MagRam

Update. Just an update. The clinic and private lessons are now filled. We still have a few time slots for photo sessions with Vickie.

Due to a couple late cancellations the Antelope Valley Stockdog Club has two working spots available in aa clinic with Norm Close - 2005 Canadian BCHA Champion - on the weekend before Thanksgiving - Fri Nov 21 and Sat Nov 22. Cost for the 2 days is $200 (lunch included). Audit Spots are $35 per day or $60 for both days and include lunch. Norm will also be giving 45 minute private lessons on Friday Nov 20 and limited slots are available. As a special treat Norm will be accompanied by his wife Vickie - who is an award winning photographer. This is a special opportunity to combine some high level instruction with a rare opportunity to have your dog (and you if you like) captured in photographic art. Photographic sessions are NOT limited to dogs and handlers participating in the clinic and are NOT limited to Border Collies. Vickie is a true artist whose work can be viewed at www.vickieclose.com and also at www.handhillsbordercollies.com Plan on about an hour for each session. Also Vickie is available for consultation pre sesseion for advice on thiongs like clothing (if you want to be in the photo with your pet), etc. Because Vickie will be committing sepcific time to you and your pet there will be a small session fee which is fully refundable and applies toward any photographic purchase. Clinic spots, private lessons or Photographic sessions can be arranged by emailing pgrannan@lawoc.com. Antelope Valley is in North East Los Angeles County near Palmdale.

I believe you are referring to Molly Wisecarver and her daughter Mary Alice (now 15 I believe). They are among the few who compete successfully in both USBCHA and AKC venues. The dog you are referring to Elijah - was run by Mary Alice at the FTB Ranch trial in July in New Mexico in Novice and did very well in that class. Mary Alice ran another dog Sherman in Open Ranch (I beleieve Sherman may be a former Open dog workig with young handler but I am not sure) each of the 4 days I was at the trial. On the first day - which happened to be her birthday -- she took first place with Sherman over a field that included Alasdair MacRae (running one of his young dogs) and a number of other recognizable names. So she is certainly a capable handler especially for one so young (and also a charming girl that Molly and her husband can be very proud of BTW). I know from her web page that Sherman has also run AKC but I do not know his breeding background. I do know of at least one other AKC dog from one of the kennels mentioned who nearly qualified for USBCHA Nursery Finals last year and was recently moved up to Open. At his first Open trial the dog and first time open handler were one place out of getting National Points for next year. The dog and handler (its his first herding dog) did very well in Pro Novice on the California USBCHA circuit last year and just moved up to Open in July. So it can be done -- but it is clearly a rarity.

You are correct and what you describe is what I refer to as "crossing the course". "Running rings" around the sheep struck me as a description of the extreme version and thus my "running circles around the sheep" answer.

Running in circles around the sheep

What Julie said. If the sheep were going in the right place then the dog was right even if it did not look like the classic position to the handler. I learned this lesson (well a bit anyway) the hard way in my first ever Pro - Novice run at Sonoma this year. On the fetch the sheep wanted to pull to their right and most of the way down my Maggie was staying a bit off to the right side of the sheep holdingg them from escaping and largely keeping them on line. It did not look right to my inexperienced eye because she was not directly behind the sheep. So I tried to get her to adjust to directly behind. The moment she hesitated it released the pressure on the sheep and they escaped to the right like they had been trying to. My dog was right and I was wrong. You can see it clearly on the video from the Santa Rosa Press Democrat accompanying this story http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20090...ICLES/903209917 - sorry I could not figure out how to link directly to video. Maggie is the sable faced dog with the bushy white tail. By chance we were one of the runs placed on the video. She is the first dog shown on an outrun on the video - I am in blue jeans and a yellow shirt. You can see on her fetch Maggie is staying off to the right of the sheep and as long as she stays in that position the sheep are coming fairly straight. Right before the video of her ends you can see her hesitate a bit in response to one of my misguided commands trying to get her behind the sheep. (You will see me lift my crook - you can't hear the command) As soon as she hesitates the sheep take off on her and escape. Fortunately for my ego the tape cuts off at that point so the whole world does not get to see me lose the sheep. But it illustrates the point fairly well I think that what matters is the line the sheep are on and not whether the dog is artificially where we think they should be. Maggie was properly reading the pressure and I misguided her.

What I believe you are experiencing here is an example of what Jack Knox calls "Correct the wrong and let right happen." After going to a Jack Knox clinic and hearing this repeatedly it still took a while for it to make sense to me but it seems right. Your running at him while he was doing wrong was the correction which told him slicing was wrong and he should try something else. His natural instincts took over and his next choice was right and you stopped running at him thereby releasing the pressure and rewarding him. Pressure on (correction) for wrong behavior and pressure off (reward) when he does it right. It's the fact that the release of pressure is a reward that is the concept we humans sometimes have trouble grasping (I know I did). The learning what is right comes when the pressure is released. Remember a "correction" is supposed to "correct" what is wrong. And - as my current trainer (herself a big hat) says repeatedly - "Stop correcting when he does it right" Anyway I'm just a newbie passing along what I have been told by several top trainers - including the catchy phrase from Jack Knox. My best advice is since you are obviously working with a trainer - listen to your trainer and do what your trainer tells you. While it is nice to understand why something works at this point at least it is more important that it works. And your timing will get better. But YOUR trainer who observes you and your dog interacting with each other and with the livestock is in far better position to offer help than any of us (and Jamie and Julie both had good insights BTW).

You paid $5,000 for a Border Collie that does not work at all ?? !! Why ?

Yes. I believe that is where Jon Katz took his dogs. For many that would be reason enough not to train there but I am sure it is actually good for her business. I am not as anti-Katz as some - actually enjoy his writing style - but I certainly would not consider him the expert on training. If you listen to the description of the instinct test on that site it is almost a parody of every identified red flag from these boards. "She has trained dogs to over 150 herding titles. IN THE TEST, positive reinforcement testing techniques are used. Dogs are first to penned sheep with dog outside a pen. Many dogs can pass the test without actually going into the pen. As necessary, if the dog requires additional stimulation by chasing stock without a barrier between, the dog (on or off lead as appropriate), will be tested inside a 200’ diameter pen with sheep. Dogs must show at least 5 minutes of interest in sheep in some herding style and some responsiveness to handling within a 10 minute period in order to receive a certificate. Every dog will receive a written evaluation. Puppies should be no younger than 6 months of age. No upper age limit. " So if I understand it a dog does not even need to be on the same side of the fence to work(herd) livestock and what we are looking for is stimulating the dog enough to CHASE. No thanks. Unfortunately many do not know better and I am sure are thrilled with their certifidcate. "Bring dog treats—we might use them (or not) when your dog sees the sheep." No stockdog trainer I have ever met uses treats around livestock. The livestock and the ability to work it is the treat. \ "3. Top Technical Tier: The technical, finesse moves specific to herding, necessary for successful herding trialing as well as effective livestock control. These behaviors are both cued by the situation and commanded by the handler. Once Tier 1 and Tier 2 skills are mastered, simple, basic herding tasks (equivalent to AKC HT level) of Tier 3 can be successfully mastered in less than a week! More difficult tasks in Tier 3 can take up to 2 years for the dog to master, 10 for the handler! " So if I graduate I can make it all the way to the AKC Herding Tested level - not even AKC Started Trial level.

OK I give. I just got back from working my bitch. And so I will use the term most seem to prefer. Too busy working the dog on sheep to coontinue the discussion.

Actually - literally a shepherd is one who herds sheep. That is what the word means and has always meant. Same as a goatherd is one who herds goats. I am sorry that the word has been misused by so many recently to mean something far less than the complete work involved in herding and now gives you a different impression. However, just as you think we need to keep the emphasis on correct handling of livestock I feel we should try to be correct in our use of the English language. Although it would probably do no good we should try to correct those who use the term incorrectly. Instead you choose to use a different term which is inherently either less precise or more cumbersome. That is your choice and I respect it. I'm sorry if my use of the time honored terms offends you because of its recent dilution. Edit to add - BTW While I do not earn a living or financial remuneration for my work with my dog and sheep and certainly not as accomplished as many on this list - including some whom I know personally who have joined this discussion - we certainly approach our time with sheep as work to accomplish a specific task and have respect for all involved - dogs, livestock, trainers, other people working their dogs. At this point - given our level of accomplishment - we are at best apprentice shepherds.

My use of the word "herding" is precisely out of respect for the shepherding tradition. I notice you had to misspell it "sheparding" in order to leave out the word "herding". Anyway enough of this semantic discussion. We can each show respect for the tradition in our ouwn way. Just try not to be offended when someone uses the ancient word for what we do despite the fact that some are trying to call lesser activities that which we love whether called "herding" or "working". To paraphrase Shakespeare - "That which we call a rose, by any other name . . ." As for me I am back to my efforts at working/herding - which based on our current skill level would have to be more accurately called attempted or apprentice working/herding. And Anna - given the potential for confusion with ACD's I understand your preference for "cowdog"

Anna - I was waiting for your input as a linguist as I know that is your background As you know me - you know my background and "work" often requires precision in the use of the language. I also happen to be a fan of the English language and prefer to use it correctly whenever I can. As the portions of the dictionary definition you have requoted demonstrate "herd" is a description of a more specific task than is "work". BTW - you left out definition 1a (the first listed is generally the most accepted - I assume because of the ridiculous example) "1 a: to gather, lead, or drive as if in a herd". Yes "work" is clearly applicable because we are performing a task when we are applying "sustained physical and mental effort to overcome obstacles and achieve an objective" using our dogs to achieve that objective on livestock. Yet by common usage over centuries the word "herd" gives more specific description of that task - to gather - yes we are doing that - lead or drive as if in a herd - yes we are doing that. I understand - believe me I understand - that because some use the word "herd" to describe what most on this board would consider a diluted task - that the term "herding" for some has acquired a pejorative connotation. However, this presents two alternatives - one is to choose a different word - "working livestock" for example - the other is to fight abandoning the word entirely by continuing to use it properly so it does not lose its original meaning. BTW - for anyone who chooses to use the word "work" - which I often use myself when talking about working my dog - I am not offended in the least. Just understand that - unless you are speaking to someone involved in your specific kind of work the term will likely not have the same meaning. For example to an Iditarod competitor I suspect the term "working" his/her dogs has an entirely different meaning related to pulling a sled. Yes, the meaning of words evolves over time with usage. For me, however, rather than being a sign to abandon the correct usage because someone else is using it incorrectly or diluting the word it is further reason to use the correct word for the correct meaning. Just understand that anyone who chooses to be offended by the word "herding" as applied to dogs gathering, fetching, driving, penning, etc., livestock is making that choice on philosophical grounds.

I fully understand your position but I choose not to abandon 700 years of usage to the Kennel Club so easily. The word has an accepted meaning and I personally find it more descriptive than "working". JMO that I believe in protecting the language as well as that which you prefer to call "stockwork" (which BTW is more descriptive than simply "work"). Simply please underrstand if some of us choose to use the word herding in its original and centuries old definition we are not intending to insul;t the purists. Rather we may be drawing the line in the sand to prevent co-opting the word. So try not to be offended if I - or others - choose to talk about herding. It is - as Pearse acknowledges in his post - the technically accurate term.

If you agree - as you say - that words matter then herding or to herd is in fact the more accurate and descriptive word than the one you suggest "working". The English language is a rich tapestry containing hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of words. By common usage and understanding - often over centuries - sometimes over just a few years certain words come to have accepted meanings. We have words that are more general - like "work" or "working" and those that are more specific like "herding". According to the Meriam - Webster Dictionary the word "herd" as a verb dates to the 13th century and is given the meaning "1 a: to gather, lead, or drive as if in a herd <herded the children into the car> b: to keep or move (animals) together, 2: to place in a group". While I wish they had not used the example of herding children into a car which I suspect is a more recent example, this is clearly a description of what we do with our dogs when we work livestock. "Work" - which you suggest we use - is an even older word from Middle English dating to before the 12th century. Here is the Merriam-Webster entry "Main Entry: work Pronunciation: \ˈwərk\ Function: noun Etymology: Middle English werk, work, from Old English werc, weorc; akin to Old High German werc work, Greek ergon, Avestan varəzem activity Date: before 12th century 1: activity in which one exerts strength or faculties to do or perform something: a: sustained physical or mental effort to overcome obstacles and achieve an objective or result b: the labor, task, or duty that is one's accustomed means of livelihood c: a specific task, duty, function, or assignment often being a part or phase of some larger activity " Clearly from the standpoint of being more descriptive of that activity which we undertake with our dogs and livestock "Herding" is more specific and descriptive than "working". Now I will agree with what I suspect is your real point of contention that the term - as used by many involved on the periphery - that what passes for "herding" in certain organizations and circles is not what a true shepherd would recognize as "herding" or is at best a stripped down version. That does not mean that we should simply abandon the more specific and accurate word to describe real herding in favor of a generic word such as "work". It is part of the evolution of our language that the meaning of words can change or be co-opted over time. The current Christmas season offers us a fine example from the Christmas carol suggesting "don we now our gay apparel" - also used in the theme from the Jetsons in "we'll have a gay old time" or to refer to the 1890's as the "gay 90's". As recently as the 1950's this word was universally understood to simply mean "happy". Now it is universally understood to refer to a sexual preference. A teacher teaches. A doctor doctors. A blacksmith smiths. A farmer farms. An engineer engineers. A writer writes. Do we denigrate any of their avocations by using the specific term for what they do instead of the more generic "work". I do not think so. That is why I don't think we can "all agree" not to use the word "herd" in its dictionary meaning which has thrived for 700 years. The use of the word "herding" does not reduce what true herding is to some sort of game or "activity". Rather it is an accurate and more specific description of working livestock. Let's not abandon the better word simply because some have chosen to dilute it.