Jump to content
BC Boards
Sign in to follow this  
IronHorse

Barbie dog definition

Recommended Posts

I will be interested to see what happens now that the North American Sheep Dog Society is the process of resurrection. I wonder what the reasoning is behind its revitalization. Anyone know?

 

Penny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iron Horse asks:

 

But isn't it possible to obtain a good working dog out of a "barbie" line?

 

Yes, and you might catch a rainbow trout out of a mud puddle. But if you want to catch rainbow trout, you're a lot better off going to an environment where they thrive.

 

You asked about who works their dogs on stock, and I am one who does. Suburban and urban dog owners are often surprised to discover that there are actually farms and ranches out there (your lamb and beef comes from somewhere, after all) and that many of these operations use Border collies to manage their stock.

 

I'd estimate that there are about 1500 open trial dogs in the US (500 USBCHA members times two to four dogs each), but there are probably 20 to 50 times that working on farms and ranches. Some are really good, some are mediocre, and some are no damn good at all. The same could be said of the open trial dogs as well.

 

The Border collie culture is not one of regulation; it's one of reputation. If I want a good working dog, I know where to go looking for it, and it's not at a pet store or Westminster. Whether the dog is registered or not is of some consequence, but not the be-all and end-all. I don't believe that any registry -- no matter how well-intentioned the board might be -- can really act as the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval for any breed of any animal. Registries are repositories of information, not police departments.

 

The ABCA has in the past and will continue to go after people who falsify documents. After all, a registry is nothing if the information it holds is tainted or questionable. But that's the limit of its police function, and that is how it should be.

 

If you want to know about the working ability of the parents, you go see the parents working. If you want to know what their hip and eye status is, ask the breeder. You are in a much better position to determine whether the information you're getting is credible than Patty Rogers would be.

 

The confusion that you point out between breeding and registry points out the need to understand what a breed of animals is. All that is necessary for animals to be purebred is that a group of breeders decide what constitutes a member of the breed (a standard) and that the breeding population be closed to other members of the species that don't meet that standard. Registries track pedigrees, which is an entirely different function from breed definition.

 

So the community of Border collie breeders agreed hundreds of years ago that our dogs should be bred for the ability to control and shift livestock. Our predacessors established the International Sheep Dog Society to track pedigrees of these dogs and their offpsring. They also set up a mechanism to allow the offspring of unregistered dogs to be entered into the studbook if their working ability was proved. With the exception of these dogs, registered on merit rather than on pedigree, no working test was established. The ABCA was established along similar lines.

 

The ISDS has made some forrays into health regulation, mostly with poor to disasterous results. One example is its attempt to deal with Collie Eye Anomoly. Bitches that bore a single pup with CEA were stripped of registration, and dogs that sired more than one litter with CEA pups were also deregistered. This has the effect of driving the disease underground -- no one tested for fear of having good working dogs deregistered. Thankfully, the ABCA hasn't gone down that sort of road yet. It has offered breeders the opportunity to record certain health certificates on the pedigrees -- passing OFA hip scores can be designated with an "@" before the dog's name on the pedigree. Very few are recorded on the pedigrees of my dogs, but I have no dysplastic dogs.

 

Anyway, the function of a community of purebreeders is to hold dogs up to the standard before they are bred, and to honestly and continually evaluate their offspring against that standard. The fact that dogs that don't meet that standard are registered is a red herring issue. I'm sure that if you talked to any top conformation breeder they would agree with me on that point. The AKC doesn't enforce any of its breed standards and it doesn't license or evaluate breeders by any standard other than the color of their money and the veracity of their claims about the parentage of their pups. The value of registration is that you know the pedigree of the dog, and you can register its pups. It is not, nor should it be, in a Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iron Horse:

 

>

 

If you can't formulate a realistic proposal on the information you have, then what makes you think a realistic proposal is possible? Not all tough problems have solutions. The ABCA registers approximately 20,000 border collies per year. Its fee schedules are on the website. It has a couple of permanent office employees to handle the paperwork, correspondence, routine queries, etc., and nearly all other work of the registry is done by 12 volunteer directors whose burn-out rate has been high. What else do you need to know?

 

>

 

Well, thanks, I guess.

 

>

 

I started out to recapitulate the 10+ year discussions on this issue, giving justice to the arguments advanced by the opponents of banning dual registration, and then decided the heck with it. I'm not going to write in defense of a policy I strongly disagree with. There are people of good will on the Boards who were against banning dual registration -- they can give their reasons if they want to, but probably they have even less enthusiasm for renewing this debate than I do. The ABCA is a member-owned, democratic organization. If you're a voting member of the ABCA and you want to see dual registration banned, let your directors know your views and vote for candidates who share them. You'll have my vote.

 

Jodi:

 

>

 

>

 

I can truthfully say that I don't know anyone who is concerned about losing money. But there are quite a few people concerned about losing good dogs. Otherwise, I think you gave a good summary.

 

>

 

The board actually did recently consider limiting the number of litters per year that any one person can register to seven, and limiting the number of litters registrable out of one bitch in a 2-year period. The latter proposal failed on a tie vote, and the former proposal was tabled. I think the main problems people had with this, aside from the longstanding reflex aversion to regulation by the registry, is that any number set will apply to all breeders and could come to be looked on as a norm. Breeding good working dogs is an art, and breeders with the knowledge and skill to breed good working dogs are few, and are the pillars of the breed. We don't want to limit our good breeders to a number that would be appropriate for bad breeders, and we don't want to "approve" of breeding by bad breeders at a level that's appropriate for good breeders. Besides, there was a feeling that any numerical limit on the number of litter registrations per year by a single breeder could be easily circumvented by the very people it was aimed at, since they could spread title to their breeding dogs around among family members, etc.

 

So many of the problems we face are more complex than they might at first appear, and solutions aren't obvious. OTOH, some of us who have been racking our brains over them for years may think we've considered every possible option and ramification, and we may be wrong. So new ideas are always welcome.

 

Penny:

 

To the best of my knowledge, the NASDS is not resurrecting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eileen -

 

"I can truthfully say that I don't know anyone who is concerned about losing money. But there are quite a few people concerned about losing good dogs. Otherwise, I think you gave a good summary."

 

Yes, in the case of the farmers and ranchers, yes, I agree that the loss of good dogs is a huge concern. I have had this discussion with many people, and a valid argument that is easily understood due to the enormity of the task, is how money would, eventually, become an issue if individual testing of dogs was required for registration. Even from my own standpoint, if registration cost me $200 per dog instead of whatever it costs me now, would I be able to afford to register my dogs? I work a decent-paying full time job. Imagine the farmer or rancher. They, more than likely, have much better things to spend their money on, and as long as their dogs get the job done, why would they spend the extra cash for the piece of paper?

 

As far as losing good dogs due to dual registration, I don't think that would be as large of an issue as the farmer/rancher lines. Yes, there are a lot of people who buy dogs from out of really good working stock, who will then dual register them to participate in ACK stuff, and if dual registration were banned, a percentage of them would stick with ACK and we would lose potentially valuable dogs that way. However, I think there are far more puppymills and BYBs who dual register their litters to be able to use it as a selling point. I don't think the gene pool would miss many of those, and I don't think the ABCA would miss the income from registration of the litters.

 

At this point in time, I support banning dual registration. I would, however, be interested in hearing from people who do not, and why.

 

"... some of us who have been racking our brains over them for years may think we've considered every possible option and ramification, and we may be wrong. So new ideas are always welcome."

 

I wish I had one.

 

Jodi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eileen,

 

As our world (working Border Collies) changes and I become more aware of our world, my past view on dual registration softens. However, with the AKC books open, what affect would the ban really have? I see added burden for enforcement, but I don't see much benefit towards the ultimate goal of minimizing/eliminating breeding outside of breeding for improving working ability.

 

Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eileen,

Perhaps a standardized legally binding breeder affidavit could be discussed (if it hasn't already)

If for no other reason such a document would discourage potentially unethical breeders from misrepresenting working abilities if they knew that by doing so could lead to legal ramifications such as for example fines and/or revocation of membership?

Such a document would strengthen the ABCAs position to take disciplinary action in the event of a issue involving ethical pratices contradicing the ABCA standards by a breeder flying the ABCA flag.

As to the content of such an affidavit, well many issues come to mind therefore the suggestion of discussion of such a document by those more qualified then myself to ponder.

(just a thought with the cost verses benefits issue in mind)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jennifer,

The thread has strayed conciderably from the intial topic,but it has brought up some very interesting issues.

personally i do not know where the term "barbie collie" originated but it sure seems to have morphed into a slang term that is frequently used to describe one dog or another IMO.

I use the term to scold jasmine when she displeases me and she absolutely hates it when i call her Barbie

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b71/Iron...mine5month3.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate this thread even though many of you have discussed the same topic over and over. Thanks. I'm learning alot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by IronHorse:

personally i do not know where the term "barbie collie" originated......

Colin Campbell (CCnNC) is the source.

 

Originally posted by CCnNC:

I wish I had thought it out that elaborately, but I must admit that it was just a flash -- or perhaps divine inspiration -- in my, at that time, not so old brain.

Source: http://bordercollie.heatherweb.com/cgi-bin...0236;p=1#000003

 

 

Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Jodi and or Eileen:

At this point in time, I support banning dual registration. I would, however, be interested in hearing from people who do not, and why.

 

"... some of us who have been racking our brains over them for years may think we've considered every possible option and ramification, and we may be wrong. So new ideas are always welcome."

 

Here are my ideas- I?m slipping into my flame-proof suit now?

 

If ABCA really wanted to discourage dual registration and/or indiscriminate breeding of unproven dogs, they could make it simple for breeders to designate on their litter applications that the puppies can not be ?open registered? with AKC (or other conformation registries) or bred. Breeders who feel strongly about it could just check off that box on the litter application, and the individual registration papers for each puppy would then say somewhere ?pedigree only - not for breeding or registration?. This could be revocable by that Breeder, if the dog proved to be something worth breeding later on. I think right now a letter has to be sent in with each individual application requesting non-breeding status, which most breeders don?t even know about. But again, it all boils down to each individual breeder?s desires and commitment.

Or, as the system stands IMO it would be just as beneficial for concerned breeders to go ahead and ?dual register? litters with the orange ?limited registrations?, thus giving the BREEDER the ability to restrict breeding and conformation showing of their puppies. If a puppy buyer doesn?t want AKC papers, they just don?t send them in. But the buyer also can?t ?Open Register? that puppy, where there are NO show/breeding restrictions. At least, Orange ?limited? papers do not allow the dog to show in conformation classes or produce registerable puppies. They are only good for the sporting competitions. I did this with my Golden Retriever pups; it weeded out the people who wanted a ?puppy to breed?. This also gives the average Border Collie owner another venue where they can do active things with their dog, even if they don?t have access to sheep or sheepdog training.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Laurie,

 

There is a "limited registration" option for ABCA-registered dogs. It just isn't well known. I agree that it could be better publicized and made easier for breeders to take advantage of. If I remember correctly, there isn't even a box to check for it on litter reg papers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Miztiki:

quote:
Originally posted by Marty&Abigail:

They want working dogs but also good looking.

I don't really understand this. What is considered "good looking"? Or do you mean conformation dogs who can work?

 

I ask because people here post lots of pictures (but not enough) of their dogs actually working, and they all look different, and they all are gorgeous. Different colors, coats, ear sets, sizes, shapes...

yeah, I mean good looking in comformation for working attitude. But I'm just speaking for Italians Border Collie. We have really ugly dogs, and when I say ugly.. I mean really ugly in conformation. Straight hock, they can't pucsh when they run.. well, is very difficult to explain in Inglish! Good looking I mean also light bones.. here there are too many "barbie dogs" really haevy. That's what I'm saying..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by SoloRiver:

Laurie,

 

There is a "limited registration" option for ABCA-registered dogs. It just isn't well known. I agree that it could be better publicized and made easier for breeders to take advantage of. If I remember correctly, there isn't even a box to check for it on litter reg papers.

You are right - Jim Hall posted a letter a while back that could be attached to registrations - but there is no EASY way for an ABCA breeder to designate it right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Rebecca, Brook Cove Farm:

Oh, I'm going to break a personal rule and respond to myself. :D

 

Marty&Abigail, here in North America, the breed was strictly a working breed for close to a hundred years. It's only been bred with appearance in mind for about ten years. We don't feel that breeding to make prettier dogs can possibly improve the breed. How could it?

 

 

That's why we are very passionate about keeping our working lines strictly bred for working. You just can't can't can't do both "brains and beauty" - the science just doesn't support it.

I'm not saying that! I'm like you a supporter of working line! I'm just saying, and I'm speaking for Italians dog, that we sould work to improve the conformation. Because agility, show and some bad farm breeder.. made very bad breeding. And I'm speaking about legs.. that are not enought strong for run, sometimes because too haevy and sometimes to thin.. and a body not enought strong for long day work.. We don't have so many shepherd here that breed border collies for working.. so we have to do in onother way. I'm not a breeder but I have many friends that are breeders, or that mate their dogs because of their herding ability. It not easy for me to explain it in English.. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Marty&Abigail:

I'm not saying that! I'm like you a supporter of working line! I'm just saying, and I'm speaking for Italians dog, that we sould work to improve the conformation. Because agility, show and some bad farm breeder.. made very bad breeding. And I'm speaking about legs.. that are not enought strong for run, sometimes because too haevy and sometimes to thin.. and a body not enought strong for long day work.. We don't have so many shepherd here that breed border collies for working.. so we have to do in onother way. I'm not a breeder but I have many friends that are breeders, or that mate their dogs because of their herding ability. It not easy for me to explain it in English.. :rolleyes: [/QB]

If I understand you correctly what you are saying is that the Italian Border Collies need to be bred to a "working conformation" and away from a "show conformation" and from the way you describe the situation with the Italian Border Collies overall, I would agree and it sounds like you all are in need of good working stock.

 

By the way I think your english is very good, its light years ahead of my italian and you bring an entirely new prespective to the boards.

You even have an accent :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IronHorse:

 

I work my dogs on stock weekly, exempting my youngest that is only 5 months who is already showing a tremendous eagerness to prove himself worthy of such work which he was bred for.

 

IMO The difference between Working Border Collies and Barbies are pretty simple to see.

 

A Barbie Collie?s worth is judged on its ?good? (if you must call them good looks, I think they are revolting) looks and gate. Nothing more. This, in AKC standards, is good enough to prove any dog worthy of breeding "better improved" puppies.

 

A Border Collie?s worth is judged on its ability to gather, drive, problem solve, and obey commands in and out of sight while thinking all on its own. In order to do all these things correctly, the dog?s soundness also comes into play. As a working community we breed for the best all around working dog, soundness and biddably.

 

Most dogs that travel all over the country with their handlers to ISDS type trials are top-notch dogs, at the top of their game and the top of their breed. This sort, for the most part, will only be bred to the best of the best with the hope of the outcome being better working dogs then either parent with each other?s strengths combined to complement the others. More then likely, these sort of puppies will be sold into all working homes that have no interest once so ever of registering with AKC. These dogs are the real things, they do what they were bred for and what the dogs before them in their original breed were bred for.

 

It often offends a lot of AKC people when we call their dogs Barbie Collies because they can no longer work like the breed they so often claim to be. They are no longer the same breed as our Border Collies and never will be again, ever, for the Border Collie is only judged and based on its ability to work while the Barbie Collies no long even hold a flickering thought of competition for our superior working dogs.

 

When people get offended of the name ?Barbie? which has been bestowed upon their dogs from their own doing, all I can think of is ?Well if you?re upset, how do you think we feel? Having fool dogs like yours running around show rings falsely representing our breed to millions and millions of unknowing people!?

 

They only have the dogs they have and they can only take what they are given.

 

Keep our culture safe. Don?t buy from AKC breeders, dual registered or not, don?t sell to buyers that ask about AKC first (unless if it is to make sure your dogs are not AKC registered, then it?s a good thing), and most of all, talk to people about our fight for what is right.

 

Katelynn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Katelynn you are right on the mark. There is not one single breed of dog the AKC has taken that they did not ruin in respects to what it was bred for. If you look in the rules for AKC champs not one word is there to be found for poodles on its retrievability. Or rat terriers on its ability to find rats. Nor will you find one regarding rotts attacking bears. You will find that their wt must be so, their ht must be so, their coat must be so,,,,etc.,etc.,etc.!!!!!! Yeah, BCs are special, because they have not been ruined by the AKC powers that be that don't know squat about a "REAL" dog. Of ANY breed. As I said before. You will never find a dedicated coon hunter getting their dog out of the paper from an AKC breeder. They will talk with other coon hunters and see what bitch is in heat and what dog might do well with that cross. Why? Because they know a AKC coon hound most likely wouldn't even know what to do if a coon was thrown at them. Could you imagine puttin ANY BC in a corral with sheep and they just sorta look around? That would be sad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not so very long ago in my part of the world, every farm had its "Sheppie", an all-purpose collie dog that was generally BC, or a mix of BC and Scotch collie, and rarely a pure Scotch collie. This wonderful all-purpose dog rounded up anything that needed gathering -- livestock, poultry, children -- and provided companionship, gaurded the home place and could be trusted to stay within boundaries of the farm. Selective breeding meant the ones that exhibited mean tendacies were disposed of and the good ones were propagated with an eye toward continuing a breed of sensible, all-purpose, intelligent dogs. It didn't matter what color they were, or even relative size. Unfortunately the world is not a static place, and the need for this type of dog diminished. So the breeding program changes to answer today's needs. HOw you all decide to proceed will impact the breed for the next 100 years. Me, I seek out a discard, a reject whose talents didn't meet expectations because I remember the best part of our old "Sheppie" was his ability to be the best friend a little girl ever had and as adult, I've never been disappointed in the ones that have come into my life. Please don't forget when you're debating which traits to value and propogate, that the BC's gentle nature, loving heart and devotion to its family is a valuable characteristic as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by IronHorse:

quote:
Originally posted by Marty&Abigail:

I'm not saying that! I'm like you a supporter of working line! I'm just saying, and I'm speaking for Italians dog, that we sould work to improve the conformation. Because agility, show and some bad farm breeder.. made very bad breeding. And I'm speaking about legs.. that are not enought strong for run, sometimes because too haevy and sometimes to thin.. and a body not enought strong for long day work.. We don't have so many shepherd here that breed border collies for working.. so we have to do in onother way. I'm not a breeder but I have many friends that are breeders, or that mate their dogs because of their herding ability. It not easy for me to explain it in English.. :rolleyes:

If I understand you correctly what you are saying is that the Italian Border Collies need to be bred to a "working conformation" and away from a "show conformation" and from the way you describe the situation with the Italian Border Collies overall, I would agree and it sounds like you all are in need of good working stock.

 

By the way I think your english is very good, its light years ahead of my italian and you bring an entirely new prespective to the boards.

You even have an accent :D [/QB]

sometimes i forget some "H" or I write some words in a wrong way.. :D It's just a long time that I don't write i English.. I'm here also to improve it! eheeh..

And to speak about this beautiful working sheep dog! :D

 

Yes you understood me correctly. But not just away from "show conformation" but also from agility conformation(to small, to thin, bad legs) and sometime from bad working breeder(health problems). So the only way sometimes.. is to work on the conformation together with herding ability. We are not farmer, and so are not some of the breeder that I know, but they are trying their best to breed good working dog, strong dog in the head and in the body. Good for herding, and also for agility and obedience.. because Border Collies couldn't be breed just for wotking here in Italy..The fanatic of Trials unfortunatly are not so much here in Italy. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
is to work on the conformation together with herding ability. We are not farmer, and so are not some of the breeder that I know, but they are trying their best to breed good working dog, strong dog in the head and in the body. Good for herding, and also for agility and obedience.. because Border Collies couldn't be breed just for wotking here in Italy..The fanatic of Trials unfortunatly are not so much here in Italy
All right, so here's a dumb question. Why do you need Border collies? Is there no native breed that already has the athletic ability for sports that can be honed for whatever you all need? Consider this:

 

The work the Border collie does is what MAKES it such a cool dog. We know this because the working dog has NEVER been bred thinking about, "Well, let's make these legs a little thinner or use smaller dogs." The only thing breeders think when they choose a dog for breeding is, DOES THE DOG WORK CORRECTLY?

 

This creates the dogs that have the build you are seeing. As you mentioned, dogs with stumpy legs and square builds have a hard time keeping up with sheep in the Border collie's traditional working environment - large fields and hillsides.

 

What a dog that works, HAPPENS to look like, is only a small part of what makes that dog able to work. If you breed for one small piece of that you won't bring back the working ability, you'll just have more conformation dogs that can't work that have slender builds instead of blocky builds.

 

The only way to maintain working ability in a breed (which includes the temperament needed to do the job, the soundness needed to do the job, and the structure needed to do the job) - is to select only dogs that have DEMONSTRATED they have the working ability to do the job.

 

If you don't have the trials and shepherd work to prove the working ability of these dogs, then I question whether there's a need to breed ANY Border collies. That's breed, not own. Many of us who aren't interested in breeding - or for whom it wouldn't be appropriate - buy dogs from working parents.

 

But I actually have heard of some trials in Italy, plus there's a European circuit and training opprtunities all over the Continent. They are not quite at the level as their UK counterparts but the trials are something that is catching on quickly, from what I understand.

 

Your English is very understandable!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Rebecca, Brook Cove Farm:

All right, so here's a dumb question. Why do you need Border collies? Is there no native breed that already has the athletic ability for sports that can be honed for whatever you all need? Consider this:

 

The work the Border collie does is what MAKES it such a cool dog. We know this because the working dog has NEVER been bred thinking about, "Well, let's make these legs a little thinner or use smaller dogs." The only thing breeders think when they choose a dog for breeding is, DOES THE DOG WORK CORRECTLY?

No we dont' have a breed as the border collie in Italy e Ie don't need one, because I don't use Border Collie for sport. I work with horses and my dog stay with me.. and now she will star working with sheep.

Maybe you haven't read what I wrote.. but my friends BREED for working ability. So I don't understand why you are trying to explain to me what is a Border Collie.. and how it sould be breed. :confused:

 

This creates the dogs that have the build you are seeing. As you mentioned, dogs with stumpy legs and square builds have a hard time keeping up with sheep in the Border collie's traditional working environment - large fields and hillsides.

 

What a dog that works, HAPPENS to look like, is only a small part of what makes that dog able to work. If you breed for one small piece of that you won't bring back the working ability, you'll just have more conformation dogs that can't work that have slender builds instead of blocky builds.

yes.. I'm not saying that wee breed firt for morphology and than for herding. Our breeder that are good breeder, do the same reasoning that you have just did.

 

The only way to maintain working ability in a breed (which includes the temperament needed to do the job, the soundness needed to do the job, and the structure needed to do the job) - is to select only dogs that have DEMONSTRATED they have the working ability to do the job.

This is an UTOPIA! you know that.. you can use the same idea for any breed and any animal like horses. It's not like that, but I would like it very much. :cool:

 

If you don't have the trials and shepherd work to prove the working ability of these dogs, then I question whether there's a need to breed ANY Border collies. That's breed, not own. Many of us who aren't interested in breeding - or for whom it wouldn't be appropriate - buy dogs from working parents.

 

But I actually have heard of some trials in Italy, plus there's a European circuit and training opprtunities all over the Continent. They are not quite at the level as their UK counterparts but the trials are something that is catching on quickly, from what I understand.

I haven't said that we don't have trials!!!!!!!! :rolleyes: We have fortunatly.. but not so many as in UK. But not all the breedes breed just dogs that win trials.. or we would have all dogs with the same parents!! :D

 

Your English is very understandable!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I apologize for any misunderstandings. I have to respond to what looks like a statement that it's ok to breed for looks (even as a secondary factor), because there's new people reading this all the time and I want the difference to be clear and the reasons for that difference.

 

Your English is better than that last sentence - at least you don't run on like that. But I'vegot the flu and don't feel like fixing that.

 

quote:

The only way to maintain working ability in a breed (which includes the temperament needed to do the job, the soundness needed to do the job, and the structure needed to do the job) - is to select only dogs that have DEMONSTRATED they have the working ability to do the job.

This is an UTOPIA! you know that.. you can use the same idea for any breed and any animal like horses. It's not like that, but I would like it very much. [Cool] This is where I get tangled up. You say you do use the dogs as they were meant to be used. But you say you can't prove their breeding worth in the above manner.

 

The last two pups I purchased came from parents like that, so, no, I don't know that this is a utopian idea. My next pup will be like that too, and in selecting the breeding I had my choice of many, many nice crosses that were bred with ONLY top working ability in mind.

 

Not only WINNING trial dogs should be bred. Competance on the trial course is the standard - then you decide what type of dog works for you best and select pups from the dogs that demonstrate that ability the best. Then you go back to superior sires with those abilities, etc, and that's how the breed was created. Not a single time did anyone consider morphology and still we got this nice, well-rounded breed, highly athletic, very sound overall, adaptable, that everyone wants now for pets and sport dogs. Which is perfectly fine! As long as they are not bred to BE pets and sport dogs!

 

I appreciate so much your participation and your global view on this issue. I hope you don't mind my picking on your statements a bit in an effort to highlight the differences. and I do appreciate that you do value the working dog very much - I've seen your other posts. :cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a great thread. It has so many wonderful, intelligent replies and opinions.

 

I agree, that although a general look will always be characteristic of BC's, appearance really should be the last consideration when breeding Border Collies. I HATE that so many noble, smart, keen working breeds have morphed (thanks to ACK!) into apartment-friendly dumbed-down over-sized lap dogs. If you want a dog to lay around the house and love everyone and get occasional walks - get an English Bulldog, or even better a Pomeranian, not a Border Collie.

 

AND... just to let anyone know who's wondering if families seeking "pet" BC's should go out and buy a Barbie Collie... I have a real working BC, from working lines & cattle working parents. He is not suitable as a working dog, but he IS a wonderful pet dog! A wonderful pet dog is not uncommon in working litters. I consider him a much easier to live with, loving, and intelligent "pet" than all of my neighbors Yellow Labs put together. hehe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not know how you can blame Akc For the dimise of all dogs when the breeders decide what to breed and what not to breed

Then not blame ABCA for letting unworthy BCs from being regestered, or bred .

bobh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...