Working bred versus sports bred ... interesting conversations with top competitors

[borasaurus]

Sorry, I just finally got to read through the whole thread, lol. No one is saying you can't use your dog for anything other than stock work. But the traits that make a border collie such a good stockdog are what allow it to excel in other things.

[CptJack]

Labs have a breed standard that includes more than 'the ability to work stock'.

 

Border Collies did not until the AKC got them.

And no one here is talking about calling the dogs a different breeds based on what they DO, but based on what they were BRED to do.

Would you call anyone who was breeding against every element of a standard a good breeder? Even if you didn't call that dog a different breed, would you call someone deliberately breeding outside EVERY ELEMENT of a breed standard a reputable, good, breeder who was breeding to better the breed?

 

I doubt it.

Just with BCs.

[alligande]

Chanse, the problem with your vision is a very simple one, by breeding for other purposes you dilute what makes a border collie a sheepdog. What the very passionate board members are saying is that a dog bred to work livestock can do anything, a dog bred for sports or any other purpose probably can't and they don't want those dogs entering the gene pool. Take a look at a lot of the hunting breeds many are no longer fit to hunt, the same with the terrier group, and very few dogs from the pastoral group are fit for purpose... This is the fate that this group is determined to avoid for the border collie in the US. A number of members are in the UK and their situation is different as the gene pool of the breed is so much greater and a great many people there appreciate what a working sheepdog can do.

Long before I found these boards I have been a supporter of only breeding for working ability, since being part of this community those fees have hardened and I am more able to articulate why.

I started this thread because I was thrilled to be talking to very serious agility competitors who are also professionals as teaching the sport is their livelihood who had made a conscious decision to get working bred dogs, as in the States most of the top competitors I have known seemed to get their dogs from other top competitors.

[juliepoudrier]

I think the missing ingredient in this argument, as has already been said, is that border collies are so exceptional at everything else precisely BECAUSE they were bred/developed for work. The genetics behind that are complex and if not selected for with every generation they begin to shift.

 

As with many things, if you observe the border collies as a breed on a daily basis you might not notice the changes, but those changes are there.

 

Sport bred dogs might be wonderful, but they have no need to be able to "read" and instantly react to another nonhuman species' actions or intent. Working dogs read and react to both the human and the livestock. There's no way to select for that in a situation where only the dog and a human (and inanimate objects) interact. There's no way to select for the independent thought (even though I could chase it and kill it I must not; it's okay to bite the aggressive ewe on the nose, but I should coddle the newborn lamb, etc.), for multitasking (listen to the human and control the stock, even if that means disobeying on some occasions) without actually working the dog on stock and then breeding those that do it well.

 

The point is that people breeding for other attributes or only some of the attributes contained in the genetics of the working dog are changing the genetics of those dogs, whether they intend to or not.

 

It's easy to say, "no harm, no foul," but just like a situation where you watch a dog change over time and don't really notice it because it's gradual (when did my best friend become old and so feeble?), the slightly changed becomes the norm and by the time you realize that the norm is nothing like the original, it's too late to go back and stop it or fix it.

 

So it's not so much about anyone's individual dog, but the survival of the breed as a whole. I don't care of people call their pets border collies or anything else as long as they recognize that what makes a the breed what it is--its very essence--is based in the dogs who were created to work stock. Move away from those genetics, and you don't have to move far, and that has changed. The essence is gone. And if AKC has taught us anything, it should be that you can't change something over generations and honestly believe that the "original" is still there, hidden in the genes, just waiting to be brought back out. We all know it doesn't work that way. Let it go now and we WON'T be able to get it back.

 

J.

[cwb3]

That is about the best summary argument right there: I started with Agility and Flyball, before trying herding. I, and my dog, learned very quickly that the sheep also have a vote in how things are going to turn out. I daresay Cowboy appreciated that fact faster than I did, and taught himself, then taught me, to slow down and work more gently with, and not against the sheep. The same dog that will pop out between weave pole 11 and 12, spin in a circle and bark at ME for not getting the next two commands out fast enough!

 

I think the missing ingredient in this argument, as has already been said, is that border collies are so exceptional at everything else precisely BECAUSE they were bred/developed for work. The genetics behind that are complex and if not selected for with every generation they begin to shift. . .


. . .Sport bred dogs might be wonderful, but they have no need to be able to "read" and instantly react to another nonhuman species' actions or intent. Working dogs read and react to both the human and the livestock. There's no way to select for that in a situation where only the dog and a human (and inanimate objects) interact. There's no way to select for the independent thought (even though I could chase it and kill it I must not; it's okay to bite the aggressive ewe on the nose, but I should coddle the newborn lamb, etc.), for multitasking (listen to the human and control the stock, even if that means disobeying on some occasions) without actually working the dog on stock and then breeding those that do it well. . .

[Root Beer]

. . . border collies are so exceptional at everything else precisely BECAUSE they were bred/developed for work. The genetics behind that are complex and if not selected for with every generation they begin to shift.

 

. . .

 

The point is that people breeding for other attributes or only some of the attributes contained in the genetics of the working dog are changing the genetics of those dogs, whether they intend to or not.

 

 

 

You know, I wish more people would choose this way of expressing this.

 

While I agree there is something to be said for being blunt and I choose blunt myself often enough, you really do catch more flies with honey, and this wording is, I think perfect.

 

There is nothing off-putting or abrasive in this wording. Julie has stated the issue with respect and objectivity, and yet has not watered down the point that needs to be made.

[Sue R]

Thanks, Julie, well-stated, as always.

[Eileen Stein]

I'm not really angry by any of the comments, I think confused is a better description. My dog is my dog and I love him for who he is. I will admit that he is working-lines bred and not working bred. If I was on these forums earlier I probably would have found a working bred, but I still don't regret getting the dog I got. I liked the family that breed him and I like their dogs. I also like the amount of work they put in to deciding the cross.

 

Of course you should love your dog and be proud of him. That would be true regardless of what breed he is, wouldn't it? I've loved every dog I've ever owned, border collie or not.

 

 

I am more just upset at the future of the breed stuff. I am not sure, but it just seems to me like people are saying these BC traits can't be captured and used for a purpose other then herding. I like the idea of breeding for a new purpose (that's why we breed dogs) and I think the sports people could breed BCs (sorry, calling them that due to lack of a better name) that still have their 'spark'. I am just upset because it sounds like people believe that breeding for something other then herding is ruining the dog. I believe that there are agility breeders out there that care more about their dogs and their breeding practice then some working breeders. Even though I am not part of that group, I do feel like this is being rude or insulting to those people that do care a lot about the health, performance, and temperament of their dogs.

 

If people want to create a dog for a different purpose, and want to start their breeding project with border collies because they like border collies and feel they're good raw material, they can do that, but when they do they are changing the standard of the breed. Whether they're changing the standard to a dog that looks a certain way (an appearance standard), or a dog who's good at agility (an agility performance standard), they're still breeding away from the standard that has traditionally defined a border collie (the working standard). They're free to do that, and I wouldn't down them at all for doing that, provided they changed the name of the dog to something else. If they don't, at best it's akin to "stolen valor" (wanting the dog to have the high-status name "border collie" when it's being bred to change it into something else), and at worst it's depriving the words "border collie" of meaning. The only purpose of words is to define things clearly, and they are defeating that purpose. I don't understand why they don't want to change the name, in recognition of what they're trying to achieve. They can pick their own name. The only reason the dogs end up being called Barbie collies or sporter collies is because they haven't chosen their own name, and those terms denote a distinction that is important. Also, there's no implication there that any of those people don't care a lot about the health, performance and temperament of their dogs. I am quite willing to assume they do, and it's certainly to their credit that they do. But that's a different issue.

Sure, this dog is no longer a traditional BC, but it was still created from the BC. The BC is it's heritage and that can't (and shouldn't) be ignored. I just personally feel that you can't be upset with these people for referring to them as a BC. Names like "sporter collie" and "barbie collie" doesn't cut it. They are no longer just any type of collie, and they certainly aren't a radically new collie (no crosses).

You're aware, aren't you, that the working dog was originally called just "collie." Then Queen Victoria and the Kennel Club began breeding them to meet an appearance standard, and what they developed became the show Collie, because they kept the original name. But what they created was so far from the "raw material" they started from that farmers/shepherds had to adopt a new name for the original collie to avoid confusion. That's why the ISDS adopted the new name "border collie" for the working (herding) collies. This time I think it would be nice if the people who are changing the dog would be the ones to change the name of the ones they're changing. Then we wouldn't have to keep pointing out that they're not really border collies, and risk hurting people's feelings.

I guess I am just not as much of a die hard when it comes to dog breeds.

I think most of us care only about our individual dogs at first. I think it takes a while living with a breed of dogs before you begin to think in terms of the breed as well as the dog -- what's good for the breed as well as what's good for an individual dog. Eventually -- especially if you understand and care about what's involved in the breed's standard -- you may come to care about both.

[Chanse]

I do understand and support the goal of protecting the working bred BCs. Yes, I do agree that you aren't going to want to dilute the working bred BC with a sports bred BC. I agree that the genetics are being changed. Sports bred BCs will likely continue drawing from the working bred lines for a while to achieve whatever mix they are going for. But the working bred definitely doesn't want to draw from the sport bred (and neither want to draw from the conformation bred).

 

I do disagree with the idea that breeding two BCs for any other reason then making a herding dog is irresponsible. As I've said, this is what we do with dogs. We take traits that we like and say "oh, I may be able to make a dog better at doing this if I breed like this." So I find it pointless to be upset with breeders that do this and even more pointless to fight this. Now that being said, the breeder is irresponsible when they start to do stuff like mix the terms 'working lines' and 'working bred'. Making the buyer think that they are getting a working dog when they aren't is wrong. Like I said, I am not against protecting the working bred dogs, but your approach to the problem seems to be hostile instead of helpful.

 

I think it would be a better idea to work with these people instead of against them. I'm fairly new to this, but from this thread it seems like all that has been done is to yell at people for calling the offspring of two border collies a border collie. I would say border collie was the obvious choice in that situation, especially since that is the case for every other dog out there. You are basically working against the grain on this one. I understand that it goes against the breed standard, but I feel that this argument is doing more harm then good. You will never convince the AKC or general public that the border collie doesn't have a certain look and temperament (I understand that the standard is for how the dog works cattle and yet I still struggle with the idea that a BC doesn't have a look).

 

Naming seems to be the main issue. Same thing happened with labs. They had a poorly handled split. Officially there is only one labrador, unofficially there are two. The American Lab (aka field lab) and the English Lab (aka show lab). Maybe it would be a good idea to adopt a naming convention like that; the English Border Collie (aka working bred) and the American Border Collie (aka sport bred). Also, hopefully I don't offend anyone with my choice of english and american, I assumed English would be a better fit for the working bred due to their start over there. Also, American Border Collie seems like a good fit for AKC registered dogs.

 

In the end, this comes down to a split in the breed. From what I've read on labs, german shepherds and now BCs, no one has handled it correctly. Everyone seems to try and fight the split until it is too late. Then they are left with a fractured breed with no clear boundaries (i.e. calling a show dog a working dog). I think it would be smarter to accept that there is a new type of border collie instead of just trying to argue that it isn't a border collie.

[borasaurus]

I do disagree with the idea that breeding two BCs for any other reason then making a herding dog is irresponsible. As I've said, this is what we do with dogs. We take traits that we like and say "oh, I may be able to make a dog better at doing this if I breed like this." So I find it pointless to be upset with breeders that do this and even more pointless to fight this. Now that being said, the breeder is irresponsible when they start to do stuff like mix the terms 'working lines' and 'working bred'. Making the buyer think that they are getting a working dog when they aren't is wrong. Like I said, I am not against protecting the working bred dogs, but your approach to the problem seems to be hostile instead of helpful.

 

I don't really understand how people who are not breeding working dogs are bettering the breed. If working dogs already have great temperaments, health, intelligence, etc., then how does breeding for all of the above, except working ability, help the breed? They're taking away from it. Working ability, to me - someone correct me if I'm wrong - is more of a package than just a single trait.

 

I don't think anyone is yelling about it, either. It seems like most people are trying to explain the concept in a level-headed manner. But that's the limitation of the Internet - it's hard to interpret people's emotions without speaking to them face-to-face.

[CptJack]

I don't really understand how people who are not breeding working dogs are bettering the breed. If working dogs already have great temperaments, health, intelligence, etc., then how does breeding for all of the above, except working ability, help the breed? They're taking away from it. Working ability, to me - someone correct me if I'm wrong - is more of a package than just a single trait.

 

I don't think anyone is yelling about it, either. It seems like most people are trying to explain the concept in a level-headed manner. But that's the limitation of the Internet - it's hard to interpret people's emotions without speaking to them face-to-face.

 

A lot of people, namely AKC people, want working bred to mean 'can herd' and that's the end of it. But the fact of the matter is, it's a lot more than that.

 

It's what is responsible for the dog being what it is today - and that includes intelligence, biddability, and ability to read people (as well as livestock) and partner so well with people, as well as physical soundness, agility, endurance, tenacity and intelligence. It's working ability that makes them excellent sports dogs, working dogs (IN ALL Capacities) and pets.

 

You yank out 'working ability' and you're yanking out everything that went into making the dog breed we love what it is. You can't just not care about how well the dog herds and get the rest of the dog. You can't. You just... you can't. Even if you argue that it's not a big deal right now, it's going to break the breed down into a shadow and ghost of itself.

 

And it might turn out that border collies bred for those other things are awesome dogs.

 

But they're not going to be what lies at the heart of a border collie being a border collie. If you really think it's okay to call those dogs border collies as long as 'working bred' isn't in the mix, all I can think is you haven't really grasped that working ability is the only thing that existed as a breed standard.

 

It's not breeding a little bit outside the standard to bred dogs without working ability. It's breeding outside the ENTIRE standard.

 

I agree the ship has sailed and the name is here to stay for barbie and sporter collies, and I agree those names are demeaning, but they aren't being bred to the standard that the people on this board still consider the ONLY correct one, so no. They're neither responsible breeders nor breeding border collies. They can't be, when they're throwing the standard the dogs should be bred to out the window.

[Root Beer]

Maybe it would be a good idea to adopt a naming convention like that; the English Border Collie (aka working bred) and the American Border Collie (aka sport bred). Also, hopefully I don't offend anyone with my choice of english and american, I assumed English would be a better fit for the working bred due to their start over there. Also, American Border Collie seems like a good fit for AKC registered dogs.

 

OK, here's the problem.

 

In order for those with AKC registered Border Collies, whether sport or conformation bred, to accept a change in the name, a movement to change the name of their dogs is something that they would have to want and be lobbying for.

 

It really isn't something that those outside of the AKC can decide and somehow compel them to accept.

[Chanse]

I don't think anyone is yelling about it, either. It seems like most people are trying to explain the concept in a level-headed manner. But that's the limitation of the Internet - it's hard to interpret people's emotions without speaking to them face-to-face.

 

Sorry, yeah, 'yell' wasn't really the word I wanted, but I didn't have a better one. Tell? That didn't seem right in the context. Yep, I blame the internet.

[gcv-border]

 

....... yet I still struggle with the idea that a BC doesn't have a look).

 

Everyone seems to try and fight the split until it is too late.

BC 'look': There really is not a look (Thank doG) for the working-bred BC. Size can range from 25-60 lbs, smooth to medium to rough coats, fine to blocky heads, ears all over the place, eye color from yellow to brown to almost black with occasional blue eyes, coat color of predominantly B&W, but also Black tris, some R&W and Red tris (even the occasional merle but that is another discussion) and on and on. I love all the different looks of a BC. Sometimes it can be hard to tell a dog is a BC until it shows its herding ability. About 10 years ago, when I lived in NJ, I was buying hay from a neighboring farmer and his new BC was hanging around. He had purchased the dog from someone in VA. That dog looked like a cross between a GSD and something else. That was an eye-opener for me. Today, after seeing photos of working-bred dogs on the web and dogs at herding trials, I can recognize the 'unconventional' appearance of some BCs. I really like the variety.

 

ETA: From my viewpoint, the beauty of a dog is not what it looks like, but what it does.

 

Fighting the 'split': You should read "The Dog Wars" by Donald McCaig which describes the fight to prevent the Border Collie from being recognized by the AKC about 20 years ago.

[borasaurus]

A lot of people, namely AKC people, want working bred to mean 'can herd' and that's the end of it. But the fact of the matter is, it's a lot more than that.

 

It's what is responsible for the dog being what it is today - and that includes intelligence, biddability, and ability to read people (as well as livestock) and partner so well with people, as well as physical soundness, agility, endurance, tenacity and intelligence. It's working ability that makes them excellent sports dogs, working dogs (IN ALL Capacities) and pets.

 

You yank out 'working ability' and you're yanking out everything that went into making the dog breed we love what it is. You can't just not care about how well the dog herds and get the rest of the dog. You can't. You just... you can't. Even if you argue that it's not a big deal right now, it's going to break the breed down into a shadow and ghost of itself.

 

Thank you, that's exactly the point I was trying to make. I think people tend to think of working ability as just flat out herding, when there are many traits that come together to be working ability. When people argue that breeding without regard to working ability can still better the breed, I just don't get it. But I don't know how else to better explain that without making this thread go in circles.

[mum24dog]

Labs have a breed standard that includes more than 'the ability to work stock'.

 

Border Collies did not until the AKC got them.

 

And no one here is talking about calling the dogs a different breeds based on what they DO, but based on what they were BRED to do.

 

Would you call anyone who was breeding against every element of a standard a good breeder? Even if you didn't call that dog a different breed, would you call someone deliberately breeding outside EVERY ELEMENT of a breed standard a reputable, good, breeder who was breeding to better the breed?

 

I doubt it.

 

Just with BCs.

 

But real labs are nothing like the breed standard you speak of. Real labs are athletic, healthy and bred to work as a gun dog. We call them working labs. We call the genuine cocker bred for work a working cocker, irrespective of breed standard. Similarly with springers.

 

Following convention I would be happy with working sheepdog. Is there anywhere but these boards where the working sheepdog is routinely called a border collie?

[Chanse]

Fighting the 'split': You should read "The Dog Wars" by Donald McCaig which describes the fight to prevent the Border Collie from being recognized by the AKC about 20 years ago.

 

Don't worry, I actually agree that the border collie shouldn't have been recognized by the AKC. I don't think a lot of dogs should have been added to the AKC. I abhor their conformation standards for working dogs. People then try to enhance those traits that the AKC says defines the breed, which has some pretty bad results. The problem is that this seems to be an unavoidable outcome for any dog breed once it reaches a certain point.

[gonetotervs]

Borasaurus, et al. -- including those who say they don't understand why breeding a dog to anything except a stockherding standard is anything except heresy--

one comment and question: when do you think climate change and lab-sciences will essentially make all meat and wool we consume something that comes out of a lab/aka Amazon equivalent, vs. something that comes off a farm?

 

I don't think I will be around to experience it and that is FINE with me. But we lost our heavy horses to the change in technology, and those are being kept alive by hobbyists. I too do agility with BCs, rescues and other breeds and straddle the line. And I have one of those tugging, somewhat barking maniacs that I want to get hyper on the start line because I infinitely trust my 70lb, working-line (nonBC) dog to a) do his damnest to beat every BC out there. And to stop his barking and quivering and hit a straight sit in front of an 8-yr-old scared leash runner who says "he's so soft" when she reaches out to hug him

 

Chanse, if you are in Nashville, sooner or later, you will probably hate me. I made a decision somewhere along the line that we would either hit those ribbons or not-qualify. My dogs have 12 months of training before they hit the agility ring and a fair amount of trainig is getting them wired to max extent possible with them still listening to to me even while acting like maniacs. My Terv (working-bred aka IPO and Schutzhund) beats my BC by several seconds when both run clean. And both of them are tugging fools until we hit the start line when both of them will give me a 4-jump lead-out even after having been kept inside for a week. Hope you don't mind the barking, either, but the yorkie lady sometimes crates next to me because she trusts my dogs and trusts them to keep any other big dogs away from littler ones.

 

Eileen and others, I am not a troll, but there are days --especially when winters are this side of "crappy" -- when I wonder how climate change and technology will change us. I sorta comfort myself with the thought that I will not be around to see it.

[Chanse]

But real labs are nothing like the breed standard you speak of. Real labs are athletic, healthy and bred to work as a gun dog. We call them working labs. We call the genuine cocker bred for work a working cocker, irrespective of breed standard. Similarly with springers.

 

Following convention I would be happy with working sheepdog. Is there anywhere but these boards where the working sheepdog is routinely called a border collie?

 

Yeah, that was basically the point I was trying to make. BCs are not a special case. I think the german shepherd case would probably be the most similar to the BC. The german shepherd began to be known for it's sloping back at one point because this made it look like it was always ready to spring into action. This was in direct conflict of the original breed standard. The creator of the breed said that the slope made them weak and unable to work, and his goal was to create the perfect working dog.

[Chanse]

Chanse, if you are in Nashville, sooner or later, you will probably hate me. I made a decision somewhere along the line that we would either hit those ribbons or not-qualify. My dogs have 12 months of training before they hit the agility ring and a fair amount of trainig is getting them wired to max extent possible with them still listening to to me even while acting like maniacs. My Terv (working-bred aka IPO and Schutzhund) beats my BC by several seconds when both run clean. And both of them are tugging fools until we hit the start line when both of them will give me a 4-jump lead-out even after having been kept inside for a week. Hope you don't mind the barking, either, but the yorkie lady sometimes crates next to me because she trusts my dogs and trusts them to keep any other big dogs away from littler ones.

 

Haha, good to know. I am just getting started with agility for the first time. I'm not to concerned with how I do (...yet), but figured it would be fun. I'll make sure to look out for the crazy dogs at any meets I go to .

[borasaurus]

Borasaurus, et al. -- including those who say they don't understand why breeding a dog to anything except a stockherding standard is anything except heresy--

one comment and question: when do you think climate change and lab-sciences will essentially make all meat and wool we consume something that comes out of a lab/aka Amazon equivalent, vs. something that comes off a farm?

 

I'm not sure what this has to do with the conversation. I don't believe that this will be an issue until perhaps a long time from now, if ever - definitely not in the foreseeable future. The general public still doesn't take very well to the idea of genetically modified foods, even if we really have no idea which are and aren't. Having meat and other products being produced by a lab (or factory, I presume) - is that even a problem that's on the table? Companies would have to lie about the origins of their products to get people to consume them. And the studies that would need to be done to allow that would take a long time.

 

I'm arguing that breeding for work is what gives border collies the traits everyone considers to be so fantastic. You can get a great agility dog, companion dog, whatever you want dog out of a working bred one. Working ability is the umbrella that encompasses the traits that non-working breeders claim to be breeding for. Why do they need to "breed for temperament," when a good working bred one already has that? As of right now, border collies are still needed on farms because nothing else can do what they can as efficiently.

 

I used to work with membranes. All the technology in the world right now could not create a membrane to emulate the work that a kidney does. I feel the same about border collies and their work on farms.

[GentleLake]

If you really think it's okay to call those dogs border collies as long as 'working bred' isn't in the mix, all I can think is you haven't really grasped that working ability is the only thing that existed as a breed standard.

 

I think this is a lot of what's at the heart of the matter for many people, that they don't understand a "standard" as anything other than appearance.

 

When I was showing my first border collie in obedience back in the early '80's I met a woman at a show who came up top me and said, "Border collies are great dogs. It's a shame you people don't have a standard."

 

I tried to explain to her that we do indeed have a standard, but that it's based on working (herding) ability and not on appearance. She just couldn't wrap her brain around the concept.

[juliepoudrier]

Is this Groundhog Day?

 

J.

[gonetotervs]

Julie, I have no idea if it is groundhog day. I DO want the ice and snow to end. And I started off as a horse person rather than a dog person, and know that we lost our heavy horses somewhere between 1900 and 1950, except to hobbyists. That was an effing disaster.

*I have drunk enough of the kool-aid on this list and elsewhere that I do NOT/NOT want this to happen to BCs.*

(I know where my next pups are coming from, and how I want to train them, and yes, I am /was taking this discussion off-topic.

Forgive me, please, there's too much ice and snow outside for me to keep my dogs even mildly exercised, and for me to keep my thoughts off the failings of various elected and gerrymandered politicians.)

 

Re agility, some of us want our dogs to hit the ring in a state of maximum arousal because we want maximum speed (and we trust our dogs to have sanity and focus even in max drive). It does not necessarily imply a lack of training chops. If you see barking and tugging maniacs ringside at agility trials who go on to win their height division or come close, well -- agility rewards those who run fastest. ( Not everybody who does ACK agility wants speed, because double Qs are highly prized on the way to a MACH, and some dogs impress by their consistency).

 

Like Mum24dogs, I suspect I'm old enough to value all sorts of criteria. I can turn on and turn off my dog's barking fooliness. My main criteria in getting a pup are sanity and resilience. You may or may not see this in our performance, but -- as always -- any lack is mine. And some of us live in hugely expensive school districts rather far from herding opportunities not because we don't believe in the kool-aid of doing herding, but because rural school districts have their disadvantages and we haven't (yet?) won the lottery.

 

p.s. any advice on how to achieve the last mentioned gratefully accepted(LOL).

[Gloria Atwater]

But real labs are nothing like the breed standard you speak of. Real labs are athletic, healthy and bred to work as a gun dog. We call them working labs. We call the genuine cocker bred for work a working cocker, irrespective of breed standard. Similarly with springers.

 

Following convention I would be happy with working sheepdog. Is there anywhere but these boards where the working sheepdog is routinely called a border collie?

 

 

Yes, in the US border collies are pretty much always called border collies. I've noticed that in the UK they are called "collies" or "sheepdogs, but if we did that here, people would be apt to think we're talking about the Lassie-type rough collies or Old English sheepdogs. and Shelties

 

~ Gloria