Do you support the akc?

Thanks for the great summary. Can you imagine conformation for E.S.? They're so diverse right now, shoving them into the cookie cutter would be distastrous. They would go the way of the BC.

I love the working BC's. Your reference to the conformation BC's makes me think of Jon Katz' reference to them as "Barbie Collies."

Sounds like a good move, Jamie!

 
This is where I will be exhibiting...
[linkhttp://www.vaxxine.com/rarities/]http://www.vaxxine.com/rarities/[/link]
 

Thanks for posting the link. It sounds like a good idea and I hope the trend continues! I'm sure your crew will knock 'em dead on the NAKC circuit.

I enjoyed reading about their feaatured dog, too. I'll be going back to learn more.

You're very welcome. I am excited about it. I will be showing there for the first time at the NJ shows next month.  I'll be sure to post about it for everyone

ORIGINAL: twelvepaws

Thanks for the great summary. Can you imagine conformation for E.S.? They're so diverse right now, shoving them into the cookie cutter would be distastrous. They would go the way of the BC.

You're welcome! Its quite a hot subject for many Border Collie owners. Nope, can't imagine it for the E.S. either. IIRC the Aussie folks contested acceptance as well, but there still is quite the grass roots effort amongst their working folk as well. The other good news is that even if it DOES happen for the ES, just like with Border Collies, Field Labs, Australian Shepherds, so on, if you have a nice foundation of people dedicated to preserving and furthering your breed then that is what is needed. Right now amongst the working BC's there is such lovely diversity it is amazing. But, that is a look thing, and the "look" diversity is maintained simply because the "look" isn't the common denominator. The WORK is the yardstick by which a true Border Collie should be measured (as to whether or not it is breeding material).

Matter of fact, with breeds in danger of being recognized, I think it would serve them well to consider it NOW, and be ready with plans of action.

I love the working BC's. Your reference to the conformation BC's makes me think of Jon Katz' reference to them as "Barbie Collies."

Aye, that pretty much covers it. In regards to the term, "Barbie Collie", one of my acquaintances coined the term a few years ago to signify the cookie cutter conformation dogs, and it seems to have stuck and spread like wild-fire.

Just for kicks, and because I have entirely too much time on my hands, here is the AKC's example of Border Collie:



as seen on their website, at www.akc.org. The dogs they're putting up look remarkably like this.

My June:



If you're interested in looking at some more working dogs, check out these links. Keep in mind, these photos are all copywritten, and cannot be used without the owner's express permission:

[linkhttp://www.bordercollie.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=14;t=001272#000033]Page 1[/link]

[linkhttp://www.bordercollie.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=14;t=001260#000008]Page 2[/link]

[linkhttp://www.bordercollie.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=14;t=001236#000000]Page 3[/link]

Just for a few. Lots of variety. But, like was said before - the work is the standard.

Re: "Barbie collies"  That term was coined during the "BC wars" before the AKC steamrolled the breed into the American conformation ring.  Colin Campbell, who used it first, lives not far from here.  Just so no one thinks Jon Katz invented it (gak)  My friend Eileen, who is president of the USBCC (working breed club), says it best:

[font="verdana, arial"]"Barbie Collie" was coined by Colin Campbell . . .during the dog wars. It means a [Border collie] bred to conform to a Kennel Club appearance standard. It is appropriate, even inspired, in that Barbie the doll is all about looks, and a dog bred to an appearance standard is all about looks.

I have working dogs - dogs upon whose ability to work livestock I really do depend for my income.  I also have a lap ornament.  I think Border collies have no place in the breed ring, but I don't think it's a bad thing for my Chinese crested (what other use does she have other than to be a pretty companion?).

My point is that I think all breeds should be subject to some external standard to select breeding stock.  There's really only two possible - performance and conformation.  My beef with the AKC is that the powers that be, will not let breed clubs decide between the two - or even add prerequisites to conformation championships.  It places an unhealthy emphasis on looks at the cost of performance - whether that be health, temperament, or the ability to do a job.

I'd be really pleased to see a conformation club that had a more progressive attitude about accepting more input from performance venues and the breed clubs to promote the "total dog" in each breed.  I still don't think the BC has any place in the breed ring but it would be nice to see a club that at least put performance on an equal footing with conformation.

By the way, here's some links on the battle to keep the BC out of the AKC:

The history of the "AKC wars" and how we ended up with two breed clubs (and five registries):
http://www.bordercollie.org/akc.html

And the genetics behind our stance on "no breed ring showing":
http://www.bordercollie.org/kpgene.html

I was hoping you'd pop in. [sm=biggrin.gif]

I feel the need to point out though for those reading this thread that are not all that familiar with breed clubs, the ultimate decision upon entering the AKC and any decision thereafter for the conformation changes to the standard belong to the parent breed club and only them.  The AKC has no say whatsoever in how a breed club chooses to write their standard and/or change it over the years as we have seen in many well known breeds.  Also interpretation and breeder judge education is also up to the parent breed club.  The AKC sanctions events, holds the registry and licenses judges, however the judges education is only as good as the breed club puts out. 
 
And politics in dogs shows.....well that is standard accross the board, no matter the breed, no matter the registry.  It's going to happen everyhwere.  Again, the judging is only going to be as good as the dogs that are put in front of the judge.   
 
That is often where the slippery slope starts.  The AKC is the most well known and therefore the most 'powerful' to the general public, so yes, entry into the AKC does impact a breed greatly however what happens after that entrance is up to the breed fancy and the individual members.  That is why it's so important that there is a balance in the breed club between people that are versed in all aspects of that particular breed, whether it be working abilities or conformation.
 
I think it's important to note also that without correct conformation a working dog cannot do it's job to the best of it's ability and may impact the amount of years a farm will get out of the dog.  Conformation should not be about just the outer looks.  It should be about structure/health first and beauty second.  And frankly good structure should make the beauty fall into place...at least in most cases. 
 
Since I too am involved with a breed that could be seperated into the working and show group, I understand where you are coming from.  We are very fortunate though in our breed that most everyone is onboard with both beauty and brains.  We also have one of the top LGD experts in the breed and she is well respected for her working knowledge.  We have our fair share of kennels that are all about beauty as any breed does, however I can say with certainty that the farm bred Pyrs from the deep working areas of the country are typically not physically sound nor healthy and are some of our biggest rescue problems.  Our club does it's best to make our presence known for farmers looking into the breed in order to educate that a well bred dog can also be a top notch working dog.
 
It really is the heart of the breed club that drives how the breed will be impacted.  If the breed club members are not unified, there is nothing the AKC could do either way.

Re: "Barbie collies" That term was coined during the "BC wars" before the AKC steamrolled the breed into the American conformation ring. Colin Campbell, who used it first, lives not far from here. Just so no one thinks Jon Katz invented it (gak)

Sorry, Jon Katz does not make a claim to coining the term. He just mentions it in one of his books, when he was getting famliarized with teh breed. I stated in haste and incorrectly. I'm blaming it on my working dog who was DEMANDING his rightful job, NOW!

Great post Jennifer!
 
My issues with the AKC involve the PAWS issue and now the newest conflict of interest with judges.
 

Jennifer, I truly wish it were true for us that the AKC respected the wishes of the breed club.  The USBCC had been working with the AKC for twenty years before the AKC decided to force the breed into the breed ring.  When the majority of members said "no", a few fanciers created new clubs to effect the recognition.  The kennel club didn't even let the club they approved as the parent club, write its own standard, adopting the British standard instead (which turned out to have some problems being applied to American dogs).  They continue to disrespect the wishes of the breed clubs - most recently they left the studbook permanently open, as if the BC were a rare breed (it's anything but), in opposition to the wishes of both the conformation people AND the working club, both of whom desired a permanent split of the breed.

American and British Border collies survived an entire century of being bred without reference to conformation.  Soundness is very important - the working club was at the forefront of finding the gene for CEA and now is working on epilepsy, unilateral deafness, and CHD.  But beyond soundness, form means nothing if it does not arise first and foremost from function. 

I'd like to note that true soundness can only be tested with a combination of performance tests and clinical evaluation - it's not something you can really eyeball in the breed ring.  For instance, exercise intolerance is a growing problem in the breed - but it tends to show up only after prolonged training or work sessions.  There's no clinical test for it, either.  Soft tissue unsoundness is another nagging problem that is not readily visible from a conformation standpoint.

So we feel that conformation evaluation would add nothing to our selection process, and in fact detract from the gene pool by adding requirements that have nothing to do with working ability (the ability to stand quietly, a particular expression, height or h/l ratios, showy coats and markings, head types and ear sets, eye color).  It it vitally important that as much genetic variation stay in this gene pool for it to remain healthy, as the requirements for working ability are VERY stringent and specific.

I don't know why the AKC wanted to mess with a good thing - acceptance into the kennel club would have gone without a hitch if they had simply allowed the breed to opt out of the breed ring.  There were zillions of BCs in obedience, however, and they wanted them out of "miscellaneous" and into the breed ring. 

I don't say any of this to bash the AKC - I just want to explain the odd history that the BC people have with the kennel club, and why you'll still hear a little rancor on that front when this subject comes up.

I just realized that in the interest of full disclosure I should mention I'm a director of the USBCC.  I forget where I am sometimes - that isn't relevant here most of the time, and when I got talking about this issue, I forgot y'all don't really know me! http://www.bordercollie.org/boardbio.html

Ok  the AKC does not "force" any breed into the conformation ring.  A group of people within that breed start the process and choose to meet the requirements.  As to performance dogs/working dogs being "better" healthwise than "conformation" animals.  I havent seen that unilaterally.  Plenty of working BCs with issues in eyes, hips, etc. 
 
It is more an issue of the quality of the individual breeders and their willingness to consider the whole dog.  If you breed to win in performance, you may choose to over look issues that might influence other aspects of the dog.  If you breed to win in conformation you might over look a different set of aspects.  As a breeder you need to be able to stand up to the "winning" pressure and breed what is the best possible dog you can produce.
 
Now please, dont misunderstand me, the AKC does many things that bug the heck out of me.  But it does offer me a venue to show case my dog(s) in mulitple pursuits. 
 
I am proud of my breed/variety which is typically one of the most titled (both ends) in any major dog show (conformation).   Luckily a fair number of folks in tervs try to develop dogs who live up to the ABTC motto.  A well balanced tervuren has a CH on one end and a UDT on the other.  Personally I would prefer it to read a CH on one hand and a HX ABC sdc on the other []

I support the AKC by registering my dogs with them, and also competing in performance events.  I also support the UKC, have my dogs registered with them and compete in their events.  Actually, my current litter is AKC/UKC registered. 

I bought an "AKC" sheep for my Collies a year ago and it's still alive - which is uncommon for a stuffie, so it must be of decent quality!

I just realized that in the interest of full disclosure I should mention I'm a director of the USBCC. I forget where I am sometimes - that isn't relevant here most of the time, and when I got talking about this issue, I forgot y'all don't really know me! http://www.bordercollie.org/boardbio.html

Oops! I suppose I should do the same. Sorry all, I forget because this is very new to me, but I am also on the Board of the USBCC.

Like I said, I think that the AKC is good for many breeds. My Papillon, Zippy, reminds me that there needs to be a standard of some sort, and since his only goal in life is to keep me company (and nobody else will sit in my lap) I think a conformation standard is just fine. And for any working breeds that are pleased with AKC recognition, good for them! We (by and large) are not. The biggest beef I have with the form follows function thing, is how can one know their "form" is correct if they don't work the dogs vigorously??

The JRTCA ran into a similar thing as the Border Collie, when the AKC wanted to recognize them. A small group of JRT enthusiasts were pushing for recognition, and if I recall correctly, it took a lawsuit to avoid such. Lucky for them they won. From what I've read they seem to be the first group to do so.

To me its pretty scary when a breed club has to bring on a lawsuit to avoid being included into a registry that they have no desire to be included in.