Jump to content
BC Boards
Rorys mom

Registration, IBCA, health...

Recommended Posts

I have been searching on the boards for a few months now, and have learned a LOT.
I have been hesitant to ask any questions, as I am afraid I will be taken wrong or offend someone, which is not my intention. I HAVE read the "Read this first"

 

I have 3 border collies (one ABCA registered-Rory) and two non registered (because I just had a fishy feeling about the IBCA)
I didn't know much about any of the registries when I got my dogs. I just fell in love with the breed so I got Rory.

Later we decided to get one from a second litter (different dam and sire) since we managed to have the time and energy to meet the needs of our first bc and ended up with two because we didn't want the last one to just go to anyone.

 

Upon training my dog and learning more about the BC culture and herding etc. I found out Keevah and Ghost have Cindy McCoy/Swafford in their pedigree. Now that I know a lot more I am very glad I never paid the money to register them to the IBCA.

 

NOW I am taking them to see how they are in herding (we have only been once so far) and this registration thing has been on my mind way too much. Rory's bloodline apparently has some great dogs/handlers, but Keevah and Ghost's (if the IBCA is even true), is a huge mess of all the people that make the BC name bad (up until a certain point-where they were in wales/Scotland)

 

My question(s) are 1- should I be worrying about their health as much as I am now that I know where part of their pedigrees are from?

 

2- should I try to get them ROM'd if they show the working ability or would their name still look bad because of their history

 

3- is there anything you can't do without ABCA registration?

 

If any of my info is confusing just ask and I'll clarify. Thanks.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi. The only reason you would need the registration is if you were to breed them, which, given their ancestry, you would not ever want to do. You can work them on stock and enter any USBCHA (or NCA if you work cattle) trials with no registration. So, just have fun with them!

A

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good for you for learning how important proper breeding is!

 

I totally agree with Stockdogranch. Given your dogs' backgrounds, unless they should turn out to be unexpectedly stunning working dogs, they probably shouldn't be bred.

 

Registering a dog on merit is a difficult achievement for a reason. If you want to work and trial your dogs, do. If they're outstanding, sure, consider ROM if it makes you happy. But I'm not sure given the genetic background they have that breeding should be in their futures.

 

Enjoy your dogs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. You should not be worrying about their health as much as you are doing now. :-) That's not to say there are no health risks, but (a) many healthy dogs have come from these kennels, ( b ) at their ages you are safely past a number of health risks (coccidia, parvo, gross temperament issues, etc.) that might have cropped up, and ( c ) worrying will not change the outcomes.

 

2. It might be worth getting ROM if they turn out to be superior working dogs and genetically sound, but that's a consideration for way down the road. As others have said, they can participate in USBCHA and NCA trials without being registered.

 

3. Well, without ABCA registration, you can't receive ABCA prize money at the national finals (that too is a long way down the road), and you can't register with the AKC (not a consideration, I hope). Can't think of anything else that you'd need registration for.

 

Good decision on not registering with IBCA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for your replies! I don't plan on breeding them at all unless for some crazy wild reason they are amazing at working, but probably not even then and NEVER plan on registering them with the AKC.

ABCA prize money, haha wouldn't that be nice!

Again than you all, I feel a lot better now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But I'm not sure given the genetic background they have that breeding should be in their futures.

 

Enjoy your dogs.

Do you mean for health reasons? Just curious, I am still understanding all of this stuff and am continuing to learn everyday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10862558_10204623613929210_9176728676295

 

Keevah and Ghost wanted to say thanks for helping our momma and being so nice. Maybe we will meet some of you at the Bluegrass Classic in may!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would not breed them for both health and ethical reasons.

I would never breed a dog unless it were ethical, just to clarify for everyone. I was more concerned about the pedigree for health reasons.

When I emailed Cindy McCoy to find out more info, she said she quit the ABCA... I wondered if she thought I was really that ignorant. Her reasoning was "because they were so mean to people"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Liz' comment regarding ethical reasons, see the link below. The McCoys, Mary Ann Harrison, Kristen Campbell, and Richard Swafford were expelled from the ABCA for either unethical breeding practices or for not cooperating with ABCA's investigations into their breeding practices. (This of course means that Cindy McCoy lied to you about how her association with the ABCA ended.)

 

http://www.americanbordercollie.org/disciplineactions.html

 

As Eileen noted, certainly these breeders bred dogs that were healthy and had good temperaments, but falsification of pedigrees means that the pedigree information on your dogs may or may not be correct. And that's where the ethics of breeding from them comes in, because you can't know for sure that what you have is what the papers say you have.

 

J.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes but if the dog is admitted through ROM, which I gather is the only possibility for ABCA registration in this case, then the pedigree can simply be omitted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking for myself I would not be happy if I bought a pup from someone who ROMed a dog and then omitted the fact that the bloodlines were Swafford or MAH, etc. If I really liked a dog and wanted a pup off it, I'd still want to know what was behind it if that information were known. Then it's on me to choose to take my chances based on the dog in front of me and my knowledge of what's behind that dog. Just my opinion.

 

J.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Julie, both about the ethics involved here and that I would want full disclosure if the pedigree were known.

 

It would be one thing to ROM a dog that had been found as a stray and therefore no pedigree information were available. It would be entirely another, IMO, if the ROMed dog's pedigree were known but concealed because people might not want a pup with its lines.

 

Again, kudos to you for doing your research.

 

Oh, yeah, and cute dogs. :) The red dog on the left looks a lot like my Bodhi, who was picked up as a stray outside of Paris, KY. Wonder if they could be related? I've always suspected he was from a less than stellar breeding. Great dog, nonetheless. :wub:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree fully with Julie.

 

I lost trust in a breeder when I found out the pedigree of their ROM dog was known and purposefully omitted to circumvent an ABCA rule.

 

While those kennels did produce many health dogs, I've also known plenty with some serious health problems. You own your dogs, you love them. Stop worrying about what might happen and just do what you can to keep them healthy, like any other dog. Lesson learned. Buy from a better source next time, but by all means train these dogs on sheep. Nothing replaces hands on experience. If you do buy a dog worth breeding in the future, your time with these dogs will only help you make that decision more easily.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree fully with Julie.

 

I lost trust in a breeder when I found out the pedigree of their ROM dog was known and purposefully omitted to circumvent an ABCA rule.

 

While those kennels did produce many health dogs, I've also known plenty with some serious health problems. You own your dogs, you love them. Stop worrying about what might happen and just do what you can to keep them healthy, like any other dog. Lesson learned. Buy from a better source next time, but by all means train these dogs on sheep. Nothing replaces hands on experience. If you do buy a dog worth breeding in the future, your time with these dogs will only help you make that decision more easily.

 

Whoa! What rule would she be circumventing if she did not copy the pedigree info from the papers she has (IBCA papers, I assume) into an ABCA registration certificate? I understood Julie to be saying that it would be unethical to include that information because you could not assume that it was accurate, and therefore the pedigree is NOT known. The OP could present the dog's papers to the ABCA and acknowledge that in the circumstances there might be reason to doubt their accuracy. I can't say what the ABCA would do in that case, but my guess is that they would not include the pedigree info. These dogs are not tainted forever because they have ancestors who were (or may have been) bred by Swafford or McCoy. If they turn out to be excellent working dogs, and if they pass the strenuous working and health tests required for ROM, there is no reason not to admit them to our gene pool, along with dogs of equal quality whose pedigree is not known.

 

Again, all this is way down the road, and there's really no point in thinking about it before the dogs' quality becomes known and demonstrated. I can see an ethical issue in breeding them before that, but I can't see an ethical issue in applying for ROM if they have met the standards.

 

ETA: Gentle Lake, at least one Swafford dog I know of WAS found as a stray, and falsely registered by him as an offspring of a mating between two of his dogs. Had she been ROMed by a subsequent owner, I'm sure the "pedigree" would have been omitted from the ABCA certificate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The AKC champion rule for one dog I know of. Not this case. Different person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Liz' comment regarding ethical reasons, see the link below. The McCoys, Mary Ann Harrison, Kristen Campbell, and Richard Swafford were expelled from the ABCA for either unethical breeding practices or for not cooperating with ABCA's investigations into their breeding practices. (This of course means that Cindy McCoy lied to you about how her association with the ABCA ended.)

Oh I knew she lied to me before I emailed her, I just wanted to see what she had to say. The dog (Captain) was the last one to not be registered (assuming IBCA is accurate) which was owned by Brystol Reckner.. Does anyone know her? I can't get ahold of her I just want to know more info, but at this point it probably isn't worth my time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking for myself I would not be happy if I bought a pup from someone who ROMed a dog and then omitted the fact that the bloodlines were Swafford or MAH, etc. If I really liked a dog and wanted a pup off it, I'd still want to know what was behind it if that information were known. Then it's on me to choose to take my chances based on the dog in front of me and my knowledge of what's behind that dog. Just my opinion.

 

J.

That's how I assume most people would feel, but I would never lie about something like that (not saying you are saying I would).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Julie, both about the ethics involved here and that I would want full disclosure if the pedigree were known.

 

It would be one thing to ROM a dog that had been found as a stray and therefore no pedigree information were available. It would be entirely another, IMO, if the ROMed dog's pedigree were known but concealed because people might not want a pup with its lines.

 

Again, kudos to you for doing your research.

 

Oh, yeah, and cute dogs. :) The red dog on the left looks a lot like my Bodhi, who was picked up as a stray outside of Paris, KY. Wonder if they could be related? I've always suspected he was from a less than stellar breeding. Great dog, nonetheless. :wub:

Thanks. Who knows they may be!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoa! What rule would she be circumventing if she did not copy the pedigree info from the papers she has (IBCA papers, I assume) into an ABCA registration certificate? I understood Julie to be saying that it would be unethical to include that information because you could not assume that it was accurate, and therefore the pedigree is NOT known. The OP could present the dog's papers to the ABCA and acknowledge that in the circumstances there might be reason to doubt their accuracy. I can't say what the ABCA would do in that case, but my guess is that they would not include the pedigree info. These dogs are not tainted forever because they have ancestors who were (or may have been) bred by Swafford or McCoy. If they turn out to be excellent working dogs, and if they pass the strenuous working and health tests required for ROM, there is no reason not to admit them to our gene pool, along with dogs of equal quality whose pedigree is not known.

 

Again, all this is way down the road, and there's really no point in thinking about it before the dogs' quality becomes known and demonstrated. I can see an ethical issue in breeding them before that, but I can't see an ethical issue in applying for ROM if they have met the standards.

 

ETA: Gentle Lake, at least one Swafford dog I know of WAS found as a stray, and falsely registered by him as an offspring of a mating between two of his dogs. Had she been ROMed by a subsequent owner, I'm sure the "pedigree" would have been omitted from the ABCA certificate.

If anyone would care to look at the IBCA and type in "Rosie" -then it would be captain beside there.

Captian must have not been registered because they were kicked out in 2006 and captain was born in 2008 if I'm reading it right. I just wonder if anyone knows the past breeders. I really would like to know an accurate pedigree whether they end up being ROM'd or not.

I know I shouldn't worry but I just ruminate on things.

Not sure if this link will take you to the site, http://cloud.easypedigreedb.com/ibca/195

 

You can go past more pedigrees too.

Thanks guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FYI, numerous mistakes have been found on that database. Would not trust it at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...