Breed Standards

I agree in theory, but then we all have to decide and agree on what a "working title" is.  Take GSDs for example.  Some people think obedience, rally, and/or agility titles are "working titles" and some think that only a SchH, PSA, or HGH title is a "working title".  Dogs from both camps do meet the breed standard, but a lot of people (such as myself) do not define AKC's other titles as "working" titles, but more like performance or sporting events. 

Some breeds are just better suited to be evaluated in other venues besides the AKC/UKC.

There really isn't any way that a judge cold relate movement in the ring to what a Border Collie is required to do in ISDS style events. For one thing, there are so many different styles of work (or rather a spectrum) that all get the job done, and the physical structure varies with the style.

For Border Collies, only a working standard is required.  No one out there wonders whether that dog lifting sheep at 800 feet and bringing them straight as an arrow to the handler with not a word needed, is a Border Collie.  

Becca,

     I mostly agree with you, but I also get annoyed when an AKC show person comments on the lovely movement of a certain dog, and in my opinion, said dog would never be able to do that outrun. Of course the AKC isn't the be all, end all of dogdom, but they do have the greatest public recognition, and critiscism, so I believe that higher standards would only have a positive effect. It could also encourage more interest in other venues with even higher standards.

     Most people don't have a clue that there is any other kind of competition other then the televised conformation,agility, and frisbee. Schutzhund? Lure coursing? Sheepdog trials?

dstull

Becca,

     I mostly agree with you, but I also get annoyed when an AKC show person comments on the lovely movement of a certain dog, and in my opinion, said dog would never be able to do that outrun. Of course the AKC isn't the be all, end all of dogdom, but they do have the greatest public recognition, and critiscism, so I believe that higher standards would only have a positive effect. It could also encourage more interest in other venues with even higher standards.

     Most people don't have a clue that there is any other kind of competition other then the televised conformation,agility, and frisbee. Schutzhund? Lure coursing? Sheepdog trials?

This is the same problem that was brought up recently in an Advocacy thread.

As an owner/handler I do not feel it is *my* obligation to somehow improve how my dogs and breed are perceived by the public if all the public cares to do is watch the Eukanuba show or whatever.  The AKC *IS* the reason that there are these exreme ring fads and breeding that is so obsessed with them that health and working abilities are tossed aside.  So why is it now the fancier's problem that the AKC has made a joke out of dog fancy?  I am supposed to spend all my money on their show entries and try to "prove" something to JQP when there are already PLENTY of venues out their that showcase and reward the correct traits for my breed?  And then they can say "but look at all the nice changes we've made!" when they were the ones promoting the rediculous ring trends and speaking outwardly against venues that have been designed to properly test the breed.  No thanks.

 What she said. This is the position the working community has always taken.  We've been at it for 125 years before there was AKC involvement in the breed, or a public perception other than a vague awareness of a "sheepdog" if they ever thought about it. We have nothing to prove to anyone.

Honestly, you really can't look at a dog and say, "Yes, that dog can do the job" or even, "No it can't."  Yes, I'm tempted to say that this dog can't possibly work five hours bringing up sheep for worming and hoof trimming - but how do we know until he's been trained and tried?

What is between those cute little ears is the most important thing about this dog.  The standard that produced his ancestors, as well as today's working Border Collie, is a high one of training that AKC titles don't even touch. You can get a herding championship and not even get near the level of training that my started young dog is at now (he's running in USBCHA nursery). The problem I have with this dog is not how he looks, but how he's bred, with little or no regard to actual usefulness as a working stockdog.

Before I'd consider Ted breedworthy, he will need to prove his competence at the Open level, on multiple courses, preferably at least one of the "big courses."  Plus, I've arranged in the next year for us to help out at a large cattle operation, and a large sheep farm near here (100+ ewes), to get an idea of his usefulness in practical situations "off the farm."

When I look for puppies, that's a minimum that I look for in a parent. 

I additionally ask myself, "Are the parents strongest at working in situations most like my own?  Were they easy to train or difficult? What were some of the training problems - were they problems I as a novice could deal with fairly easily or are they weaknesses I'll end up seeking pro help to fix?" 

Notice how working breeding always seeks to balance worst case scenarios.  We never look for uniformity (conformation), but only balance between all the extremes that make this breed useful.

Many different types of dogs can be successful at the ISDS style trials, but the work itself produces an overall predictability. Dogs that minimally will be able to do that natural outrun, lift, and fetch "out of the box" more or less. Dogs that have a natural balance between keenness and bidability. Dogs that have the reflexes and timing to catch tricky stock, but have the impulse control to hold and settle when calmness will move stock faster than push. 

Such a breed is one that farmers can take and not spend much time training, and still have them be great assets to them.  For a working breeder, every decision they make is centered on livestock, not the dog.  Can the dog do the job? How can we improve next time around? If there's any genius, can we concentrate it? This tends to encourage variety along a spectrum rather than uniformity.

Here's the mama of my next (I hope) puppy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bn_6OwARSKg&feature=channel_page She works a farm in the mountains of VA with hills so steep you can't ride an ATV down them.  The sire also works here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUDbd5Chzyc

Here's the grandsire last May - he's eleven years old here.  The occasional shouts you hear are because after picking up these sheep 800 yards away, he's ignoring her repeated requests to SLOW DOWN!!  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PBGtD7PG7o 

Notice that in all these vids, we walk and run and waddle and leap, but never do we trot. I can't really think of anything further from what Border Collies are all about in real life, than the breed ring and physical conformation standards.

I stand on the side of the breed standard supplemented by proof of sound temperment and sound health condition.  Granted organized dog shows REGARDLESS of the venue can be as much of a detriment as they can be a force for maintenance of the breed.  A standard can be interpreted as a guide to the minimum consideration of breed type.  It is not enough in and of itself.

It is the choices of the individuals who own the dogs and their williness to place one aspect of a dog's make up above another.   I do not own a BC but I do hang with quite a few people who do.  These folks compete in all venues.  I am close friends with some folks who have truly competitive (winning) dogs and acquaintances with many others.  They have purchased dogs from people who work.  There are dogs I know who have been bred from dogs with the gene for collie eye, and the exercise induced hyperthermia (I am sorry I do not remember the actual diagnostic term).  I know working K9 from malinois kennels that have incredible drive and work but HD.  They get bred.  Why, because work is the only consideration the breeders use.  I have seen considerable change in belgians in the 12 years of my club associations (and 10 years ownership).  The emphasis on heads in UKC and in Europe (where working titles or substantial temperment testings are required to receive breeding recommendations) has resulted in straight fronted dogs who can not trot in a circle.  That means, boundary work (when shifting the flock from field to field) becomes a more labor intensive. So even if the dog has wonderful skills and can even win in a French trial and do the job day in and day out, it will be for fewer years.

It is not the venues, it is not breed standard, it is the ethics of the people who choose to breed.

Ted's sire is a CEA carrier.  He was bred to a CEA Normal female and a solid working litter was the result, with the worst case scenario being that any of them MIGHT be a carrier also.  Carriers are normal sighted.  Chances are, however, that in the next generation, any that are selected for breeding will also happen not to be carriers.  And that will be the end of CEA in this line, but not the end of the line.

That is how selecting for work first operates.

As to exercise induced hyperthermia.  First, it's little known outside sport and pet breeding circles at the moment.  I HAVE seen dogs with exercise intolerance and heat intolerance and trust me, these dogs do not make it to Open.   

It's up to the puppy buyer to educate themselves on what constitutes actual working breeding.  I don't consider a dog that is one of four on a farm with twenty dog broke sheep, that has never trialed above the novice or nursery level, to be working bred.  More importantly, I don't consider the breeder to be one who is in a position to make the hard decisions about the difference between a dog that can do the day's work and one that can't.   I'm not a breeder but I've been a sheep producer for a while now, using dogs, and even my novice eyes can see where  even minor flaws can make a dog totally useless when you need them most. 

And I don't purchase pups from untried parents - I want to see that they are capable of the work, and have been doing it for some time, over a variety of conditions, and show the complete package of soundness, temperament, trainability, and health that is vital to a true working dog.

If anything, this actually proves my point that you can't stand on the outside and say, "That characteristic should be bred and that one shouldn't, and this is the best way to figure out which dogs make the best working dogs."

Honestly, I can't understand it.  It seems perfectly simple to me.  If you want a breed that works at a particular job, you train every dog you breed, to do that job.  You don't spend time and money and valuable stretches of a dog's short life, getting other people to tell you whether a dog looks like it might be able to do a job.

Besides, even if working breeders wanted to try to "show judges what working dogs should look like" - that battle was lost long ago, from the first that one of the above type Border Collies stepped in the ring.  Those dogs rule, period - they are "showy" and no working bred OR EVEN CROSSOVER BRED dog can hold a candle to their melting expression, sweet faces, glowing coats, beautiful flowing gait, lovely angulation (which is getting more oblique with each generation it seems), perfect round little feet, straight fronts and rears, delightfully set necks and toplines that allow beautiful draping of coats, and correctly set ears.

This is one of the most beautiful Border Collies I know:  the grandsire of my hopeful puppy:

Look what happens when he stands straight up though.  Note front, topline (particularly across loin).  I can just see the judges drooling over this: 

Especially when THIS is standing in the ring with him:

There's a reason for Rook's conformation though.  If we put in arbitrary standards on  how the dogs look, how can we maintain their ability to do the athletics that their jobs require?  There is a very strong thinking in our breed that it is BECAUSE we don't care about straight legs and pretty gaits at the trot, that we have dogs capable of this:

All photos of Rook copyright and property of Christine Henry.  Do not download or link.