Denise Wall

Wow, glad things seem okay at this point. I can't believe Solo can open child proof bottles when I can't even do it. Never a dull moment with these dogs... As an aside, my old Molly's flop ears pricked more and more as she aged. My husband told me it makes sense because as we age cartilage calcifies and so gets stiffer. Sadly, we lost her last spring to old age a couple of months before she turned 17. I think if she'd lived another year she'd have been completely prick eared.

Thanks Sue but to be fair Jemima wrote the list for me. I've known her for several years through a couple of canine genetics lists. Her research was solid for this piece. It's stood up to scientific scrutiny and started or brought about many needed positive changes. As with anything this controversial, naysayers spread a lot of misinformation. I just wanted to provide information on some of the positive effects it's had. It's amazing how much impact this documentary has had in the UK.

Shows at 8PM and 11PM Dec 10, 2009 Check listings here: http://www.bbcamerica.com/404.jsp This hard hitting documentary prompted an impressive number of changes in the purebred dog breeding world. I asked Jemima Harrison, who produced this film, to list some of the most important changes that have come to pass since this documentary first aired in the UK. Here's her answer: The most changes to date have come in the UK. The KC will no longer register the progeny of father/daughter; mother/son or full-sib matings (unless convinced of a strong scientific reason for doing so). The KC is running a prominent "fit for function, fit for life" campaign It has made changes to 78 breed standards in order to discourage/reverse exaggerations and has added the following clause to every breed standard: "A Breed Standard is the guideline which describes the ideal characteristics, temperament and appearance of a breed and ensures that the breed is fit for function. Absolute soundness is essential. Breeders and judges should at all times be careful to avoid obvious conditions or exaggerations which would be detrimental in any way to the health, welfare or soundness of this breed. From time to time certain conditions or exaggerations may be considered to have the potential to affect dogs in some breeds adversely, and judges and breeders are requested to refer to the Kennel Club website for details of any such current issues. If a feature or quality is desirable it should only be present in the right measure." the KC has commissioned an independent enquiry into dog-breeding that will report in January. Headed by Professor Sir Patrick Bateson (a descendant of William Bateson who coined the term "genetics") it is expected to make strong recommendations regarding the need to preserve/improve genetic diversity. The APGAW report is downloadable from here: http://www.apgaw.org/reports.asp The RSPCA report is downloadable from here: http://www.rspca.org.uk/in-action/issuesindepth/pedigreedogs two other independent enquiries - one from the RSPCA and one an all-party parliamentary group - have come to the same broad conclusions as the film - that there are serious welfare problems that need to be addressed urgently. Both have favoured self-regulation rather than new legislation and also recognise that there is not a one-size-fits-all solution. the KC has just signed up to the following welfare principles: 1) every dog should be born with the best possible chance of living a healthy and happy life, well suited to its intended lifestyle 2) all those who breed dogs should prioritise health, welfare and temperament over appearance when choosing which animals to breed, in order to protect the welfare of both the parents and offspring 3) all those who benefit from dogs have a collective responsibility to work together to protect dog welfare the KC has announced that it is keen to allow the registration of the LUA Dals and that objections from the breed club (requested by Dec 31) can only be on the grounds of health and welfare (ie.not on the grounds of breed purity). Although the KC has allowed some limited outcrossing in the past, it is definitely being more proactive in this area. See also: http://www.bsdaofgb.co.uk/inter-variety_breeding.htm The KC has launched a new Canine Genetics Centre based at the Animal Health Trust (the main developer of DNA tests in the UK) The Animal Health Trust says it has had a "huge increase in breeders" wanting to help in the development of new DNA tests since the programme. The KC has improved judge's training inc that judges of gundog breeds must attend field trials before being allowed to judge at Ch show level. Breed clubs' Code of Ethics are no longer allowed to condone the culling of healthy puppies that don't meet the breed standard. The KC has withdrawn the allocation of CCs from GSDs in 2012, demanding evidence that conformation problems in the breed are being tackled. ( http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/item/2791/23/5/3) Many more cavaliers are being MRI scanned for syringomyelia. (A three-fold increase in the number of MRI-scanned dogs listed on the UK Club's website) The KC has promised breed health plans for every breed. Part of this will be an assessment of the genetic diversity of every breed. (Bit sceptical about this last bit but they'll be nagged if they don't do it...) The RSPCA is funding the University of Sydney to develop a veterinary-based disease-surveillance scheme. Just in case this sounds quite a lot, it isn't really. Mostly it's just words. But the words ARE welcome and it feels like a corner has been turned here. AUSTRALIA ANKC has said it will adopt the UK breed standard changes ANKC is funding the Uni of Syndey to assess the level of inbreeding in Australian dogs. CANADA the promise to review the amended UK KC breed standards of breeds of UK origin (but don't think they've done anything!) USA AKC forms Health + Welfare Adivsory Council (can't prove it but I think it is pre-emptive) http://www.akc.org/news/index.cfm?article_id=3909 Jemima

http://www.vet.utk.edu/studies/pdf/CanineA...itisStudy09.pdf at http://www.vet.utk.edu/studies/index.php

Thanks again guys! Anna, looks like the same Russell. From the usbcha pedigrees from the 09 finals: Russell M 7/97 113815 Off Stetson, Al Marti ABCA 59050 Jill, D. Miland Al Marti ABCA 46449

Thanks again, guys. Liz, there were a lot of pics of Kaige airborne In fact, the Nursery dogs were quite dynamic as a group. Very exciting to photograph. And the red dog, Zeke, a border collie, was absolutely stunning in the shots. Christine took those pics with my gear while I went to get a dog to run.

Thanks guys

Taken Oct 23 and 25, 2009: http://www.pbase.com/cdwall/gallery/jan_thompsons_trial

Debbie, It's very difficult to get accurate figures for genetic diseases however in certain instances there are pretty reliable data. One example would be CEA, which is what the OP was asking about. Taking numbers from CERF data over many years, as well as results from dogs examined at the sheepdog finals over many years, a consistent affected rate of around 2.5% was seen. The dogs examined at the finals are not just trial dogs, although they would likely be owned by people who would be at the finals. Any ABCA registered dog is examined for free. Around 200-300 dogs have been examined each year since 1996. The total numbers are now well into the thousands. CERF data would have come from several "disciplines" of border collies. With CERF data, the information is (or was back at the time before we got the CEA DNA test) sent in to CERF's anonymous database by the examining vet regardless of whether the individual submits the exam results to CERF. In both of these situations, the data obtained are unbiased by things like people deciding not to send the information into a database like OFA. The main CEA gene is a single recessive gene. The DNA test is reliable. Dealing with the problem is about as straightforward as it gets. People on the ABCA Health and Genetics Committee try to weigh every angle with each decision in each disease.

I chose to define those zones in terms of work because that's the way I think it should be. The definitions had to be fairly general or else it would become too hard to follow. Obviously some dogs that are perfect on one type of stock or for certain jobs or in a certain area won't be perfect in other situations. So the definitions are flawed to some extent. If any one has a better idea I'm game. I want to keep refining the analogy over time. As to the original post - personally, I've had good luck (by my standards) keeping my line going by breeding hard (too hard for trials or nearly so) bitches. ETA: Sue, I think you skipped the orange zone in your last post. White is supposed to be useless for working stock, or nearly so.

SS Cressa, the reason I asked you about your experience working stock is because you were making a lot of judgments about how well show dogs work on farms and such. Not to pick on you specifically because I hear this all the time from non working border collie people. Why is it that people who don't work stock with their dogs think they know more about it than people who do? And while I'm ranting...if show people are insulted at their dogs being called Barbies then how about if one spends all of their time and efforts studying, training, working and carefully breeding the very best workers they can only to be told, oh, you don't *need* to breed border collies for "the herding instinct." They all have it anyway. Our dogs that haven't been bred to work and have never been worked to a high standard on stock are just the same as yours. Wow. What idiots the working border collie people are! To think all that time and effort spent for no reason. To think none of the working people has ever figured that one out in all these years. It doesn't matter how they're bred. Personally, I find that insulting.

SS CRESSA YOU DIDN'T FIND ONE OR TWO. THE DOGS YOU GAVE AS EXAMPLES ARE NOT RUNNING IN OPEN. THEY'RE RUNNING IN NOVICE, THE LOWEST LEVEL CLASS. OKAY? How much experience do you have working stock? ETA: Only one is even running in novice. And there is no USBCHA novice. USBCHA doesn't even recognize novice classes - only Open and Nursery.

In case anybody is interested: http://www.bordercollie.org/boards/index.p...c=25767&hl=

As a long-time occasional breeder of working border collies it is my opinion that we would be better off to start over (if we had to) with a breed that still works, like the kelpie, than to try to reconstruct the working ability from the conformation border collie lines. Once Humpty Dumpty is broken, it's hard to put all the pieces back together the right way again.

This answer is addressed to the question of the OP and not any of the dogs mentioned. Young dogs mature at different rates. I like the ones that do "something" especially if they are talented dogs and have good minds. If they're talented and have good minds then the "something" they do is more than likely going to be correct or at least not so bad. When I use to ride horses I noticed the dressage horses that were able to make it to the upper levels of training were not the best movers, or the best looking ones, or even the most talented ones, but instead mostly the pretty good ones with the mind to handle to pressure.

Thanks Sue and Julie Julie, can you share about your two littermates on this topic?

In my experience working with now three different sets of littermates these things are mostly hardwired. Same trainer, different outcomes. Littermates are not all the same. I have also worked with or closely followed a number of the dogs from each my breedings. Again, different tendencies genetically, modified slightly by training. These were all dogs I bred and I know a lot about the dogs behind them, many of them being my dogs that I kept from birth until death. The last set of littermates is still young, but the other two sets were dogs I started and was also able to see how they ended up. My overall impression is dogs tend to go back to some faults they had as puppies when they approach the end of their working lives. As in, if they were hard to flank, tight, grippy, ran through sheep or things like that early in their training, you might see that again if you have them long enough. They lose the inhibitions that have been trained into them to do these things. You can change some of these behaviors a little with training and handling. And some people can handle through them almost all of the time. But as has been stated, when it gets as hard as it gets, you will see what they are. There are certain types of handling that will make certain traits worse. Apprehension that manifests itself as looking that handler or such, is one. However, there will be dogs that won't look at the person no matter what they do so genetics is certainly involved. Overhandling, micromanaging, and low confidence and/or lack of knowledge on the part of the handler can cause dogs to shut down. I'm sure all dogs can be shut down eventually, no matter what their genetics, if enough of the right kind of pressure to shut them down is used. However, short of that, there are dogs out there that will become good dogs no matter what their situation. When a well-intentioned dog is faced with extreme overhandling or inexperienced handling, I think those dogs that are very keen will be forced to do one of two basic things besides quit - they will learn to not care about what the sheep are doing and just do as told, or they will learn to blow off the handler and do what they think they need to do to keep the sheep under control. I have seen both. Many times.

Thanks again, Kristen That ram sure produced some flightier lambs than what I've had lately. My goal is usually 1/4 cheviot for hardiness. This year the lambs were 1/2. It's been a while since I've had that. And thanks for the nice comment on May. I love little May. I don't know if it's obvious in the videos but she's just a little biddy thing.

Thanks, Kristen.

Cool. Thanks

Okay, I've been stewing over this for a few days and I finally have to comment. Other factors besides laxity are involved in the development of hip dysplasia, and it varies by breed. PennHIP themselves (now) accepts and reports that its effectiveness in reducing hip dysplasia varies from breed to breed. Yeah, it's real effective for German Shepherds because they have no muscle left in their back ends. All breeds are not the same. Here's an article I *researched* and wrote about it years ago. It still holds up IMO: My Thoughts on Developing a Wider View of Hip Dysplasia in the Border Collie It pisses me off a little when someone implies that I'm simply "making excuses" for not using PennHIP for my breeding dogs just because I don't happen think it's a very good test for border collies. Please note that I am in NO WAY implying in this article that border collies with hips so lax that they are dysplastic is the desired goal. Some people have tried to take this message away from the article in the past and that is not what is being said. Sorry to hijack the thread but it sounds like the OP has a good plan at this point.

You guys (where's that embarrassed emoticon?) Thanks Lana. PS Where are y'all getting these non standard emoticons and how do you post them?

Well, thanks to you guys for taking the time to watch I want to qualify these videos once more. This is just one average trainer's experience with one particular dog. I'm not a big hat, though I've had a modest bit of success in the past. I do some hobby video and have some decent low pro video equipment and a good editing system. I started doing those video updates of May for a girl who bought one of her littermates. Then I kinda got into it and decided to challenge myself to learn better editing skills with each one. They were never meant to be any kind of training guide. As for May specifically, I had a little more background on what might be future problems or strengths because she is of my breeding. I was expecting the tight and short left flank/outrun would be a natural fault in her. It'll need maintenance but it's not too bad considering. I think I addressed that okay from the beginning. She is a bit too focused on what she perceives as the job. This will need maintenance to keep her flexible and I don't think I addressed this early enough or as intensely as I should have. As I said in another post, I've seen this before to a fault in her grandmother so I should have been more ready for it. This maternal line also tends to fight too much handler pressure (for them), such as the pushing them way off and then letting them come back and have the sheep technique. They just won't go. If they're stopped or blocked, they plant themselves and if they're moving, they get faster and tighter no matter how correct your position and timing. (And this is not only with me but with people much better at using this technique than I am.) I caught on pretty fast to this and decided to keep things calm, try to figure out the right amount of pressure and be happy with a little give to handler pressure at first. (See the difference in May's response to handler pressure in the 8 month video vs. the 11 month one.) This attitude on my part allowed me to enjoy training her more than any other dog I've ever trained. I just relaxed and tried to set things up so she could learn from the sheep and we didn't have to fight. Now she "gives" to reasonable pressure appropriately so I think I had a good plan on that. Lastly, something I haven't discussed before is this maternal line of mine tends to have a lot of "line" balance in them. I was prepared to prevent too much of this from becoming a problem. I could see pretty much from the beginning she was going to be able to naturally throw down and drive sheep in really straight lines with very little help. Using a larger number of sheep, and heavy full Dorset and Dorset cross sheep (which is conveniently what I happen to have) that don't flock quite as tightly as some other breeds, I've kept her pretty free flanking. Also I didn't work as much on driving as I would have with a dog with the opposite tendency. If I can put off letting her discover the joy of holding a really tight line on the drive until she's around three years old, I think she'll end up more balanced in scope over all. Thanks again for the nice comments.

I don't know. Maybe. I'd like to get a good video of an Open run with her to narrate first to show how she ended up - good and bad - in a testing situation such as a trial.

Thanks Sue and Karrin My standard commands for a wide flank or outrun are "away back" for the counter clockwise and "come out" for clockwise. That's what I'm using on this video. Sometimes I use "out" or "get" (as in "get back") or "get out of it" to ask them to go wider in general if they're already on a flank but I'm trying to change that to be more specific and use a different "wide" command for each flank.