Jump to content
BC Boards

Bridging division between Working Border Collie Tradition vs. “Working” Agility Dogs+Other Disciplines


Recommended Posts

... The stellar MACH handler has real and consistent placings (1st, 2nd, 3rd place) real ranks in the National competitions. Many of them also teach and instruct as well, like my friend. Finally, the way a MACH breeder gets to be a responsible breeder is by having CLOSE FRIENDS AND RELATIONS WITH PEOPLE ON THIS BOARD who do have the sheepherding experience, advice and expertise....

This thread is surreal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 801
  • Created
  • Last Reply
you have Warren Buffet who dares speak the truth about corruption and things not being right or fair

 

You might want to look into that angle a little better seeing as one of his companies is currently suing the IRS to avoid paying over 600 million in taxes.

 

Now I don't know the back story on that, but it does go to show that large corporations most always make choices based on money. So if one of Warren Buffett's companies is making a decision based on money after he came out with an article about closing tax loopholes, tax breaks, etc, how much more will the AKC a large that corporation that has supported puppy mills for years? I mean seriously, most everyone understands the evils of puppy mills and the AKC still supports them!!

 

If you don't have MACH in AKC you are merely a hobbyist handler and "pet owner" of the B.C.

 

You'll have a hard time bridging gaps with a view like that. You won't be able to bridge gaps in the agility world let alone the the stockdog world. If the AKC looks down on people in that way, why should others want to (let alone try to) hold the olive branch out to them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You'll have a hard time bridging gaps with a view like that. You won't be able to bridge gaps in the agility world let alone the the stockdog world.

 

Indeed. I guess I am still confused what you are getting at here with the "MACH handler" statements...why would someone with good handling skills necessarily have the knowledge and skills needed to breed dogs for any reason, much less to maintain the needed livestock ability?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't compete in agility, have "played" a little...just not enought time to to do EVERYTHING with work/kids/dogs/etc...so sheepdog trials and competitive obedience are my thing :) BUT I know many well respected "MACH handlers" in the area as MN is a hotspot for some of the best agility trainers/hanlders around so I've heard??

 

From what I understand there are many venues to compete in for agility, but to earn an AKC MACH is to be the best of the best so to speak?? And when the competition is as stiff as it is around here, and it's not just about qualifying or getting titles..but winning the classes by fractions of seconds...takes ULTRA talented trainers and dogs??

 

 

I know ALOT of people who compete in agility just for fun which is TOTALLY cool!! It's fun for the trainer and dog!! I've always wanted to try it!! Really get into it!!

 

But like all competitive events there are the really awesome trainers/handlers and dogs..ALL trials I've seen either obedience/agility/herding all have about %80 people who are just trying to "make it through"..make it through the course, get the title, qualify....and then there are those %20 trying to win it!!

 

I think this person is generally reffering to that type of person as a "MACH trainer" even if they compete in a different agility venue...someone who is respected as a top competitor??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think there is any shame in recognizing the top trainers/handlers at all....I still watch Alasdair Macrae run a dog in AWE..jaw open...then go back the field and try and get better!!! I would never try and compare myself to him..or others capable of winning an open trial!! OMG the mere thought of getting around is mind boggling!!! I DO want to be there some day but I can recognize my training/handling skills compared to someone who has perfected there craft enough to WIN over all others, are PEANUTS!!

 

Same with competitive obedience!! And I'm sure it is the same with Agility!! I know everyone has there own goals and I don't want to take away from novice people who have reached them, but I hope this person isn't getting flack for recognizing some of the top competitive people in her chosen sport and wanting to get there themselves someday..

 

I was the same way when first starting out..knew I wanted to excel at whatever I got into..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...I hope this person isn't getting flack for recognizing some of the top competitive people in her chosen sport and wanting to get there themselves someday..

 

No, no, that isn't the issue at all.

 

The down home issue at hand is breeding practices. The border collie is, IMHO, the best herding breed in the world. They are the product of centuries of selective breeding for their working ability. This can, in part, come down to intelligence, problem solving ability, biddability (sp?), stamina, desire, control, balance, agility, stock sense, temperament, courage and so on.

 

In Agility, the dog is given explicit directions on which obstacles to tackle... how does that prove to expand the breed's intelligence and problem solving abilities versus a dog you tell "bring in the sheep" and the dog does it on his own?

 

Agility courses are, what, two to three minutes at high speed? Maybe a little longer depending on the course? How would that burst assist breeders in knowing a dog's stamina and whether the dog could work for 12 hours? Or even three hours?

 

What about balance and stock sense? There is no way to see that in Agility.

 

Courage? Not even close to the same level.

 

And control. Without a doubt, it does take a decent amount of handler control to handle your dog in an Agility ring; however, that's not the type of control I'm talking about. There needs to be strong self control for a dog to not get distracted when working sometimes out of sight of the shepherd... and to not get overly excited grip/kill stock.

 

The only way to test these qualities in a dog is to put her stock because you just can't see it in the Agility ring.

 

As for the AKC Agility "MACH handlers" being "the best of the best," I really, truly just cannot see that. The whole argument of AKC Agility being more "practical" is a bit alien to me. Personally, I think it's harder to train some of the UKC Agility obstacles. I can see the sway bridge having a practical application to SAR and the open tunnels that the dogs have to crawl through having practical application for war dogs... or any dog that has to crawl under barb wire. The blind jumps in the UKC definitely require a high level of trust in your dog that you won't have her jump off a cliff. I competed under both UKC and AKC rules in rally, formal obedience, and agility, and it is sooooo much easier, IMO, to get a Q under AKC rules. As for placing... well that also depends on the day's competition, so I really don't see what any of that has to do with keeping the border collie lines true, much less bettering the breed, because you will lose critical elements that make the border collies what they are.

 

People here who have been herding longer than I have can probably answer this: While you can get some sense from an instinct test how a border collie will react on stock, would you say a clear picture on the dog's true stock worth depends on the length of time on stock and different situations? And a difference between practical stock work and herding trials?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope this person isn't getting flack for recognizing some of the top competitive people in her chosen sport and wanting to get there themselves someday..

Of course not. That isn't my point. The way Serena described them "If you don't have MACH in AKC you are merely (emphasis mine) a hobbyist handler and "pet owner" of the B.C." makes it sound like if you aren't already as good as they are, you are beneath them. When did "hobbyist handler" and "pet owner" become dirty words? As far as I'm concerned, unless somebody is making enough money doing agility to support themselves, they are all "hobbyists". And are the dogs not also their pets?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

As for the AKC Agility "MACH handlers" being "the best of the best," I really, truly just cannot see that. The whole argument of AKC Agility being more "practical" is a bit alien to me. Personally, I think it's harder to train some of the UKC Agility obstacles. I can see the sway bridge having a practical application to SAR and the open tunnels that the dogs have to crawl through having practical application for war dogs... or any dog that has to crawl under barb wire. The blind jumps in the UKC definitely require a high level of trust in your dog that you won't have her jump off a cliff. I competed under both UKC and AKC rules in rally, formal obedience, and agility, and it is sooooo much easier, IMO, to get a Q under AKC rules. As for placing... well that also depends on the day's competition, so I really don't see what any of that has to do with keeping the border collie lines true, much less bettering the breed, because you will lose critical elements that make the border collies what they are.

 

 

 

I'd like to cast a vote for SAR and assistance dog trainers as the 'best of the best' -- the things that assistance and SAR dogs can do make agility courses seem silly and trivial. People literally entrust their lives to assistance dogs. Every time I see a blind person with an assistance dog, I am so impressed I get a lump in my throat. Talk about dogs making a difference to humans, the tire jump is nowhere in that equation! I still have a photo of a SAR dog and its handler at Ground Zero on 9/11, they are taking a break and leaning on each other and it's an incredibly moving glimpse of that relationship.

 

Seriously, I've never teared up watching a dog do agility.

 

Also, I enjoyed UKC agility a lot when my dogs did it, and the variety of obstacles was much more of a challenge to them, I felt, than just speed and jump height. The sway bridge and the swing plank were two things that tested a dog's willingness to walk (or run) on unstable surfaces, for instance. I just don't get the whole AKC worship thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am so confused I can't even tell what's being discussed.

 

Set me striaght...

The OP thinks that if you are a MACH handler then you are comparable to a Top Open Competive Sheepdog trialer?

 

And only if you are a Mach person or an Open handler can you work to bridge the gap that exisists between sport and working dog breeders? Of that if you are neither then you are a hobby dog person???

 

Still can't seem to understand even my own words.

 

I respect people who are running in the top of their choosen fields of dog work/sport but would NEVER buy a dog from anyone that isn't working thier dogs on livestock.

That being said, I don't have to buy my dog from a top handler, merely a person dedicated to preserving and bettering the working dog and they have good dogs.

 

Example:

I don't have money or time to trial at the moment. I have never ran in an open trial but have been working with working stock dogs for over 14 years. I trust myself to pick dogs that I would want pups out of. By merely watching the dogs do their work. On or off the trial field. There are lots of dogs out there not running in trials that are wonderful dogs. Owned by folks that are normal people who like me enjoy working with the best dogs they can find.

 

Doesn't take titles or wins to convince me of quality of dogs. Takes a dog that is doing great at where ever it might find it's self doing it's work.

Open handlers can certainly showcase their dogs quicker or easier but surely that is not the only way.

 

So tell me, am I understanding the OP correctly....you have to be a MACH handler or Open dog trialer placing in the top to be qualified to know how to breed and run dogs?

 

Shushhhhhh....don't tell my dogs. They will be disapointed in me! :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What the HH is this?

 

 

What has to change is the hearts and motivation of people.

 

 

And

 

I think have a cup of really hot strong tea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I understand there are many venues to compete in for agility, but to earn an AKC MACH is to be the best of the best so to speak?? And when the competition is as stiff as it is around here, and it's not just about qualifying or getting titles..but winning the classes by fractions of seconds...takes ULTRA talented trainers and dogs??

 

There is no doubt that a MACH is very difficult to earn and that anyone who earns one has put tons of work into getting there. Certainly it requires a dog and handler team with talent, the right chemistry, and good and committed training.

 

At the same time, not all Agility participants choose AKC. No AKC competition = no MACH by default. Yet, many of those participants are part of a dog and handler team with just as much talent, excellent team chemistry, and train just as well and put as much work into participation in the venue of their choice as those who choose AKC competition.

 

As far as the MACH being the best of the best, it would be one measure. The USDAA championship title is certainly a prestigious one, as well.

 

But when it comes to the "best of the best" most think of those who make the world team as that.

 

And while I realize that there are top handlers in any discipline who will lord it over everyone else, the vast majority of MACH title holders that I know, world team handlers that I've met, and handlers that I would personally consider among the best of the best are 100% respectful of both the venue choices of others and the work that teams that have not attained those particular honors put into their individual teams.

 

Maybe this is different in other regions.

 

None of this is to say that those who have gotten to the highest levels don't deserve some accolades for getting there. As far as respect, I base my own more on the respect that a handler shows for his or her fellow Agility participants and his or her dog than on any title.

 

But like all competitive events there are the really awesome trainers/handlers and dogs..ALL trials I've seen either obedience/agility/herding all have about %80 people who are just trying to "make it through"..make it through the course, get the title, qualify....and then there are those %20 trying to win it!!

 

And who is anyone to say that those who are trying to "make it through" aren't working their rear ends off to do so?

 

That was the point at hand - that top competitors "work" at Agility with their dogs and those who are not at the highest levels do not, and so are merely "hobbyists". That is the point on which I disagree.

 

That is not to negate the work it takes to get to the top.

 

Sure, some handlers don't work at this discipline. Some do literally train to the minimum and go out and have fun. But the fact that a given dog/handler team is not at the top levels and/or may be struggling is in no way an indicator of whether the team is "working at it" or not.

 

The fact of the matter is, unless you walk a mile in a given team's shoes, or unless you work with that team very closely, you have no idea how much work that team puts into Agility. Do you (general you, not you-you) think the top handlers didn't start working at it until they earned their MACH's or made the world team? Of course not. Much of the hardest work goes into the foundation, learning how to train and handle in the first place, working through the challenges along the way, and everything it takes to get from the first training session to the accolade in question.

 

. . . but I hope this person isn't getting flack for recognizing some of the top competitive people in her chosen sport and wanting to get there themselves someday..

 

Not at all.

 

I disagree with the OP on two points:

 

1. That AKC and USDAA are the only "authentic" Agility venues.

 

Indeed, all of the venues bring something unique to the sport, whether that be in a certain games format, and emphasis on a certain type of handling, perhaps a unique piece of equipment, etc. etc. etc.

 

While AKC and USDAA are the more prestigious venues, all of the others are, indeed, just as authentically Agility and are valid venue choices for any dog and handler team who prefers any among them.

 

2. That those who have a MACH "work at" Agility and those who do not, do not do so.

 

This is not a matter of aspiring to get to the highest levels, but making a judgment on the amount of work that teams put into Agility.

 

Take a team with a dog that is reactive to other dogs, and the handler may well put 10 times the work into just getting to the point where the dog can step into the ring at a trial than a handler with a normal dog puts into getting a MACH. Take a team with a handler that is not athletically inclined and must develop a certain level of fitness and coordination before even starting in the lowest level at any venue, and you have a person who is "working at it".

 

There is a much bigger picture to Agility than the highest level titles. Sure, those are great to aspire to if one keeps some measure of humility and realism in the process. But Agility is about far more than earning a MACH. Especially for those who choose not to participate in AKC at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I apologize for my confusing post..I didn't mean AT ALL to say that novice handlers don't work JUST as hard as people who attain the highest levels of the sport!! I would say they sometimes work even harder!!! And yes, it can take countless years to gain the knowledge and expertise to get to that level...or you get the young guns in that are just naturally great and excel quite quickly. However they are get there the people at the top of any given sport are there because they excel above the others.

 

And I didn't mean to make the "MACH" the be all end all defintion of success in agility..I am sure there are many equivilants with different organizations..I just don't know them because I don't know agility. I just know the MACH like the AKC OTCH is earned based on placements..and points earned by beating other competition. I'm sure the USDAA championship is similar and the ADCH?? I know can be difficult to attain but is similar??

 

I also ONLY believe in breeding the border collie for stockwork, and from my experience I have seen PLENTY of amazing agility dogs from strait sheepdog lines, the issue is supply and demand from my perspective. Most agility people I know will not bother going to a stockdog breeder because A) a stockdog breeder won't sell them a pup knowing it will be used for agility primarily B) They just aren't educated enough ....I remember when first starting out in dogs a few years ago there were ALL kinds of rumors surrounding working border collies. I got completely freaked out on buying one from a stockdog breeder!! I would hear things about sheepdogs being to high strung, the breeders don't do health tests, they're to "WEIRD" and "Quirky"....I of course know better now, but it gave me some insight into what some border collie people in the sport world really think...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MACH stands for Master Agility Champion title awarded by AKC (American Kennel Club). To achieve this title the dog and the handler must compete as a team earning first Novice, Open, Excellent and then Master Titles. There are two types of courses at the competitions: Standard which includes the contact equipment (A-frame, bridge, teeter and table) and the Jumpers with Weaves. The Novice, Open and Excellent (A) titles require three qualifying runs with progressively harder requirements and courses. The Master titles requires 10 perfect runs at the Excellent B Level. Qualifying runs at the Excellent B level also earn one speed point for each full second under course time(partial seconds are eliminated.). Once the team is competing with both runs in one day at the Excellent B level they start to accumulate "Double Q's". A team earns a Double Q when they qualify 100% perfect on both runs in one day. To earn the MACH title, the team must have 20 double Q's and 750 points!
http://www.machdiva.com/machpage.htm

 

 

All I see is $$$$ for both clubs and AKC.

 

I have a couple of friends that are trying to earn MACH's on their dogs, while I respect their decision to do it I can't help but wonder why, aside from wanting to, which is fine.

 

I'm cool with people setting a goal, but in one case the owner is cash strapping herself and the dog is being pushed past his mental capacities temperment wise. The dog has made gains, but I think they are approaching the as good as it gets threshhold, there will be lots of road dust inhailed in an attempt to gain the rest of the points.

 

I try to remind her to balance learning and expirence with what is best for the dog, if she is not learning anything or doesn't need the ring expirence just save the money and wait on the next dog, which is a pup that is showing a natural want to engage and readily addresses agility obstacles. Whereas, her other dog would rather just be a dog, thinking he would be a hermit if he was a person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Taz's sister earned a MACH. Guess that means we're all set for her to have pups any day now...not.

Well, according to this

Finally, the way a MACH breeder gets to be a responsible breeder is by having CLOSE FRIENDS AND RELATIONS WITH PEOPLE ON THIS BOARD who do have the sheepherding experience, advice and expertise.

a number of people on this board would qualify to be breeders.

 

OP, I have a next door neighbor who is a nurse. I also have a 1st cousin who is an emergency doctor. That does NOT qualify me to work as either. Your excuse as to why sports breeders should breed does not make sense, especially if they think agility is the same as working stock. The fact there are people out there that think like that is scary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me the unique thing about the border collies is their relationship with humans, called biddability. This biddability is a feature that allows the dog to hear and listen to their boss in spite of their tremendous work drive based in a primeval instinct. Derek Scrimegour wrote, that there is no reason "why would he do anything for you in the first place". It is something really big that makes a dog overcome its desires out of its own free will, when she makes the choice to listen to the voice of her boss. To me, this is what makes a border collie a border collie. Not being stockwork savvy alone, but having the unique ability to overcome this tremendous desire in order to work with a human as a team.

 

This feature is present in very few herding breeds. I have seen many non-bcs working stock and it wasn't the lack of skill that struck me as negative, but the lack of biddability coupled with low work drive, which seems to be the norm. In practice, the handler has to balance between an out of control, disobedient dog, and a dog that just walks way. But tht's a non-border collie.

 

This feature of border collie's character is only testable with livestock and is only reliably tested in the presence of high work drive. A champion in obedience ring can blow off the handler with a dedication worthy of a much better cause. I have seen it many times - dogs that have a low drive to herd sheep and yet, and yet their handler has to always go into the ring armed with an arsenal of scaring tools and over and over and over leaves the training area hoarse.

 

In my opinion, the loss of this feature - the desire to work with a human in the face of (almost) overwhelming desire to work - will in time translate into a different dog also away from the sheep.

 

When I was raising my Bonnie, lots of people just couldn't believe I was training her without treats, and many prophesied a great training disaster for us. I am not against training with treats, I am just saying that many people don't really realize what these dogs are like, and and many dogs indeed are not like that anymore.

 

Maja

 

Maja, thank you for a great explanation of this. You said it so well. Your post should be pinned up somewhere for all the newcomers with similar questions to read. These dogs are fantastic at so many things. They dominate in many of the dog sports and are unparalleled at stock work. And yet sport people come along and think they can improve on them by breeding for sports. I don't understand that thinking - you only have to look at what type of breeding selection produced this great dog, and why would you ever want to deviate from what has worked so well and breed with different selection criteria than what produced the dog in the first place?

 

Change the criteria and you will eventually change the dog. There are a lot of good trainers in dog sports. As the breed quality starts to slip due to different breeding selection, they'll just make up for it with good training. So like an invisible cancer, the changes will eat away at what the breed is, until someday you look around and realize all the border collies you see are just like any other dog and no longer the incredibly unique and wonderful dogs they are today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know I don't really fit in around here, since I participate in AKC events with my rescue, but I wanted to say this...

 

If you don't have MACH in AKC you are merely a hobbyist handler and "pet owner" of the B.C. Note, I'm only talking about those with AKC registered dogs.

 

...is not the prevailing attitude from people I know who do AKC agility, including the many handlers I know who have acheived MACH titles on their dogs. Just sayin'.

 

And speaking of MACH, I'm pretty sure I'll get one with my little rescue dog some day, as long as our health holds out. If we do, that makes me no more qualified to breed border collies than any other Joe Schmo out there! It boggles my mind to think that anyone should think it would. :blink:

 

I'm kind of confused over the whole thread. (Surreal is a good description). I think it's pretty simple, really. There are two groups of people, one which believes that border collies should ONLY be bred from proven stockworking parents, in order to continue to breed good working dogs that have not lost the important qualities that make border collies, well, border collies. Then you have another group of people who think it's ok to breed border collies for any other number of reasons, but none of them to preserve the working ablility. There will never be any bridging of a gap between these two groups. I can hope that people in the latter group would chose to join the ranks of the first, but I know that it won't happen the other way around, and for that I'm glad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm kind of confused over the whole thread. (Surreal is a good description). I think it's pretty simple, really. There are two groups of people, one which believes that border collies should ONLY be bred from proven stockworking parents, in order to continue to breed good working dogs that have not lost the important qualities that make border collies, well, border collies. Then you have another group of people who think it's ok to breed border collies for any other number of reasons, but none of them to preserve the working ablility. There will never be any bridging of a gap between these two groups. I can hope that people in the latter group would chose to join the ranks of the first, but I know that it won't happen the other way around, and for that I'm glad.

 

I think you nailed it, Paula.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I didn't mean to make the "MACH" the be all end all defintion of success in agility..I am sure there are many equivilants with different organizations..I just don't know them because I don't know agility. I just know the MACH like the AKC OTCH is earned based on placements..and points earned by beating other competition. I'm sure the USDAA championship is similar and the ADCH?? I know can be difficult to attain but is similar??

 

 

You don't need to beat other dogs to earn a MACH. It requires 20 double Q's (qualifying in both standard and jumpers courses on the same day) and 750 points. You earn a point for every second under Standard Course Time. Admittedly a dog who only earns one or two points per run is going to take a long time to earn a MACH or maybe will never get one. But you can earn a MACH without ever winning a single placement. Think about it - it's a title that a basset hound can earn (I'm sure there is at least one MACH basset out there) - so is that saying that a MACH border collie is super high quality and should be bred because it can accomplish something that a short legged, unathletic, independent minded breed of dog can accomplish? A MACH is not a true test of anything IMO. Or any agility title for that matter. MANY breeds do quite well at agility. I only know of ONE breed that is the supreme stockdog.

 

USDAA ADCH does require a 'super Q' where you come in the top whatever-percent of the Snooker class (you do not have to win it) but snooker is based mostly on strategy of getting the higher point obstacles, which are purposely put in places that are harder to get to without incurring faults, so it's more of a strategy and handling skills thing than a speed thing, and is more a showcase of handler skill than dog skill. The rest of the ADCH requirements are just more qualifications in lots of different things, you don't need to get placements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't need to beat other dogs to earn a MACH. It requires 20 double Q's (qualifying in both standard and jumpers courses on the same day) and 750 points. You earn a point for every second under Standard Course Time. Admittedly a dog who only earns one or two points per run is going to take a long time to earn a MACH or maybe will never get one. But you can earn a MACH without ever winning a single placement. Think about it - it's a title that a basset hound can earn (I'm sure there is at least one MACH basset out there) - so is that saying that a MACH border collie is super high quality and should be bred because it can accomplish something that a short legged, unathletic, independent minded breed of dog can accomplish? A MACH is not a true test of anything IMO. Or any agility title for that matter. MANY breeds do quite well at agility. I only know of ONE breed that is the supreme stockdog.

 

Yes, this!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think about it - it's a title that a basset hound can earn (I'm sure there is at least one MACH basset out there) - so is that saying that a MACH border collie is super high quality and should be bred because it can accomplish something that a short legged, unathletic, independent minded breed of dog can accomplish? A MACH is not a true test of anything IMO. Or any agility title for that matter. MANY breeds do quite well at agility. I only know of ONE breed that is the supreme stockdog.

 

 

This is a great explanation!

 

Serena, simple facts like THIS is why I'm saying you making tons of analogies to ice skating or artists or anything else is obscuring the point and IMO not very helpful to the discussion. Dogs are not people. We could talk about ice skating all day and it would only have certain parallels to agility, and a lot of other issues that are completely different.

 

I still would like you to speak to my direct question - if you DO hate/disagree with the AKC and what it has done/is doing to dog breeds, especially the Border Collie, 1) why would you support them while making gestures like signing petitions they'll NEVER care about (my point about your ACTIONS of support meaning much, much more than signing some website), and 2) rather than bang you head against a brick wall that doesn't care and is happy to take your money, why not simply choose another venue and petition that venue to have tire jumps if you think they are that important, or work with the local club to get more trials in your area?

 

If you don't hate the AKC, or don't feel that the amount of support you give them really matters in the big scheme of things, if you strongly prefer AKC agility to any other style, in other words if you are comfortable supporting them and you have no plans ever to join another venue, why not just own that? You don't have to think like everyone here. There are respected board members who choose to patronize AKC events. Many of us would never do so, but it is a personal choice. I guess what irritates me about your position is that you are trying to have your cake and eat it too - you want to play with AKC but by organizing feeble attempts to change them (that will not work no matter how many monthly petitions you sign) and throwing up a lot of smokescreen arguments about how you're "forced" to do this, you want to be able to keep what you perceive as the moral high ground.

 

After all the great posts on this thread by Jovi and Kristine and cjhonna and Diana, it is clear to me a serious agility person does NOT have to patronize AKC to build handling skills and test and develop your dog's skills, and to really accomplish wonderful things as a partnership. The best argument I've seen for why someone "has" to choose AKC is a scarcity of other organization's trials in your area....but again with all the desire you have for change my assertion is it would be a LOT easier to get one of these other venues to simply have more trials in your area than to get the AKC to change one iota of anything it does or its philosophy. If you'd rather sign petitions that do nothing, fine, but my point is WHY bother. Just OWN your choice, realize what sorts of consequences and meaning the support you give the organization has, and recognize your choice AS a choice, and not something you are forced into. Because ISTM to argue as you are is that it's not a choice is disingenuous, hypocritical, and won't help to bridge any gaps at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You talk about how the AKC is a terrible organization, but haven't stated why you feel it is so bad. The philosophy of this board and most of its members is that the AKC is ruinous to the border collie because it promotes breeding for reasons other than preserving the traits of the world's premier stockdog. You, however, advocate breeding for agility with dogs not tested on stock at all (as long as their handlers are MACH title holders and somewhere back down in the dog's lineage a genuine stockdog appears every now and then). This practice of breeding border collies for any reason other than preserving working ability is exactly what the AKC promotes, so I can't quite figure out why you see the AKC as bad for border collies.

 

Perhaps instead of talking about getting someone to organize petitions (because it sounds like you don't actually even want to be the one organizing this campaign, you'd just like to suggest it and have someone else take the reins), you should spend some time researching this issue in general. Because no offense, but it sounds like you are just making things up as you go along without any regard to what those outside your tiny circle of friends think or having any consistency in your own opinions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...