harm in asking. Any obsessive behavior is bad. Not all border collies turn in to obsessive messes without strick control all the time. I might think it's a bit obsessive to always control your dog. We all have to let our hair down sometimes, why not them? Why does it always feel that you are personally taking on the working community as something that we need to defend or condemned to how we see our dogs. Feels like you have an issue with working people, like we beat our dogs into submission. Maybe it's just how I take your posts but I see it or take them that way all the time not just a few posts. And no I probably won't change my ways with ball playing, it works for them and me. As I'm sure your way works for you. My dogs understand quite clearly what the need to understand. It just isn't a game of ball with lots of rules that I need them to be clearly understanding about. Well that sounded like a rant...sorry.