Crufts

[The Good Shepherd]

I'm 27 and about as non-conformist as one can imagine. However, I do know what is right and what is wrong for a Border Collie. The right thing for a Border Collie is to be bred to a strict working standard. Not for being a show dog, or for agility or for "candy colors." Just like I think German Shepherds should be bred for a schutzhund and not AKC standard. It just turns out better dogs.

 

I don't work Mick on sheep anymore, because I don't have the money for lessons, but I consider myself lucky to get a good dog from working lines, even though his main exercise is playing frisbee at the dog park these days.

 

 

I agree with you on the GSD AKC standard. Poor dos!

 

But I take offense with "Bred for Schutzhund". You must not know what GSD's are still used for in Germany? - Tending

[IPSY]

The GSD in those shows would literally fall to pieces if asked to do any type of work . Their conformation is horrendous ! Not one of those dogs could tend sheep or scale anything other then a pillow.

 

The BC are shown in the same light. ( some of them ) Im sure can and do work.

 

But to be able to watch and enjoy seeing so many breeds and the different sports , like agility and flyball , freestyle is fun to watch IMO. It doenst mean I support them.

 

As for supporting AKC , that is the only venue ( in my traveling range ) that offers numerous agility trials. And I will continue to trial them unless another venue comes within traveling distance for me.

Like I stated before , my dogs and I enjoy it tremendously. You cant make a dog like agility , but when they do , its alot of fun and good exercise for both dog and handler.

 

I wish I had access to sheep more often , and we still might one day. But why should anybody be judged because they do other activities with their Border Collies. I appreciate and admire BC that work , but there are alot of other things these magnificant dogs can do.

 

GSD can do agility too. They are a versatile breed that has been used for a number of activities. I may not like some of them , but I would never judge a person because of what they chose do with their dogs.

[geonni banner]

"As for supporting AKC , that is the only venue ( in my traveling range ) that offers numerous agility trials. And I will continue to trial them unless another venue comes within traveling distance for me.

Like I stated before , my dogs and I enjoy it tremendously. You cant make a dog like agility , but when they do , its alot of fun and good exercise for both dog and handler.

 

I wish I had access to sheep more often , and we still might one day. But why should anybody be judged because they do other activities with their Border Collies. I appreciate and admire BC that work , but there are alot of other things these magnificant dogs can do."

 

Ipsy

 

Ipsy, I really sympathize with the lack of non-AKC sport venues in many places. It is frustrating. Every person has to make a decision to use the resources within their reach or "do without." I love to see dogs doing anything that they enjoy, that builds a good working relationship between dogs and their owners.

 

I've never gotten the impression here on the Boards that people look down on BC owners for doing activities other than stock work. What people deplore is breeding for activities other than stockwork.

 

You wanna do agility? I'm all for it! You go girl!

[Eileen Stein]

I would never judge a person because of what they chose do with their dogs.

 

Really?

 

I would judge a person for what they chose to do with their dogs if what they did was harmful to their dogs as individuals or harmful to the breed. You might not care if what they do is harmful to the breed, but I bet you'd judge them if what they did was harmful to their dogs.

 

But perhaps I'm wrong. Perhaps you do think that what isn't right for you might be right for Michael Vick, because it's all relative?

 

I would never judge you for not working sheep with your dog. I would never judge you for doing agility with your dog. Both are perfectly fine choices. But your dog does not need AKC competition to enjoy the pleasures of agility. So to justify supporting the AKC because "that is the only venue ( in my traveling range ) that offers numerous agility trials" -- well, I judge that excuse as pretty lame.

[IPSY]

"As for supporting AKC , that is the only venue ( in my traveling range ) that offers numerous agility trials. And I will continue to trial them unless another venue comes within traveling distance for me.

Like I stated before , my dogs and I enjoy it tremendously. You cant make a dog like agility , but when they do , its alot of fun and good exercise for both dog and handler.

 

I wish I had access to sheep more often , and we still might one day. But why should anybody be judged because they do other activities with their Border Collies. I appreciate and admire BC that work , but there are alot of other things these magnificant dogs can do."

 

Ipsy

 

Ipsy, I really sympathize with the lack of non-AKC sport venues in many places. It is frustrating. Every person has to make a decision to use the resources within their reach or "do without." I love to see dogs doing anything that they enjoy, that builds a good working relationship between dogs and their owners.

 

I've never gotten the impression here on the Boards that people look down on BC owners for doing activities other than stock work. What people deplore is breeding for activities other than stockwork.

 

You wanna do agility? I'm all for it! You go girl!

It is sort of afriendly game of dodge ball .

I will have to check back about the controversy over the breeding.

Just as a example, if I have two dogs that competed in agility and have done exptremely well and I decide to breed them and have another puppy from my two great dogs , that is a problem ? To who ? I wouldnt sell the remaining pups to anybody that I dont know, only to agility folk because I would have a better chance of knowing what kind of life they are going to have. And I may see them at the trials and watch their progress.

I dont see anything wrong with that.

[Sue R]

I will have to check back about the controversy over the breeding.

Just as a example, if I have two dogs that competed in agility and have done exptremely well and I decide to breed them and have another puppy from my two great dogs , that is a problem ? To who ? I wouldnt sell the remaining pups to anybody that I dont know, only to agility folk because I would have a better chance of knowing what kind of life they are going to have. And I may see them at the trials and watch their progress.

I dont see anything wrong with that.

I can't understand your being here as long as you have been and not seeing that what you wrote is the antithesis of what this board's philosophy is concerning breeding.

[Denise Wall]

Just as a example, if I have two dogs that competed in agility and have done exptremely well and I decide to breed them and have another puppy from my two great dogs , that is a problem ? To who ? I wouldnt sell the remaining pups to anybody that I dont know, only to agility folk because I would have a better chance of knowing what kind of life they are going to have. And I may see them at the trials and watch their progress.

I dont see anything wrong with that.

 

Every time you do that someone will not be able to breed two good working dogs because you have already used up the homes for the puppies. You are replacing the working population with non working border collies. Does that make more sense?

[geonni banner]

It is sort of afriendly game of dodge ball .

I will have to check back about the controversy over the breeding.

Just as a example, if I have two dogs that competed in agility and have done exptremely well and I decide to breed them and have another puppy from my two great dogs , that is a problem ? To who ? I wouldnt sell the remaining pups to anybody that I dont know, only to agility folk because I would have a better chance of knowing what kind of life they are going to have. And I may see them at the trials and watch their progress.

I dont see anything wrong with that.

 

Well, let's look at that.

 

Start with the big picture. Breeding a litter of pups for any reason is a problem IMO, if there are dogs "on the ground" that could do what's wanted. How many pound dogs are destroyed each year that could be great agility dogs?

 

You really want to do agility with Border Collies? Then why not get one from rescue or support a breeder of consistently fine stockdogs by purchasing your pups from him/ her? It takes a lot of experience to consistently produce dogs that have natural talent to do anything well. Putting a great agility dog to a great agility bitch does not guarantee that you will get great agility pups. You have similar or better odds of getting the talent you want by interviewing with good BC rescue folk.

 

In the meantime, the litter of pups you have produced will certainly not have improved or even maintained the potential stockdog talent that the sire and dam may have possesed. There is nothing wrong with a potential or proven stockdog doing agility, but there most certainly is a problem with a Border Collie who is not a proven stockdog being bred. Every time this happens the breed as a whole loses material from the reservoir of the ability which defines the breed.

 

Even wise, experienced and careful breeders of stockdogs will regularly produce pups of less-than-stellar stock working ability. These animals can and should have good homes. So why not take one home and do agility with it? Leave breeding to those with the knowledge and talent to maintain and improve upon their dogs' ability to do stockwork.

[Katelynn & Gang]

As a breeder, you should only be breeding to better the breed. In this case, breeding to better the breed is ONLY breeding dogs whose working ability is superior.

 

Any mutt off the street can do agility (or any sport for that matter), enjoy it and be good at it. Sports are just for fun, no one needs to depend on correct breeding to be successful at them or have fun.

 

Rachers and farmers do depend on their dogs and their breed to do things correctly becasue livestock and money depends on them.

 

Katelynn

[bcnewe2]

It is sort of afriendly game of dodge ball .

I will have to check back about the controversy over the breeding.

Just as a example, if I have two dogs that competed in agility and have done exptremely well and I decide to breed them and have another puppy from my two great dogs , that is a problem ? To who ? I wouldnt sell the remaining pups to anybody that I dont know, only to agility folk because I would have a better chance of knowing what kind of life they are going to have. And I may see them at the trials and watch their progress.

I dont see anything wrong with that.

 

Interesting thought. But I see it all the time. You don't mean me do you? I'm a good dog owner, I do things with my dogs. These dogs/puppies will have good homes, I will take back any that don't. That right there buys me the right to breed my dog(s).....

 

Most everyone always thinks they are the exception to the rule. Guess it's human nature. I for one am just dying to have the ability to say "I have dogs I think are worthy of breeding". My standards are what this board preaches. Not taking my cue from them but from my own observations and growth from learning to work stockdogs and seeing what a good stock dog can truely be.

Yes I'm vain enough to want to have that dog, but up till now, it hasn't happened. Makes me sad, because I sure want one! but also a testiment to how many dogs are out there that are truely not breed worthy (the dogs that I work/own come from very reputable breeders). If I can just have a dog that I can say that about, I'm not sure if I'd breed it or not. My ego would probably get the best of me, but at least I'm not letting it get in the way of me not breeding my beloved dogs who unfortunatly are not going to improve the gene pool.

 

Not really picking on Ipsy as I think she was just trying to make up an example statement to understand what is being said here.

I see it everywhere. Usually when I try to expain my thoughts on dog breeding, I'm met with eyes that have that far away look, like "poor lady, she doesn't even love her dogs enough to breed them". That is the true JoPublic thoughts and feelings that I have run into so far. I usually use my own dogs as examples so I don't offend some into not even listening if I said their dogs weren't "good enough"

[juliepoudrier]

There's more than enough being done of the "I'll breed my good agility/flyball/disc/pet dog" already. Why would we need more?

 

Sigh. It's been said here before, but I'll say it again: It's a problem to those of us who think purpose-bred dogs need to continue to be bred for the purpose for which they were intended. Not doing so starts us down the slippery slope of genetic drift. All the things that make border collies the winningest agility/flyball/disc. etc. dogs are there as the result of breeding for the whole package of the working stockdog. Genetic drift will surely change that, and not likely for the better. Sure it's your right to breed your dogs, but if more people would look at the big picture instead of just assuaging their own egos, many breeds of dog wouldn't be the mess they are in today (not to mention all the unwanted dogs out there).

 

J.

[IPSY]

Every time you do that someone will not be able to breed two good working dogs because you have already used up the homes for the puppies. You are replacing the working population with non working border collies. Does that make more sense?

No , it doesnt. If the people wanted a good dog for agility that came from two good agility dogs , and they bought one of them instead of your pup , thats completely wrong ? The people dnt want nothing to do with sheep and dont care if their dog ever sees a sheep. Wouldnt you want to keep your pups for someone that works the sheep then do agility ?

Thats what I cant understand .

[IPSY]

Interesting thought. But I see it all the time. You don't mean me do you? I'm a good dog owner, I do things with my dogs. These dogs/puppies will have good homes, I will take back any that don't. That right there buys me the right to breed my dog(s).....

 

Most everyone always thinks they are the exception to the rule. Guess it's human nature. I for one am just dying to have the ability to say "I have dogs I think are worthy of breeding". My standards are what this board preaches. Not taking my cue from them but from my own observations and growth from learning to work stockdogs and seeing what a good stock dog can truely be.

Yes I'm vain enough to want to have that dog, but up till now, it hasn't happened. Makes me sad, because I sure want one! but also a testiment to how many dogs are out there that are truely not breed worthy (the dogs that I work/own come from very reputable breeders). If I can just have a dog that I can say that about, I'm not sure if I'd breed it or not. My ego would probably get the best of me, but at least I'm not letting it get in the way of me not breeding my beloved dogs who unfortunatly are not going to improve the gene pool.

 

Not really picking on Ipsy as I think she was just trying to make up an example statement to understand what is being said here.

I see it everywhere. Usually when I try to expain my thoughts on dog breeding, I'm met with eyes that have that far away look, like "poor lady, she doesn't even love her dogs enough to breed them". That is the true JoPublic thoughts and feelings that I have run into so far. I usually use my own dogs as examples so I don't offend some into not even listening if I said their dogs weren't "good enough"

 

I was using my dogs as a expample. I dont plan on breeding any on MY dogs.

[IPSY]

There's more than enough being done of the "I'll breed my good agility/flyball/disc/pet dog" already. Why would we need more?

 

Sigh. It's been said here before, but I'll say it again: It's a problem to those of us who think purpose-bred dogs need to continue to be bred for the purpose for which they were intended. Not doing so starts us down the slippery slope of genetic drift. All the things that make border collies the winningest agility/flyball/disc. etc. dogs are there as the result of breeding for the whole package of the working stockdog. Genetic drift will surely change that, and not likely for the better. Sure it's your right to breed your dogs, but if more people would look at the big picture instead of just assuaging their own egos, many breeds of dog wouldn't be the mess they are in today (not to mention all the unwanted dogs out there).

 

J.

 

 

 

Well , it's a shame we dont agree on this issue. Its a matter of opinion.

[flyer]

I have to say that I have come to agree with this board's principle that BC's only be bred for stock working purposes, not just from reading this board and stock training books, but now from actual experience.

 

Not a scientific study by any means, but Colt's grandfather was a top agility dog. Bea is from a long line of stock working dogs as the farmer bred his own dogs for over forty years when needed. I love them both dearly and Colt is probably going to make a great agility dog, very athletic fellow, but Bea is something else altogether. She is a confident high drive individual with remarkable impulse control at a very young age. There is no doubt about her desire or ability to work stock. She would also make a good sport dog. Agile, fast and focussed.

 

If I could articulate the difference between working with each of them I would say that Colt works for me. Bea works with me. It is just a feeling I have, but I've had it for awhile now and it just gets stronger all the time. Now one could say it is just their personalities, but I think not. Many people watching me with each dog wouldn't see the difference as they are both so keen and obedient, but I can definitely feel it.

[IPSY]

As a breeder, you should only be breeding to better the breed. In this case, breeding to better the breed is ONLY breeding dogs whose working ability is superior.

 

Any mutt off the street can do agility (or any sport for that matter), enjoy it and be good at it. Sports are just for fun, no one needs to depend on correct breeding to be successful at them or have fun.

 

Rachers and farmers do depend on their dogs and their breed to do things correctly becasue livestock and money depends on them.

 

Katelynn

 

Great , but I own BC not for farming , but to enjoy sports together. The Boards arent only for farmers , its for people who love BC and the activities that you can do with them.

[Sue R]

I was using my dogs as a expample. I dont plan on breeding any on MY dogs.

Okay, understood, but by your example you obviously don't see anything wrong with anybody who feels that they have good agility (or you fill in the blank with whatever endeavor or sport you prefer) dogs to breed them. And that is so contrary to what everyone has been trying to explain (over and over again) concerning the breeding of Border Collies to maintain and improve the characteristics that make the breed so unique, useful, and adaptable.

 

And really, I'm addressing the "generic you" because what I'm saying applies to any and all who justify breeding for whatever reason suits themselves, no matter what the long-term consequences to the breed (or to the dogs languishing in the rescues and shelters) might be.

[Sue R]

Great , but I own BC not for farming , but to enjoy sports together. The Boards arent only for farmers , its for people who love BC and the activities that you can do with them.

As Katelynn and others have said over and over, it's not what you choose to do activity-wise with your dogs, it is simply an issue of reasons and justification for breeding. :D (in lieu of knocking head on brick wall emoticons)

[juliepoudrier]

Great , but I own BC not for farming , but to enjoy sports together. The Boards arent only for farmers , its for people who love BC and the activities that you can do with them.

Oh good GRIEF!! WHO has said this board is only for farmers? Who? No one. Why is it that people who don't believe in the underlying philosophy that governs these boards insist on coming here and arguing that it's perfectly okay to breed their sport, pet, etc. dogs? Why do you think Eileen has posted the READ THIS FIRST notice at the top of each discussion section? For her own jollies? Or because she really would like for board members to take heed of the foundational philosophy of this forum?

 

I guess I could counter your comment by saying that if you truly loved the border collie you wouldn't be arguing for breeding practices that will ulitmately fandamentally change what a border collie is. Haven't I read other statements from you regarding the sad state of the German Shepherd? Can you not see any similarities between the attitude that says it's okay to breed my sport dog or my conformation dog because *I don't want to work stock with that dog anyway* and the same attitude (I don't need a working shepherd it just has to look like what wins in the show ring) that has led to the demise of the German shepherd on the whole as a breed?

 

Oh, and I can't believe you really didn't understand Denise's point that working dogs make as good as or better agility dogs than sport bred dogs and so when you breed your sport dogs you really are taking away homes from properly working bred dogs. At least some sports folks are enlightened enough to understand that what made their dogs so great was the years of breeding for working ability that has gone into this breed. Too bad so many others are deliberately blind to that fact.

 

So go ahead and breed the hell out of your sport dogs and encourage all your friends to do the same. Just don't expect understanding and support here.

 

J.

[IPSY]

Really?

 

I would judge a person for what they chose to do with their dogs if what they did was harmful to their dogs as individuals or harmful to the breed. You might not care if what they do is harmful to the breed, but I bet you'd judge them if what they did was harmful to their dogs.

 

But perhaps I'm wrong. Perhaps you do think that what isn't right for you might be right for Michael Vick, because it's all relative?

 

I would never judge you for not working sheep with your dog. I would never judge you for doing agility with your dog. Both are perfectly fine choices. But your dog does not need AKC competition to enjoy the pleasures of agility. So to justify supporting the AKC because "that is the only venue ( in my traveling range ) that offers numerous agility trials" -- well, I judge that excuse as pretty lame.

 

Oh Ok. So if I give you my address and you can send the funds to fly my dogs and I to other venues ouside of my reach ? That would be nice .

You can count how many NADAC trials are in home range on one hand . Not enough for us.

Maybe a CPE and some UKC , but not nearly as many as AKC . I dont care if TRIPLE A ran a trial , I would participate in it because we love doing agility , not because of who is offering it.

 

I would never condone anything if it was harming a dog , any dog. I was only using my dogs and I as a example to breed. I have no intentions of breeding my dogs at all. And have no intentions of breeding BC in general. Its amazing how fast something said by one person can be turned around ! Now I am a bad breeder who breeds agility dogs to get agility dogs .

 

I can undrstand what you said about being harmful to the breed. I see your point of that. I look at that now differently.

But it doesnt make me any worse of a person if I dont breathe fire when someone talks about AKC agility.

I dont have the funds to go to flying all over to do USDAA or any other venue. I know there are tons of USDAA trials in California and I wish I could travel there , but one of my main competing dogs wouldnt be able to cope being on a plane so I would never put her on one. Does that make me a better person in light of the fact that I wouldnt never put my dog ona flight just so I didnt have to participate in a AKC agility trial ?Or should I jsut say the heck with it , throw her on a plane , not care if she makes it ok , just so I can fund USDAA instead of AKC ?

No , Im going to stay local and enjoy a sport with my dogs , no matter who offrs the trial.

[ejano]

There was a eukanuba dog show on the animal planet on last night and I just happened to flip to it has the 'herding' class was being presented. As a victim to my own curiosity I decided to watch to see what kind of barbies they paraded around the ring. Sure enough, just after the German Shepherd with his dwarfed back legs, the border collie was presented. What was especially disturbing was that the commentators ranted on about how perfect his markings were and how his broad chest would help him in the field. He also described the show ring as the dog's 'job' and how the dog was 'working' every time he stepped into the ring. I guess my dreams of my '30 lb not-flashy-at-all narrow-chested' Harper winning the Westminster are shot. Darn. I'll just have to do something productive with her.

 

 

 

At least the commentator didn't call the dog evil as the Westminster commentator did one year...he described the Border Collie's intelligence as "Evil" Good grief.

[ejano]

I have to say that I have come to agree with this board's principle that BC's only be bred for stock working purposes, not just from reading this board and stock training books, but now from actual experience.

 

Not a scientific study by any means, but Colt's grandfather was a top agility dog. Bea is from a long line of stock working dogs as the farmer bred his own dogs for over forty years when needed. I love them both dearly and Colt is probably going to make a great agility dog, very athletic fellow, but Bea is something else altogether and I really don't know her lines at all. She is a confident high drive individual with remarkable impulse control at a very young age.

 

If I could articulate the difference between working with each of them I would say that Colt works for me. Bea works with me. It is just a feeling I have, but I've had it for awhile now and it just gets stronger all the time. Now one could say it is just their personalities, but I think not. Many people watching me with each dog wouldn't see the difference as they are both so keen and obedient, but I can definitely feel it.

 

 

Your comment re: working for and working with is an interesting observation. I've seen the same distinction in several dogs as well. For example, Scotty wanted nothing better than to figure out what you wanted and do that thing. Ladybug tries to figure out how to get you to do what she wants...but she's always ready to learn a new game as a full partner in the enterprise. Both of those dogs were rescues and probably never saw a sheep until we took them to the boarding kennel, which is a working sheep farm.

 

 

With these new pups, tt is interesting to see how the genetics plays out. I know that Brodie has given every indication that he's got it" -- that package of characteristics and drive that make a stock dog what they are. Robin is more laid back....he's interested in stock (especially chickens, regrettably) and he'd work, I think, but he isn't as intense about the sheep as Brodie. He'd rather learn a new trick so he could show off what a clever fella he is. Of course, there's that whole nature vs. nurture thing. We'd intended Brodie for sheep for some time and Robin for obedience so perhaps we're "leading them" that way as well although they do have totally different personalities and temperaments.

 

Stand by....we start obedience rally training next week and sheep lessons when this darn snow melts....

 

Liz

[IPSY]

As Katelynn and others have said over and over, it's not what you choose to do activity-wise with your dogs, it is simply an issue of reasons and justification for breeding. :D (in lieu of knocking head on brick wall emoticons)

 

Anybody has a right to breed their dogs . Not everybody may agree with their reasons. You dont have to except it either. Take it up with those breeders ,Im sure this board has a long list of names . Dont take it up with the people who feel for the situation , but have a open opinion about it , take it up with the people who actually do the breeding !

I love those emoticons though

[IPSY]

 

 

Your comment re: working for and working with is an interesting observation. I've seen the same distinction in several dogs as well. For example, Scotty wanted nothing better than to figure out what you wanted and do that thing. Ladybug tries to figure out how to get you to do what she wants...but she's always ready to learn a new game as a full partner in the enterprise. Both of those dogs were rescues and probably never saw a sheep until we took them to the boarding kennel, which is a working sheep farm.

With these new pups, tt is interesting to see how the genetics plays out. I know that Brodie has given every indication that he's got it" -- that package of characteristics and drive that make a stock dog what they are. Robin is more laid back....he's interested in stock (especially chickens, regrettably) and he'd work, I think, but he isn't as intense about the sheep as Brodie. He'd rather learn a new trick so he could show off what a clever fella he is. Of course, there's that whole nature vs. nurture thing. We'd intended Brodie for sheep for some time and Robin for obedience so perhaps we're "leading them" that way as well although they do have totally different personalities and temperaments.

 

Stand by....we start obedience rally training next week and sheep lessons when this darn snow melts....

 

Liz

[geonni banner]

The following is long, I apologize for that. It is also my opinion only, and I don't apologize for that.

 

I don’t do agility. Not because I see anything wrong with it, but because I am physically challenged to a degree that my dog could run the course half a dozen times before I made it around just once. My knees are shot.

 

Ok, I have a question for all the agility people out there who are following this thread. Does your dog enjoy running an agility course set up in your back yard more or less than one in a competition environment? How about one set up in a park with a bunch of people who know each other, but are just running for practice?

 

What I’m getting at is this: If the dogs, in fact, love running the course as well at home as they do at a trial, then it is not a question of whether there are non-AKC competition venues available or not. It is a question of whether the owner enjoys competition or not.

 

My guess is, the dog doesn’t care whether he/she wins or not – especially since the dogs don’t run simultaneously – they run one at a time. It seems more likely that it is the owners who get a buzz out of the competition aspect of the sport.

 

So let’s be clear here. If you (and this is a rhetorical you, NOT aimed at any one person,) feel that you must attend events sponsored by the AKC in order to do agility, then what you are really saying is that you have to attend AKC events in order to get the bang of competing. It isn’t about the dog – it’s about you.

 

If you choose to do competition agility in AKC events, you are sending a message to everyone present that you condone the policies of the people who brought you the Barbie collie, the crippled GSD, the breathing-challenged Pug, etc. (Your entry fee also goes to promote and perpetuate these practices.) It doesn’t matter how you actually feel about the dog fancy and the breeding practices thereof. Your appearance at the event will be seen as a tacit acceptance of the AKC mindset.

 

It would seem to me that if running the agility course with your dog is most important to you because of the teamwork with the animal and your mutual enjoyment of the activity, then there is no reason to attend any competition that is put on by any group whose basic philosophy you disagree with.

 

Surely a group of like-minded enthusiasts for the sport of agility can find a way to meet on their own and have a great time running courses with their dogs.