Jump to content
BC Boards

juliepoudrier

Registered Users
  • Content Count

    13,690
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by juliepoudrier

  1. I've had three red dogs (one a red tri) and would have another in a heartbeat. I know of one who's breeding is very like most of my dogs. I'm waiting for his owner to breed him.... J.
  2. Somehow I have a mouse that keeps getting in my feed bin (it must be squeezing through the tiniest of holes). Twice I've tossed it out to Pip, but he has yet to catch it. He sure is excited to go into the tractor shed where the feed bin is now. The hunt/chase is on! J.
  3. I'm so sorry. It's hard letting go, even when you know it's the right thing to do. I hope your memories of healthier, happier times will help you through your grief. Godspeed Aleuu. J.
  4. I agree that if someone wants to raise livestock and they find what they want, there's no need to wait for a dog. I also don't see anything wrong with having the dog first and then getting stock. Sure, some folks keep stock only for dog training, but many of us raise stock because we enjoy raising stock. I keep my ewes for fiber and their lambs go for meat. Ewe ambs that are being kept as replacements (or wethers saved back for butchering for personal use) are worked by dogs until they enter the breeding flock after their first year (this provides me with a fresh set of sheep for dog training and is a means of making those young sheep "productive" while I support them until breeding age, which for me is the fall after they turn a year old. Nothing stays that's not productive, with the rare exception (there's always a special old one or similar). But I also can't imagine managing my flock, or the other flocks here (including poultry and goats) without the help of dogs, especially this time of year when we're putting out hay and feed. I recently helped a local farmer get her sheep and goats up for worming. They were kept on a large pasture (40 or 60 acres) and she was experiencing losses because she was unable to reliably bring them up for checking and treatment, She was ready to get out of raising small ruminants because of the difficulty she was having managing them (they also raise cattle). We found her a good trained dog and her outlook has changed completely. She's a prime example of someone whose farming life was turned around by a good dog! Anyway, I guess the problem with getting a trained dog now if you're (BPoint) not retiring for another 5 or 6 years is that the dog could be approaching retirement itself at that point. Also, depending on what sort of livestock you raise and how you set up your farm, you might be able to manage with a less-than-talented dog until you can get a trained dog. That is, you could work with what you have while you're starting out, then add a started/trained dog later. The problem with a pup is that you just really have no idea if it is going to be a useful worker or not, and of course by the time you find out the youngster is 2 or 3 years old and you then you have yet another who can't help you do what you need to do. J.
  5. Sue's whole post bears repeating, but for me this part truly resonated. I, too, have seen and heard from eyewitnesses and it's just mind boggling that the working dog community doesn't step up and police our own, but that's another thread I suppose. J.
  6. Emily, The bitches aren't retired from work; they're working elsewhere. As I said in my previous post, I am not a spokesperson for Karen. I simply live here and reported my observations in answer to your question. For some people the breeding of border collies is a business. In this case, although I may disagree with the business, I can't fault the care or placement of the dogs or puppies. I suppose If you really wish to understand her philosophy, you'd need to ask her directly. Eileen, At least on Facebook it's not just those on the list who are referring to it as a blacklist, FWIW. J.
  7. But doesn't the ethics statement beg the question of why ABCA takes money from registrations of dogs/breeders who don't meet that ethics of breeding standard? Is it a policing issue? Or simply an issue of needing the registration money for the registry to be able to continue to function? To me, it's something like saying, "I don't want you to do this, but if you do, we'll take your money to register your dogs anyway." It's seems a very fuzzy, grey way of operating to me. J.
  8. I'm confused about the registration vs membership thing. Can someone clarify? Toy can have a registered dog without being a member, but you can't register a dog without being a member. Pulling membership would prevent registration of puppies, but not sure how that would affect the agility dogs. And if ABCA can't track show dog's except for champions, how wound they track sport dogs? And what about dogs like Kristi's? J.
  9. I think it would be easy enough to sell pups to nonworking homes on NB status, though probably there would be people who wouldn't want to take a pup under those circumstances. As I stated on one of the FB threads, though, as a breeder (of two litters) my main concern is that the pups end up in loving forever homes. I don't want pups I produced passed from handler to handler because people or so anxious to have nursery dogs that they push too hard too fast. Fortunately I don't breed much, but honestly, even when I bred Twist and had interest in pups from some big names, I chose to place the pups with people I knew rather than working dogs folks I knew of because I could be sure that the people I knew (who maybe wouldn't burn up the trial field) would at least love and care for those dogs for their entire lives. That's just me, but I have often said on this forum in response to the folks who say that working dog people won't sell to sport people that I would choose an excellent sport home over a mediocre working home (and by mediocre I mean one that doesn't meet my personal standards on how a dog should be kept, trained, etc.) because I know the sport home is the one who is unlikely to pass a dog on, repeatedly. Limiting those sorts of homes would be unfortunate for those of us who really want to make sure pups go to permanent homes. J.
  10. Emily, I really don't want to be a spokesperson for Karen, but I will try to answer your question since I do live here and see what goes on. She generally has maybe one or two breeding bitches here. (Right now she has a bitch from Kevin Evans, one from Bobby Ford, a pup that was with Amy Yoho and is now living with Karen [neutered], and Imp. Mick.) She has two close friends who she lends dogs to, one for a goose dog business and another who has a farm, but the dogs live in the house. Both of those people will breed the bitches that they have at times. Since the bitches are still registered in Karen's name, all registrations also end up in her name and she does help place the puppies that result from those breedings. She also sometimes gives dogs to friends but retains breeding rights. For example, Mary Williams who does a lot of agility (Nationals level) but is completely new to stockdogs has a young dog from Karen (K. Evans' Caleb x Freck, imported in whelp) she's trying to train for stockwork. Karen gave her a started dog (also from Kevin, though I don't know if he produced her or bought her and trained her) to learn from. The only caveat was that she get a couple of litters from Patch. So Patch lives in a house, is working stock here with me helping Mary, does demos with us, and has even worked on the set of Turn. But Patch is still in Karen's name, so any litters from her will also be registered under Karen's name. Karen is something of a different case, I think, because she has a lot of repeat buyers of her puppies. She will take any pup back, temporarily to work on an issue or permanently to find a new home. Her long-time friends and multi-dog buyers regularly come out to help socialize litters. The pups are raised in beautiful conditions on a raw diet, receive all the vet care/health checks they need, are dewormed regularly before they go to their new homes. I will also note that Karen does not sell every puppy she produces. She will give pups to people (people she knows and trusts) if she feels the circumstances warrant it, no strings attached. She also spends a great deal of time helping *anyone* with a border collie (not necessarily her breeding) who contacts her seeking help with behavioral or training issues. And she does all the genetic testing on her dogs and has hips read (through Cornell, I think?). If there are issues in a litter or she doesn't like a dog's temperament or temperaments produced, she will not breed those dogs again. As for the dogs she's using, they come at least started, if not fully trained, mostly from the UK, though she has a young American bred bitch now as well (not producing pups). I think her plan is to send that youngster off to be trained. But every single one of her breeding dogs has been trained to work, whether they continue with that work when they get to the states or not. The downside to the clientele is that many of them are dog sports enthusiasts, so the number of pups who go on to work stock themselves isn't huge. That said, I do know of a bunch since I've been living here that are in working homes, even if it's just hobbyists. Note that I am not defending numbers here, but as far as I can tell, Karen does right by the dogs, the puppies, and the puppy buyers. Of course this is just one example and certainly not universal by any means. I think that a good number of her puppy buyers don't even bother to transfer the papers to their names, which is interesting, but I guess if they don't plan to breed they don't really care. So this is my observation in the short time that I have lived here at the farm. She is definitely a high-volume breeder, but my observation is that she stands by her dogs and the pups produced are well cared for, well socialized, and well placed. J.
  11. Tea, I think that part of the discussion was about not allowing them to register because they dogs are not working stock, but I've kind of gotten lost in this discussion because I haven't been on the forum for a few days. J.
  12. Karen, I think there are plenty of breeders out there who have already (long before a list was even considered) taken steps to make it appear as if they are not breeding large numbers of puppies. Five or six years ago I knew of one well-known breeder who registered dogs under family names, presumably for just that reason. I have no idea if they're still breeding a lot, but at least some folks might be surprised by the name, which I will not divulge because it's really immaterial to the discussion. It's another reason I find this list problematic. At least the folks on the list are being honest about their breeding practices, FWIW. And I wouldn't be surprised if some of them didn't end up doing something similar. Easy enough to transfer a registration and let someone else register a litter. J.
  13. Roxanne, I'm also part of BRBCR so can keep an eye out for you. I also have other contacts and sometimes hear/know of young purebreds (older puppies) looking for placement. I will keep you in mind and also let my contacts know you're looking. It's a shame about males being more problematic WRT allergies. My males are my most outgoing, easygoing dogs. My females can be quirky and snarky, but as I said in my earlier post, that seems to be a trait of their breeding.... J.
  14. One argument that Sue didn't cover was the one regarding preservation of the working border collie. The reasons for why high-volume breeders, in ABCA's viewpoint, can't also be preserving the working border collie have already been stated in this thread, so I won't repeat them here. My concern about pointing out these high-volume breeders as being antithetical to ABCA's stated mission to preserve the working border collie is the number of dogs registered each year, from any size breeder, who clearly aren't being bred with any regard to ability to work stock. So the ABCA is pointing out these particular breeders but essentially ignoring all the others who also aren't breeding for working ability (and per some of the FB discussions I saw, at least some of the breeders on that list are working farms breeding and selling working dogs to other farms, mainly cattle operations). As was mentioned earlier in this thread, ABCA can't know what all breeders are breeding for, but it seems a bit unfair to me (and I am NOT saying I agree with breeding lots of pups, just pointing out what I consider to be a disconnect in this way of going about pointing out who is NOT preserving the working border collie) to point a finger at these breeders and not at others. I would personally would be much more comfortable with the list if ABCA simply stated that they are opposed to high-volume breeding and left the comments about preserving working ability out of it, because as far as I can tell looking at what's being bred and sold just in my part of the world, a majority of those dogs, no matter how many litters the breeder has produced in a year, are NOT being bred or sold for stock work. J.
  15. Luxating patellas are a fairly common issue in smaller breed dogs. I have a friend with a rescue chihuahua who has luxating patellas--fairly severe--but was told by her vet that she doesn't necessarily have to do surgery right away, if ever. I'd get a second opinion and then just go with how Cricket is doing on a regular basis (e.g., how it's affecting his quality of life). J.
  16. He looks so happy! Just goes to show that even dogs who don't seem to stand a chance of making it can do so with the right loving foster care and permanent placement. Kudos to you and his adoptive family. J.
  17. It sounds like an abscess and here's hoping that he responds to the antibiotics and it resolves quickly. J.
  18. Coming late to this, but as the owner of a mostly white border collie (colored head only; ticking on rest of body), I can say that my sample of one has been extremely healthy (despite epilepsy in the litter, he was not affected) and has a great personality. The latter I attribute to his lines (the males from those lines tend to be happy, friendly dogs in general, through there are exceptions, and the females of those lines have a tendency toward snark), NOT his color. The only health issue he has had is a shoulder injury related to work. I had him and littermates BAER tested as pups because of the association with excessive white and deafness (which can affect the entire litter, not just the one with a lot of white). My white dog is pretty well known around here because I set sheep at a lot of trials, including the novice field at the Bluegrass. Working breeders have actually approached me about taking their (unexpected) white puppies because it's obvious I don't have the usual prejudice against white dogs. If I liked the breeding, another white dog is not outside the realm of possibility. I don't go looking for them, but I certainly wouldn't turn one down based on color alone, if the dog came from lines I liked. Pip is 9.5 years old and still going strong as my main work dog (and he just recently won a double lift trial, so he's got what it takes to be a winning open trial dog too). A friend of mine also has a rough coated white dog (she's actually a tri, and has some color on her face, but less than my white dog). My friend's dog is an agility dog, who was retired early due to jumping problems. Again, the problem was not related to the dog's color. Any individual dog can have issues. Other than problems known to be directly related to color (color dilution alopecia, for example), I don't think white dogs are more prone to health issues than any other color. (And there is a very well known trial big hat who thinks red dogs don't hold up as well, yet I had two different red dogs who lived to be nearly 16, both successful open trial dogs, and neither with any health issues except those associated with old age or genetics that have nothing to do with color--that is, CHD.) So, I agree with Donald, if you like a puppy, no matter what the color, I'd go for it. And if someone offered me a well-bred working pup who happened to be white, I wouldn't bat an eye, as long as the basic testing (BAER) had been done on it (or the parents in the case of hips or potential genetic issues like IGS <--again, none of these are related to color). As with any question like this, most of what folks experience with their white dogs may not truly be correlated to color, but because the problem happened with the oddly colored dog people will attribute the problem to the color. In other words, until I see a well-thought-out study that points to color being associated with things like allergies or autoimmune disease or the like, I will be rather disinclined to believe that white dogs are more prone to those issues. My opinion of course. These were taken New Year's day as we were helping our friends shear their flock. Working the small pen where we were pushing the sheep into the chute of the handling system: Moving the shorn sheep back to their pasture at dusk (hence the blurriness): What's a self respecting dog supposed to do when being harassed by piglets? J.
  19. My deaf oldster, who is trained to whistles, doesn't seem to hear them anymore. IME with five or six older dogs now, the deeper or sharper (but not high pitched), more resonant noises (like clapping or a low, loud voice<--hard for me because I have a fairly light, higher pitched voice) seem to get a better response. If clapping means "stop what you're doing," then that might well be a suitable cue for the old dog to stop and look around, unless you're worried it will affect everyone else. J.
  20. There are a couple of border collie x GSD mixes (known cross) in BRBCR, not yet listed because they are still too young. I believe several more purebreds are coming into rescue soon. I believe there were a couple of older pups (less than 6 months?) also in the rescue, but not sure if they've been spoken for. That said, there are breeders of good working dogs in MD and PA. Cheryl and Dick Williams have already been mentioned. If you PM me, I can give you a list of folks who breed occasionally in MD and surrounding states (for those who are curious, I am not listing here simply because they are people who train and trial but don't have regular litters). J.
  21. Try clapping. I have the same issue with raising my voice and making the other dogs worried. Clapping has always helped get the oldersters' attention. I also have used a flexi for the geriatrics in places where we could get separated (sheepdog trials and the like). If there's a chance that *you* could lose sight of your dog, try using bells on her collar or a flashing collar (for low light) so YOU can see where she is and go closer to her to get her attention. J.
  22. Jule, That is Donald's normal form of salutation (Dear Ms., Miss, Mr.). I don't think it's meant to be offensive or patronizing. Quite the contrary, I think it's meant to be polite. But of course you can't stop someone taking offense. I understand that in a large country it was easier to stay local with dogs you could see, but I think the whole idea of dogs registered with the "local" KC gives some of us the jitters, mainly because of the history of the KC and what it does to working dogs. That's the point I believe Donald was trying to make. When the AKC recognized border collies, there were working breeders who dual registered because they thought perhaps they could influence from within. They soon found that they couldn't. Obviously if what you saw on a daily basis is what you liked and wanted for yourself, then ultimately who the pup was registered with, or whether it was registered at all, probably didn't matter. That's always the case on an individual level. Where the problems come is in the wider perspective: what the kennel clubs stand for, what their practices result in, and so on. And that's where these conversations usually become problematic. If the working dog folks are keeping their lines "pure" within the greater KC registry (a subregistry of sorts) then individual breeders and buyers do have the benefit of the information on an X-generation pedigree. I would guess by now, though, that the working registry would be able to supply pedigrees going back at least four generations? The problematic part for me would be the fact that by keeping those working dogs within the KC--that is registering them there--the breeders are financing the activities of the KC, most of which are pretty much in direct opposition to maintaining the original purpose (or the ability to actually do what the breed was meant to do, and at a high standard). That would be a big sticking point for me, just as it is here where I live. Maybe it's different in Australia--I don't know. From what you describe, it sounds as if your breeder registered out of convenience more than anything else, but understand that for many of us, KCs represent the ruination of many breeds (as you acknowledge with the German shepherd), and I personally would take a dog from any registry but that, sight unseen if need be (happens plenty here because of distances, too, though of course the working border collie world is small enough that we do often know of each other--or know someone who knows the breeder/dogs in question, and the internet has made sight unseen a thing of the past, though of course seeing in person is always a preferred choice). The working registry here does include some limited information on testing on the pedigrees, but for me, the most important thing is knowing the breeder and the dogs behind (and to the sides of) the pup in question. I would like for the "big stuff" to be tested for, but honestly I don't want to pay a fortune for a pup (for example, here a started dog goes for roughly the same price as a KC registered puppy) that may or may not turn out to be the type of working dog I need. So I am more on the "I'll pay less for the pup and give up the security of multitudes of tests" in order not to have a huge investment up front in something that won't be able to show me its true value/potential for at least a couple of years. For me, personally, here in the U.S. I would take an unregistered, untested (that is, medical testing) working bred dog over anything registered strictly with the AKC. I actually got one of my best working dogs when a friend of mine called to tell me about an accidental litter that had one smooth coated female available. I agreed to take her just because I knew who the parents were (and their relatives) and knew the pup, once trained, would probably suit me. I think I saw one picture of her before she arrived at my doorstep. She's going on 10 years old now and I will be very sorry when I have to retire her. Everyone has different comfort levels, but in the case of supporting a KC vs not, I'd be willing to give up access to certain information if that was the price of not going the KC route. Honestly, I have yet to meet a KC-registered, conformation bred dog that I would call useful for anything but the most basic farm work or at the highest levels of trialing. As I said, the situation may be different where you are, but this is the reality for those of us in the U.S. and so it colors our responses in threads like this one. ETA: Oops, just saw where you said you were leaving. I hope that's not the case. We often disagree here, sometimes heatedly, but we can always manage to learn from one another too. If you've been here long enough, you also come to recognize the different personalities and styles of communicating and so are less likely to be offended by folks who are not actually trying to be offensive. J.
  23. I use Costco, even though there's not one all that convenient to me. Their prices are better than most place, although at least in the case of Pb, the price has been steadily rising. J.
×
×
  • Create New...