Do you support the akc?

"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 "
 
So it's sounds to me like the problem was these few members as well....not solely the AKC.Did AKC offer them some sort of compesation for "defecting'? Some incentive aside from showing their dogs? Just my curiosity as I knwo they've made some nice offers of free registration to the Coonhound folks...
 
Did your BC club/group offer these few members an outlet for showing their dogs...like a bench show with a dual CH. type deal or anything like that? again...curiosity. []

Well I dunno if they won....they got to keep the name Jack Russell out of the AKC but the Parson Russell sure looks a lot like them, and the description too. I wonder if the pedigrees cross over? Anyone know?
 
ETA: oh I see they sued to NOT accept AKC dogs into their registry...not vice versa...that makes more sense lol!

So it's sounds to me like the problem was these few members as well....not solely the AKC.Did AKC offer them some sort of compesation for "defecting'? Some incentive aside from showing their dogs? Just my curiosity as I knwo they've made some nice offers of free registration to the Coonhound folks...

Yep - it seemed to be on both sides to some extent. However, even when they (the AKC and USBCC) had previously agreed that the USBCC was the parent club they turned a blind eye and accepted this small group's sway. It seems all quite underhanded and steamrollish to me (on the side of the small group, and the AKC tbh). I don't know if there was incentive or not. Becca may know.

Did your BC club/group offer these few members an outlet for showing their dogs...like a bench show with a dual CH. type deal or anything like that? again...curiosity.

Not really. The Border Collie has been for many years a working dog, and most had no desire for a conformation type showing whatsoever. Had our club offered a conformation type competition, the result would still have been the same - losing the working ability in favor of breeding dogs for a certain "look" - tipped ears, unbroken white blaze, etc. It unfortunately IS a very slippery slope, and it is very dependent on fads of the day - what a group of people like to look at at the time, and the true working ability gets dumbed down and lost in dogs selectively bred this way.

Editing to get my facts straight:

The JRTCA stand on recognizing AKC dogs into their registry:

http://www.terrier.com/notices/lawsuit.php3

The JRTCA's stand on the AKC:

http://www.terrier.com/jrtca/noakc.php3

Well I dunno if they won....they got to keep the name Jack Russell out of the AKC but the Parson Russell sure looks a lot like them, and the description too.

Yepper. Actually, many of us BC enthusiasts would have been perfectly pleased with an arrangement similar to this. Call it something else, we'll be happy - because it has rapidly morphed into something else.

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.

 
unfortunately this has never been the case. As soon as competitions based solely on looks spring up, the health and functional ability of the breed has dramatically declined. Look at horses-- in horses, most folks are much more interested in functional abilities and temperament than in looks. Serious genetic problems similar to those that afflict dogs, like hip dysplasia and "collie eye", are rarely seen. Except in the few breeds that have conformation classes-- halter arabs and quarter horses, and breeds bred almost solely for color, like paints. Genetic diseases, poor temperaments, lack of functional ability are rampant in these strains of horses.
 
Look at the GSDs winning in the ring these days. Their hind ends are totally non-functional.
 

Remember that at the time there was only one venue for obedience, and at the time, as now, Border collies pretty much owned the upper rung of competitive obedience.  There were a few kennels who wanted to add to being top of their game in competitive obedience, whatever comes from being at the top of your game in conformation (I have no idea about this, but imagine being able to instantly, cheaply, and easily become the #1 or #2 in your breed by importing a few dogs).

For many years before the AKC took an interest in the BC, the obedience people did a great deal of lip service to the working folks, which were and still are the majority of the breed, until the AKC held out the carrot of being a big fish in a little pond.  At that time they started burning bridges like it was going out of style.  We desperately wish that the final bridge could have been burned - the abilty to dual register - but in spite of the wishes of people on both sides of the question, the AKC has left that open forever.

An interesting factoid - at about the same time in Canada, their kennel club attempted the same thing.  However, Canadian law requires that there be only one registration organization for any one breed.  A vote of current BC owners put the Canadian BC squarely outside the kennel club.  If the same law were in place here there would be no AKC Border collie today.

Oh I can completely understand about the [color=#cc0000]working thing. [/color]
 
BUT it just seems to me that mayhaps a whole lotta mess could've been avoided by simply giving those few, an outlet to show their dogs within their organization...and NOT awarding any CH's unless the dog also had a working or obedience title or something like this...they might not have felt their ONLY option was AKC. Now if these same few people would've hadda issue with the no CH without a working title...well then fooey on them they should pick another breed for sure. BUT if they were willing to abide by that...where would the harm have been?
 
Just a thought and hindsight is 20/20 lol.
 
ALSO...what is consensus on BC's in the Herding group at UKC? Looks like they've been there since 1990?

LOL.  UKC is kind of a non-issue since their influence on the gene pool is minimal.  UKC registered dogs are still not allowed to register ABCA, but we haven't heard any howls of rage on that front!  []

The ABCA would never sanction any type of conformation event.  The mission of the "triumvirate" of working orgs that oversees the working BC, is to preserve a gene pool of dogs selected only for their ability to work livestock.  The philosophy, which goes back to the beginning of the breed, is that to select very narrowly for a particular type of working style, one must not add in any other traits for selection.

It's a little like racing thoroughbreds.  Right now if you want a stable of fast horses, you go to several races and pick the ones that runs the fastest, the majority of the time (if you can afford them, lol).  What if you then said you wanted the fastest horses that stood no more than 16 hands and was only bay or black?  What would happen to your gene pool as you restricted your selection points while maintaining the racing standard?

We select for extreme performance.  We cannot afford to introduce any other irrelevant traits that would exclude genetic material from our gene pool.  Thus, as far back as 100 years ago, the founders of the breed recognized that conformation would be dangerous to the breed if it were added to the current performance standard - or it would require the lowering of the performance standard to maintain a healthy gene pool.

Therefore the ISDS (the first BC registry) and the ABCA from their inception have both been actively against the showing of Border collies in conformation events.

Oh I see.
 
It's pretty much a people trait I've noticed tho that seldom do absolutes last forever. It kinda is only a matter of time (a long time sometimes!)before someone wants something to be different than it is now, usually to match their own agendas or desires, lol!
 
If those people multiply and stick to their guns then they usually manage to get what they want. It is good sometimes...and as I suppose in this instance...it's not so good [] 
 
I'm sorry it's caused such a rift...my other breed Akitas has some similar stuff going on now but their issues are not even based on anything BUT appearance lol!

Yes, but most horse people will tell you that there are certain conformation traits associated with speed, endurence, ability to collect, etc.
 
Conformation DOES play a significant role in performance.  Why do you think that Quarter Horses, and other stock horses posessing QH blood are the horses most often seen in reining, cow work, speed events, etc--a lot of it has to do with their confo.  They are built for short bursts of speed and quick, tight turns.  They have to have the mental drive to perform of course, but without the proper confo for the job they will always be battling their own bodies. 

I think a lot of breeds are starting to address these issues for various reasons.  I don't mean to imply that our system is perfect.  We have a LOT of housecleaning to do.  As someone mentioned, health will quickly become a problem in the breed as fewer very high-level working dogs are bred from.  Temperament, soundness, and endurance are all pitched to such a high level in this breed that they are held together in a delicate balance by only one thing - the performance standard.  Touch that and the dominoes start falling rapidly.  The registry has acted on this by excluding dogs who achieve conformation titles and periodically explores the feasability of banning future dual registration.  The breed club is starting to move on this issue by developing a recommended breeders list and a code of ethics.  The trialing organization is exploring ways to make the competitions more accessible and public, and backing members in pursuit of higher honors like the World Sheepdog Trials.

I'm pretty optimistic that we can develop a paradigm that can shape a sound, high performance breed so that both modern farmers and canine sport competitors know just where to go for healthy, talented partners in work and play.

Conformation DOES play a significant role in performance.  Why do you think that Quarter Horses, and other stock horses posessing QH blood are the horses most often seen in reining, cow work, speed events, etc--a lot of it has to do with their confo.  They are built for short bursts of speed and quick, tight turns.  They have to have the mental drive to perform of course, but without the proper confo for the job they will always be battling their own bodies.

Sillysally, yes, that is true, however if you start to say that all QH have to be bay.... well then where are you?  Or if you say, well that QH is a champion reining horse, but his mane is too thin, don't breed him....  That's what is happening. 

I guess I think of "conformation" shows as beauty pagents.  Not actual conformation.  A fluffy Aussie or BC sure is cute, but does the coat really matter?  Does the color of the horses hair matter how good of a cutting horse he is?

Conformation DOES play a significant role in performance.

True. And any Border Collie whose "conformation/structure" makes it such that he or she cannot do the job day in and day out gets pulled out of the gene pool because it SHOWS UP in the work. If a Border Collie is "structurally unsound" and cannot meet the standard of work, they should not be bred. Its easy enough to figure out whether or not your dog is sound and structurally correct if you work it. No standing in a show ring necessary! And guess what? We're preserving and improving the livestock working ability because that is what is being bred for.

Easy enough, and we didn't even have to worry about whether or not the dog's collar was broken, or what the ears looked like... That's another reason why there is so much diversity within the working Border Collie... many BC's possessing slightly different "conformations" still get the job done, and to a high standard, and into their old age. Happily. Efficiently.

Edit to add: I am referring to Border Collies here:

Tashakota is right on. When you start breeding dogs based on "slightly tipped ears, white collar must not be broken, must have white blaze", etc, the crucial part (working ability) is being lost.

Again, the question becomes, how does one know the conformation is correct for the work, if they're not working their dog? I don't mean letting fluffy chase the sheep once a month, I mean really WORKING the dog. Likewise, how do they know they're "preserving the working instinct" if they're not working their dog???

So from the statement on working the dog....can I assume that OB work or Agility work is not really considered work as it does not encompass working with sheep?
 
Do BC people who title in Ag/Ob/FB, and don't really have interest in working sheep...rate on the light or dark side?
 
Trying to get a handle on where the lines are drawn....lol...it seems complex.

So from the statement on working the dog....can I assume that OB work or Agility work is not really considered work as it does not encompass working with sheep?

Do BC people who title in Ag/Ob/FB, and don't really have interest in working sheep...rate on the light or dark side?

Trying to get a handle on where the lines are drawn....lol...it seems complex.

[] It is a little complex, and a lot confusing. While obedience, flyball, and agility are noble ventures and important in their own right, work is typically defined as Stock Work. There is some debate about that, but as a general rule within the community (typically) "Work" or "Working" refers to working sheep, ducks, cattle - livestock.

The best way I can explain it is this. When it comes to the light or dark side, it has more to do with what the dogs was BRED for, than what the individual owner does with their particular dog. If I were looking for a dog to do obedience, agility, or flyball with I would STILL go to a working breeder. It is these qualities that come from a good working breeding that makes these dogs so awesome at other sports. I think its important for dog owners, and BC owners to do stuff with their dogs. Where we more or less draw the line is what they BREED their dogs for.

I have several friends/acquaintances that aren't into sheep, and use their dogs solely for sports. So? They bought from a working breeder - and don't plan to breed their dog. That matters.

Does any of that make sense? I'm in a chocolate chip cookie stupor at the moment.

At the risk of putting you guys to sleep, this explains it better than I can (I think):

http://www.bordercollie.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=008029

PS, Gina, I'd love to hear about what's going on with Akitas.