brookcove
Posted : 1/8/2009 9:52:28 PM
Breeding that is too focused on trial success can produce a variety of not-so-useful characteristics in dogs. Generalizations are impossible because it depends on the style of handler, and the type of trials they prefer. The problems you mention aren't really an issue because the judges don't reward style or judge the dogs - it's all based on what the sheep do. So not matter what, a dog that lacks courage will not show well on sheep that are tough, and a dog with a hair trigger will do badly on nervy lambs that bring that out in a dog. You see enough trials and you'll see the major failings in most any dog.
But we did have a period, for instance, when it was fashionable to have a dog that worked a certain way that required a lot of fine tuning, because the top handlers were winning with those dogs. But, it was a type of dog that didn't translate well to your average farmer who needed a dog that could work naturally right out of the box.
Now those handlers are starting to face some dissatisfaction even with their students and are finding it hard to establish lines. So they are swinging the other way, looking for dogs that are more natural and self starters.
Before that trend, we had a ton of major trials where a certain kind of really crazy, deerlike sheep were used exclusively and the dogs that won had a lot of eye and were very careful workers. That was fine, but when too many like that are bred, eye starts multipying because it's progressive - when you breed eye to eye it increases in the next generation. We need the more upright workers, too. Soon we started seeing well-bred dogs who could barely move sheep, though they certainly were easy to get started.
It's a pendulum. But the checks and balances appear even at that level too - the trials are balanced by the people who are using the dogs, and the people who are using the dogs keep the breed consistent by going back to the trial standard.