Jump to content
BC Boards

An innovative approach to puppy mills


Donald McCaig
 Share

Recommended Posts

I think it would be easy enough to sell pups to nonworking homes on NB status, though probably there would be people who wouldn't want to take a pup under those circumstances.

 

As I stated on one of the FB threads, though, as a breeder (of two litters) my main concern is that the pups end up in loving forever homes. I don't want pups I produced passed from handler to handler because people or so anxious to have nursery dogs that they push too hard too fast. Fortunately I don't breed much, but honestly, even when I bred Twist and had interest in pups from some big names, I chose to place the pups with people I knew rather than working dogs folks I knew of because I could be sure that the people I knew (who maybe wouldn't burn up the trial field) would at least love and care for those dogs for their entire lives. That's just me, but I have often said on this forum in response to the folks who say that working dog people won't sell to sport people that I would choose an excellent sport home over a mediocre working home (and by mediocre I mean one that doesn't meet my personal standards on how a dog should be kept, trained, etc.) because I know the sport home is the one who is unlikely to pass a dog on, repeatedly. Limiting those sorts of homes would be unfortunate for those of us who really want to make sure pups go to permanent homes.

 

J.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 197
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Breeding for agility, obedience, or flyball is not breeding for working ability any more than breeding for a pretty dog is. What if a dog is doing well in Open, but earns a Champion title? Another option so the owners can still compete with their agility/sport dogs would be to give the dog non-breeding status once it earns the agility, obedience, or flyball title,

 

But I bought my agility dog as a started sheepdog, from a fellow who runs 1,000 ewes, and this dog didn't start doing agility until after his nursery year ended (he ran at the USBCHA finals and made the short go). Should he lose his breeding status because I did agility with him? That seems odd.

 

My youngest dog was also bought as a trained dog. He's from Bruce and Linda Fogt, out of Linda's good bitch, Jill. He qualified for the USBCHA nursery finals twice (and ran with me in 2015), and now is starting his agility career. He also has run in his first USBCHA Open trial. If he earns an agility championship, you think he should lose his breeding status?

 

Many, though certainly not all, agility border collies these days come from working breeders who also will sell to qualified sport and pet homes. Where I am (in the pacific north west) there are some surprisingly well-bred dogs competing in agility. When people ask me where to get a border collie for agility, I first suggest rescue, but if they want to purchase a pup, then I give them the names of some working folks whose dogs I admire. Not all who compete in dog sports are doing so with purpose-bred sporter collies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WSP - No has said that any of those few people who run successfully in Open and in a performance sport with a particular dog or bitch actually breeds that animal with the intent to produce sport dogs that will then be bred to produce more sport dogs. The few I am aware of are extremely responsible breeders and only breed a dog/bitch that has proven itself on the farm/ranch/trial field in a mating with what they feel is another bitch/dog that has similarly proven itself.

 

They are not making "sport" breedings even though certainly some of their pups may go to sport homes. I don't know everyone so I can't speak for everyone but that seems to be the case among the few who do both at a high level. Those who don't work their dogs on stock at a high level and have that sort of experience should not be breeding anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the ABCA is trying to do the best by the border collie, then why not try to discourage breeding for other than working(like agility). Some of the people on the blacklist are dedicated to producing good working dogs.

Or why not have a blacklist for those with obedience, agility, or flyball champions so those looking can see who is breeding away from working.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the ABCA is trying to do the best by the border collie, then why not try to discourage breeding for other than working(like agility). Some of the people on the blacklist are dedicated to producing good working dogs.

Or why not have a blacklist for those with obedience, agility, or flyball champions so those looking can see who is breeding away from working.

 

I'm confused. One of the marks of a working bred dog is that they can very versatile. A dog that is bred to work sheep and is excellent at working sheep can still do agility. Why are they somehow mutually exclusive? It is still a dog whose genes are first and foremost working genes. If they are proven on stock and are used to breed (regardless of whether they've done agility or not) they're not going to magically be passing on sport genes just because they did a sport. If I was born brunette and I dye my hair blonde later in life, my children aren't going to be blonde as a result.

 

And that's just in response to the "non-breeding" label argument. If they're not being bred revoking their membership makes even less sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

And that's just in response to the "non-breeding" label argument. If they're not being bred revoking their membership makes even less sense.

Who said anything about revoking their membership?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'm confused. One of the marks of a working bred dog is that they can very versatile. A dog that is bred to work sheep and is excellent at working sheep can still do agility. Why are they somehow mutually exclusive?

Sure a working bred dog can do agility, but an agility bred dog can't necessarily be a good working stockdog.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's too bad that Karen wasn't interviewed by a couple of board members before the list was released along with given a tour and given a chance to explain what you just did Julie. But, I suppose maybe it was taken into consideration and just didn't matter, only the number mattered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe it's just me, but I don't see the list as a "blacklist". I see it as information that is made available. If I see a name on that list it wouldn't automatically mean I wouldn't buy from them. But it would mean that I'd be asking a lot of questions so that I was satisfied with how the dogs were treated, how they were being proved and why they were being bred.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see this as a blacklist either. It's just information, I'll do with it what I wish. I absolutely wouldn't dismiss a breeder because they're on the list. If they're *responsibly* producing good dogs, I don't really care how many there are.

 

WSP, I don't know if I'll make my point or not, but I'll try.

 

An agility dog doesn't magically lose all working ability. If I (like airbear) bought a real deal, trialed/trained/whatever working dog and chose to pursue agility, it's still a working dog. I could do agility with it, breed it to another confirmed working dog, and sell all the pups to agility folk, and those pups are still working bred. Assuming both dogs were actual working dogs, it wouldn't go against what the ABCA stands for. I may not be a big time member, but the ABCA doesn't appear to have a stance against dogs going to sport/non-working homes. It just has a strong stance against *breeding* non-proven individuals. Yes, conformation dogs go directly against what the ABCA stands for. That deregistration process is quite understandable. But sport dogs and working dogs are not mutually exclusive. A dog can have endless sport titles and still be a working dog. I absolutely don't think sport-only dogs should be bred. But pulling the registration on titled dogs also eliminates some great dogs, like airbear's.

 

I thinks it's a moot point, as the ABCA decided against such actions. But this is a fairly theoretical thread, and it's fun to consider possibilities!

 

I think the thought of video proof of working ability is interesting, but wouldn't end up being efficient. The Hangin Tree's can do it, but that's a teeny association compared to the ABCA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CORRECTION:

 

Dear Doggers,

 

In response to one of Mr/ms wsp's speculations that the ABCA ight"pull registration on those dogs that earn obedience/flyball/agility championship" I wrote "that suggestion was brought before the membership and voted down."

 

My statement was incorrect. At the ABCA annual meeting at the Tennessee Finals in 200(1?) it was proposed that dual registry be forbidden. This was voted down.

 

Donald McCaig

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm confused about the registration vs membership thing. Can someone clarify? Toy can have a registered dog without being a member, but you can't register a dog without being a member. Pulling membership would prevent registration of puppies, but not sure how that would affect the agility dogs. And if ABCA can't track show dog's except for champions, how wound they track sport dogs? And what about dogs like Kristi's?

 

J.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Neither does a pup from a breeder who registered 30 that year

It does if they breed simply to produce pups. If none of the pups from the first litter can work, then you have 7 litters of the same cross. And then they're being bred simply because of who they are out of...

 

I'd like to see numbers of litters from bitches. To me the 8 yo bitch that's had 7 litters is far worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It does if they breed simply to produce pups. If none of the pups from the first litter can work, then you have 7 litters of the same cross. And then they're being bred simply because of who they are out of...

 

I'd like to see numbers of litters from bitches. To me the 8 yo bitch that's had 7 litters is far worse.

If you have registered 30 pups in a year, they all can't be the same cross from the same parents. I breeder might breed 4 different bitches to his best male to see what will be produced. Two might be on his farm, and the other two might be in his name, but at another farm. Two of the bitches have 8 pups and two have 7 Now he is a high volume breeder right up there with puppy mills.

 

The list isn't about how many years they are using her for breeding. Or maybe they need to come up with another list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I would much rather see something on the website about not supporting those who breed for color, agility, obedience, or just pets, as they are doing more harm to the breed in general.

 

From the ABCA's statement of Ethics and Best Practices, linked in the paragraph that introduces the high volume list:

 

The Border Collie stands alone in its exceptional ability to work livestock. That is the purpose for which the breed was developed, and the ABCA defines the breed by this working ability. The main goal of any Border Collie breeder should be to produce sound, useful, working dogs. While Border Collies also excel in many non-herding activities, they should be bred primarily for the ability to work livestock. The ultimate responsibility for maintaining the integrity of this as yet unspoiled breed lies with the breeders. Breeders are urged to take this responsibility seriously. Puppy buyers are encouraged to buy only from those breeders who do take this responsibility seriously. Only dogs that are physically sound, of good temperament and superior working ability should be considered for use in a breeding program. . . . [Emphasis added.]

 

The ABCA is strongly against the commercial breeding of Border Collies for the pet market. . . .

 

Breeders should ensure that litter numbers are consistent with both sound breeding principles and the best interest of the individual female. Sufficient time to evaluate the health and stockworking ability of the preceding litter is recommended before rebreeding a male or female. . . . [Emphasis added.]

Link to comment
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...