On titles and codes of ethics

[DryCreek]

Interesting read....

http://lassiegethelp.blogspot.com/2007/12/on-titles-and-codes-of-ethics-or-how.html

[Lilavati]

That one is interesting . . . and in principle, I agree . . . i certainly agree with people not writing laws about things they know nothing about. However, though i agree in principle with breeding rock solid, great temperment dogs for pet homes . . . errr . . . just how would this is any way be managed? And besides, the public has to WANT fantastic dogs, regardless of pedigree first. In principle agree, in practice . . . ugh, it would never fly.

[Gempress]

Interesting, but I don't agree with many of the points. Most of it sounds like the typical ranting of some working dog people, trying to make show titles seems worthless.

There are a few things I do agree with. For example, if the AKC herding instinct test is really that simple (I don't know if it is, never seen it myself), I do agree that it's ridiculously easy.

But I DON'T agree that titles are just worthless scraps of papers, or that modern show "herding group" don't have any herding instinct whatsoever.

There is one basic flaw I see in these types of hardcore working-dog people. They are single-handedly attempting to push their breeds to extinction. Seriously. How many people *need* their dogs to herd? Or haul loads? Guard livestock? Hunt boar? And as the world and technology changes, these needs will get fewer and fewer. If a breed wants to keep its existance as times change, it needs to adapt. It needs to rely on its other qualities, not just its original working purpose.

I know my view is an unpopular one. But if EVERYONE got their dog just to serve its original purpose and be genuinely useful, almost all of us would be owning toy breeds. I see nothing wrong with certain lines that have become "soft" enough to live in modern society as pets.

[Lilavati]

Interesting, but I don't agree with many of the points. Most of it sounds like the typical ranting of some working dog people, trying to make show titles seems worthless.

There are a few things I do agree with. For example, if the AKC herding instinct test is really that simple (I don't know if it is, never seen it myself), I do agree that it's ridiculously easy.

But I DON'T agree that titles are just worthless scraps of papers, or that modern show "herding group" don't have any herding instinct whatsoever.

There is one basic flaw I see in these types of hardcore working-dog people. They are single-handedly attempting to push their breeds to extinction. Seriously. How many people *need* their dogs to herd? Or haul loads? Guard livestock? Hunt boar? And as the world and technology changes, these needs will get fewer and fewer. If a breed wants to keep its existance as times change, it needs to adapt. It needs to rely on its other qualities, not just its original working purpose.

I know my view is an unpopular one. But if EVERYONE got their dog just to serve its original purpose and be genuinely useful, almost all of us would be owning toy breeds. I see nothing wrong with certain lines that have become "soft" enough to live in modern society as pets.

Well, yes, I do agree with that point. On the other hand, the current alternative, if you want to breed "legitimately" is breeding for conformation . . . which would be fine, except that soooo many of the conformation breed dogs are bred exclusively for their appearence. There's really no place, currently, for breeding dogs to be, primarily, pets. Or there is, but its the BYBs and the mills, and we won't even discuss that.

[HoundedByHounds]

Exactly I refuse to believe ALL the Corgi's, Collie's, Shelties surrendered to shelters because they "nip heels" or "chase cars" etc are from "hardcore working lines" No..they are from BYB's and show lines and working lines ALL...and guess what? the instincts remain..to torment or delight the owner.

[Dekka]

I did like the article. I know so many dogs with no herding instinct that have their HICs. I agree its nice to have something to show the instinct is still there, but the bar is set waaayyy to low. I think the conformation ring (I don't care who's fault it is, ie the breeders, kennel clubs etc) has ruined so many breeds, I have met my fair share of dogs with ch. in front of their names that are so far off what the original was, or were so messed up tempermentally, etc. I do think titles are good, just not as the sole method of judging the dog. If I met a dog with an OTCH, a ch. a working title or 2 and a MACH (or equiv) I would be highly impressed. The dog would likely have to have a good tempement and good structure to achieve this. One title venue alone means not a lot to me.

[HoundedByHounds]

It's always amusing to me that the "show breeder" who statistically breeds the LEAST number of animals of a given breed yearly...is always the ONLY source mentioned when one talks about the dumbing down or bad health, of a breed.

It's not the BYB's or the Mill folks...and god forbid it's the working folks.

We breed the least....under the most restriction and glaring from the public...yet we are capable of ruining entire breeds. Yyyeah.

I place my puppies...and I see newspaper ads for Beagle pups from some BS registry for $75-150...yet *I* am responsible for overpopulation, health issues, dumb issues, etc. Where do you think the parents of these $75 pups came from, I wonder...what pedigrees do they go back to? I have seen a few pedigrees and I can say...it ain't who gets most of the blame. *eyeroll*

[Lilavati]

It's always amusing to me that the "show breeder" who statistically breeds the LEAST number of animals of a given breed yearly...is always the ONLY source mentioned when one talks about the dumbing down or bad health, of a breed.

It's not the BYB's or the Mill folks...and god forbid it's the working folks.

We breed the least....under the most restriction and glaring from the public...yet we are capable of ruining entire breeds. Yyyeah.

I place my puppies...and I see newspaper ads for Beagle pups from some BS registry for $75-150...yet *I* am responsible for overpopulation, health issues, dumb issues, etc. Where do you think the parents of these $75 pups came from, I wonder...what pedigrees do they go back to? I have seen a few pedigrees and I can say...it ain't who gets most of the blame. *eyeroll*

You personally? No. Conformation breeders? Yes, or, sort of. There's no doubt that mills and BYBs are worse than show breeders by a mile. A completely defective dog can not be shown in the ring. A dog way off the standard can not be shown in the ring. A dog that is unmanagable can not be shown. So, conformation breeders are not the worse offenders. Nor are they responsible for the over population problem. In fact, many conformation breeders I know turn out wonderful dogs.

But the fact remains that there are many who breed exclusively for appearence, with just enough attention to other factors that their dogs can be shown in the ring. That in many cases breeds have been distorted almost beyond recognition (think English Bulldogs) or have had health problems exacerbated by inbreeding. In some cases, as well, the breed clubs or the standard seem to conspire to damage the breed. One glaring example is the merles other than blue rule with Cardigan corgis, which has fragmented the gene pool of an already rare breed. Great thinking folks.

But you are completely right . . . conformation breeders are not the worst offenders, and many are not offenders at all. But there are more than a few who contribute to the problem, if only by breeding for the 'fads' in a breed's appearence and by placing looks above all else.

[Dekka]

It's always amusing to me that the "show breeder" who statistically breeds the LEAST number of animals of a given breed yearly...is always the ONLY source mentioned when one talks about the dumbing down or bad health, of a breed.

It's not the BYB's or the Mill folks...and god forbid it's the working folks.

We breed the least....under the most restriction and glaring from the public...yet we are capable of ruining entire breeds. Yyyeah.

I place my puppies...and I see newspaper ads for Beagle pups from some BS registry for $75-150...yet *I* am responsible for overpopulation, health issues, dumb issues, etc. Where do you think the parents of these $75 pups came from, I wonder...what pedigrees do they go back to? I have seen a few pedigrees and I can say...it ain't who gets most of the blame. *eyeroll*

I don't think anyone was pointing fingers.. (I breed too) BUT I do know of some breeders in my breed (thinking of one in particular) who produces HUGE numbers of puppies a year, and IMO while her dogs to well in the conformation ring, they are not good representatives of the breed and there are a fair number of health issues in the lines she breeds.

And look at the fox terrier, conformationally it would no longer fit down a fox hole. Maybe in some people's minds thats fine. To me that is ruining the breed. I have met stunning looking ch. BC who couldn't herd to save their lives..how is that in the best interest of preserving the breed? Need I mention the GSD? in one of the threads on this forum someone showed an old photo of a very nice dog and asked do they ever get breed like that anymore..the response was interesting. I lost a lot of respect for the show ring when I saw the fattest, heaviest lab win at Westminster. There is no way that dog could handle a day in the field.... these things are not being done by byb and millers.

Of course miller and BYB breeders are bad. That is a given, and really is only peripheral to the issue at hand. No one imagines they have a breeding 'plan' or have the best interests of the dogs in mind.

[corgipower]

Morgan comes from the top lines in her breed ~ on both sides of her pedigree. She has a list of health problems a mile long. I have no doubt that those problems are coming from the line that she's inbred on. But no one who is breeding that line or who bred some of her ancestors even want to discuss it. These lines prodice some great workers and some beautiful corgis. But that's not really helpful when she has a hormone imbalance, a heart murmur ~ because her heart is too big, a history of pancreatic problems, hips that are loose, and knees that luxate.

[HoundedByHounds]

Vicious circle...and the only one's being hurt are the breeds involved.

The root of the issue is people...people wanted the Bulldog to look the way it does...and now it does....so now they don't, now it's horrifying!...so soon they won't look like that anymore...but then that "old look" will be resurrected as "rare" and guess what? Round and round we go! Same with the other old favorite breed to bash on...GSD's...

There is nothing new under the sun...as the saying goes...breeds will always change...people will always complain..."resurrect" "recreate"...and then fads will change again...lifestyles will change again...and we'll go around again. Fads have driven dog breeding since it began...competition too...Farmer John liked Farmer Ted's dog but he hated Farmer Ted so he created his own version of the same breed but BETTER...Lord Hurley loved Lady Hairston's Setters but thought they'd be nicer in Black and Tan so he bred his own version that could outhunt her's and even better weren't nrealy as ugly, but then she bred her's even PRETTIER...etc etc...

[Dekka]

I have nothing with making new breeds (as long as its not the byb or millers doing it lol) But to change a dog to the point of it no longer being able to work is silly. A new colour, etc is fine. But how does breeding lines with hip displaisa fit in? Or other known genetic issues just because that dog can win in the ring. Not saying all breeders do this, heck some of my close breeder friends would never ever do such things. But we all know who does these things.

[HoundedByHounds]

Of course I know people who cut corners in breeding...I know them in show, sport, and hunt and BYB fields all...and all are equally annoying. But I don't see the point in laying the blame for an entire breed's decline at their door. It take a village...and genetic disease has been around a lot longer than they've been...and people have been ignoring it a lot longer than they have...right back to the beginning of most breed...even working ones.

[Lilavati]

I have nothing with making new breeds (as long as its not the byb or millers doing it lol) But to change a dog to the point of it no longer being able to work is silly. A new colour, etc is fine. But how does breeding lines with hip displaisa fit in? Or other known genetic issues just because that dog can win in the ring. Not saying all breeders do this, heck some of my close breeder friends would never ever do such things. But we all know who does these things.

I could even tolerate not being able work, or at least not being the best at it, because working dogs make terrible pets in many cases (though I'd like at least an echo of the instincts there!) . .. but the hip dysplasia is one example of the problem . . . or, talking about English bulldogs . . . the problem is not that they don't look like the old type (in my mind) its that they've been exaggerated so much they have huge health problems. I LOVE EBs . . . I even like them just as they are . . . but I'm unwilling to take on the health problems that I have a good chance of getting with one no matter who I get it from. Its one thing to go for a look . . . and another thing to take it so far that the animal is barely functional.

[Dekka]

HBH I know its not JUST the breeders. But I would think, perhaps I am overly optomistic, that people who breed and show do so because they love their breed. And I have issues with how people who go around saying dogs should only be bred to better the breed (which I agree with) but will breed dogs with known health issues, but will point to the fact that because the dog wins its bettering the breed. I know of a few working people who will breed to lines known to produce health issues. But at least a good working dog will have to have decent structure and athletisim to be able to to work for any length of time, an appropriate temperament and instinct. Conformation only tests the dogs structure and ability to trot prettily. How many dogs actually work at a trot (some do, but many don't) I know many a horse that has a stunning trot but can't canter worth a darn..and therefore is not athletic enough to succeed in any career other than maybe driving. This is why in some breeds of horses, the horses at inspections are shown loose so that all gaits can be assesed. To many fancy trots but useless horses have been approved.

[RD]

Truthfully, I agree with everything Luisa mentioned in her article.

Show breeders are mentioned the most because in many working breeds (such as the border collie), they're glorified for producing the prettiest dogs that are in the spotlight the most. When truthfully, they are a variation of BYBs. I do not mean this to be offensive to the members here who breed their dogs for the show ring - chances are, your breed is not widely used to do what they were originally bred to do. I don't know many Beagles who are still needed to hunt in packs, or GSDs that are needed to tend flocks, APBTs that are used to fight other dogs, etc. Border Collies are still needed as working dogs, and to breed for anything other than working ability is to harm the working Border Collie as a breed. If someday there are no more sheep or cattle farms and people don't need herding dogs, then by all means it's doing right by the breed to select for other traits. But until then, breeding away from the original purpose (the "standard", I guess you could say) is only hurting the breed.

Breeding show dogs from show dogs? Fine. I have 2 dogs from show/sport lines and it's very clear that they were bred as show/sport dogs, FROM show/sport dogs. In most of the breeds that still fill their original niche, you have a very sharp, distinct line drawn between show lines and working lines. It's almost like they are two separate breeds. If you keep to those "variations" and don't harbor illusions about the working ability of the show-bred dogs, I see no problem with it. Just don't take existing working lines and ruin them for work by breeding for appearance only. People buy dogs from working lines because they want a dog that can do it all, but why is it so important that a dog win a conformation championship? If it's of major importance to anyone, they're not breeding for a working dog, they're breeding for a pretty dog that can also work. And soon the pretty side takes over, and the "work" standard gets lower and lower. What does it matter, anyway, since the dogs are "just pets" most of the time? This is the kind of thinking that sends the quality of a former working breed down the gutter.

As for the instinct being present in all dogs, that's halfway true. Yes, a skeleton of the "herding instinct" remains in dogs no matter how far removed they are from their heritage. My show/sport bred dogs still have an interest in stock, they'll still pursue livestock and try to stop them, but is that herding instinct or prey drive? Is nipping at a running child's heels indicative of an ability to control livestock, or is it the little voice that every dog has in his head, saying "chase things that run away"?

The term "instinct" is thrown around way too casually. Look at Bev Lambert's dog working in that video clip. The ability to control sheep at that level of precision at that distance? THAT is herding instinct. Yes, Pippa has been highly trained but training can only take a dog so far. She has natural working ability. No matter how much I train Dakota, he will never be able to do that. He doesn't have the inborn ability.

Show breeders like to kid themselves and think that their dogs can do exactly what Pippa does in that video. THEY CANNOT. If they could, AKC's herding trials would be the same as the USBCHA herding trials. AKC trials would have a 500+ yard outrun in an open field, not a 20 yard outrun in an arena, if the working ability was the same. AKC trials would have a shedding activity, a long fetch and drive, sometimes a double lift outrun (I know it's a lot of lingo, and I don't have the time to define it all. Suffice it to say, these things are not easy.) But the working ability isn't the same, and it's unfair to expect a show dog to be able to work at a high level, just as it's unfair to expect a working-bred dog to win best in show at Westminster.

I ramble. I always ramble on this subject. So, in short, I agree 100% with the author of the blog. I think she's one smart gal.

[OutlineACDs]

I did like the article. I know so many dogs with no herding instinct that have their HICs. I agree its nice to have something to show the instinct is still there, but the bar is set waaayyy to low.

The HIC is a certificate, NOT a title. Both of my dogs have HIC's, but I do NOT claim that they are herding dogs. This is the same as claiming that a CGC is a title. It is only a certificate, and it means next to nothing. (No offense to those who have CGC's)

[Dekka]

but when you get your CD thats 'only a certificate' too. Or your ADC etc. I know people who consider a CGN/CGC a title.

[DryCreek]

I agree 100% with the author of the blog. I think she's one smart gal.

I agree RD, I visit her blog daily ;)

One thing that needs to be pointed out....

Herding is a canine instinct, no a breed specific instinct. Many different breeds can carry the herding instinct and follow it to a certain level. Some breeds tend to be better than others yet there is no guarantee.

You have a larger variation of the trait within a breed as compared to variations in canines as a whole. There are those (such as Pippa ) that are born to it, while others need varying levels of training to do the job yet they will never be quite as good as a natural. And, as we all know, there are those of the breed that are at the opposite end of the spectrum and couldn't herd their kibble in a round bowl!

The fact that theres an APBT with a herding title blows breed specific traits right out the window.

The fact that any herding breed dog, (work, pet or show), shows a minimum herding ability/instinct is no surprise as it's a common trait among many breeds. It's those that go beyond and not only DO the job, but do it well and love it, that's a goal worthy of striving for in a breeding program.

[darkchild16]

APBT's were originally herding dogs ;) J.D. did all the herding on our ranch.

[Renee750il]

Title or certificate, a CGC is an Accomplishment and it makes a statement.

And no, mine don't have CGCs.

[RD]

I agree RD, I visit her blog daily ;)

One thing that needs to be pointed out....

Herding is a canine instinct, no a breed specific instinct. Many different breeds can carry the herding instinct and follow it to a certain level. Some breeds tend to be better than others yet there is no guarantee.

You have a larger variation of the trait within a breed as compared to variations in canines as a whole. There are those (such as Pippa ) that are born to it, while others need varying levels of training to do the job yet they will never be quite as good as a natural. And, as we all know, there are those of the breed that are at the opposite end of the spectrum and couldn't herd their kibble in a round bowl!

The fact that theres an APBT with a herding title blows breed specific traits right out the window.

The fact that any herding breed dog, (work, pet or show), shows a minimum herding ability/instinct is no surprise as it's a common trait among many breeds. It's those that go beyond and not only DO the job, but do it well and love it, that's a goal worthy of striving for in a breeding program.
Interesting thoughts, DryCreek.

Personally I disagree, I don't think all dogs carry an instinct to herd (to bring stock together or drive them to a specific point). Herding is a very refined form of prey drive. Do all breeds have prey drive, or a drive to chase moving animals? Absolutely. And prey drive is a beautiful thing that can be harnessed into extreme usefulness. APBTs as cattle dogs, for example. Are these dogs skilled at moving livestock without training? I highly doubt it. I bet when you put a drivey, untrained APBT in a pen with some sheep, the dog will chase and think it's a game. With a lot of training, this dog could become an incredibly useful stockdog in close quarters (such as arena trials in which the APBT earned his/her titles). But some breeds need to have a higher degree of natural ability in order to a job where a person can't always be right there to correct them if they're wrong.

I absolutely see what you're saying, but I think there's a difference between a dog that truly has herding instinct, and one that just does "obedience on stock". Both can be very useful with the right job and the right handler, but I fear that this could be used as an excuse (in breeds like the border collie) to breed dogs with less ability, because it's easier to do so.

I couldn't agree more with your last sentence. :)

[DryCreek]

I don't think all dogs carry an instinct to herd

Neither do I, but I stand by my opinion that the instinct is not "totally" breed specific. If you take a breed that is not "normally" considered a herding dog, yet it shows some instinct towards the task, I believe you could alter this breed through years of trait specific breeding. In other words, you can create a herding dog out of non herding dog stock given enough time to alter the purpose (It won't happen overnight and would require intense selection standards.)

Now, I'm also basing this on the HIC cert being talked about on the blog, if it is as easy as stated, many breeds never thought of as herding dogs might be able to acquire this cert...;)

I think there's a difference between a dog that truly has herding instinct, and one that just does "obedience on stock". Both can be very useful with the right job and the right handler, but I fear that this could be used as an excuse (in breeds like the border collie) to breed dogs with less ability, because it's easier to do so.

That, unfortunately, is a breeder specific trait LOL.

Breeds were developed for tasks when the dogs showed a natural affinity for the job. Some dogs were physically built for the task, some had the intelligence required for the task. Through selective breeding in working environments these dogs became specialized for the job the working homes needed done.

But, working stock was also developed (were talking way back when) by mixing different breeds, each with specific traits towards the job required, until they started breeding true as the herding dogs we see today.

It's not a program I would undertake, LOL. I'm not one to fool around trying to create a "new herding breed". But, given enough time, I believe it is possible to do so.

It's not needed as our ancestors have already done the job, but it is interesting to theorize.

[Gempress]

It's interesting to me how many people on this forum stress "breed for work only!" Yet at the same time, very few of us own working-line dogs. And we discourage people from getting working-line dogs as simple housepets---too drivey, requires too much work for most, needs experienced handler, etc.

I don't have problems with working line dogs. I'm all for it. But I am definately against all dogs being bred specifically for working ability. I think it's silly to put the breeding emphasis on a trait that only 0.5% of dogs (actually, it's probably less than that) really use.

I think it's elitist, plain and simple. We're wanting delegating these breeds to a priveliged few who have sheep to herd or ducks to fetch---ironic, considering how *few* of us on Chaz who own these working breeds actually do that. Wait, I forget the usual working dog owner's motto---"Oh, but that doesn't matter in my case. I use that drive for other activities." As if there aren't perfectly wonderful mutts or toy breeds out there who can do weight pull, run agility or learn Rally-O.

Whether we want to admit it or not, almost all of us with dogs bred for jobs simply don't need that dog's original skills. We don't. We get the breed because we love the look, the temperament, the intelligence, the history, the coat, the size. Not because we have geese that need fetching or lost children to find. So why do we keep insisting that all dogs of that breed MUST be bred for working ability?

[HoundedByHounds]

My guess would be...control issues...personally. Dog people have those a lot...do as I say not as I do is a close second. ;)

[Dekka]

but why do you want a breed if you can't handle it? For example why choose a BC if you can't handle an intense drivey dog? Why are some working lines bred to be so hard. I have met some very nice working dogs who also make good pets, the two are not mutually exclusive.

Why must we destroy the very traits that makes the breed special in the first place, just so every average Joe can live with it? There are many breeds that are average Joe friendly. And some people are making new breeds for Joe public. IMO we should leave the working dogs alone when it comes to 'dumbing them down'

Just as an example. Snip has only been out hunting twice. No idea if he is going to be really good at it, but he shows a keen interest and has been shown to engage the quarry. He is also one of the best pets I have ever owned. He is friendly and out going with all dogs, is very laid back in the house, not hyper, sleeps in bed with me etc. The two can coincide.

[HoundedByHounds]

I've seen plenty of average Joe's live with Labs, Goldens, Beagles just fine...show or field line. Bottom line is this...the demand is for pet dogs...of whatever breed. NOT working or show dogs...period. That is reality....that is not going to change..ever...no matter how much hue and cry is raised. Esp with hunting the ability for 'dog to do what they were bred for' will shrink...not expand as AR makes their progress.

The working/show folks should realize their ideals...are NOT the ideals of the majority of people who own, or want the breed...and resolve to preserve what is important TO THEM...and not push other people to think the way they do, or assume people who don't CAN'T HANDLE the breed, because that only alienates people...and gives a negative feeling about niche (meaning working...hunting...show....sport people who do NOT breed for public pet demand but for their own purposes)breeders.

Negative feelings among JQP, translates to a real lack of support when it comes to legislation,...i.e. "those snooty show/working/agility/flyball/hunting people DESERVE to lose their dogs...they don't think I'm good enough to own one, anyways".

We must always remember that DOG PEOPLE NEED TO STICK CLOSE TOGETHER because divide and conquer is the mantra of the AR movement...and when they go after the working people...like Open Field Coursers for ex or Earthdog trialers as "stressing and harming wildlife in the pursuit of their own sick brand of fun"....who will stand up for you?

JQP? who you told couldn't "handle" your breed, that they were being bad owners because their dogs don't work but instead provide companionship? or shouldn't own one, period?

Show people who you insulted numerous times about their dogs being dumbed down Barbies?

All you's general...and not aimed at anyone in particular.

[HoundedByHounds]

just a last thought. The AR movement is here and it is real. The time for the sort of divisive writing in the woman's blog...is past. the time for sniping at one another's breeding programmes...aims...goals...is past. The time for "my dog's better than yours" is past...the time for blaming he she or it for the way a breed looks now...is past.

We must all accept that in spite of our differences WE ALL LOVE DOGS...and we all would like to be able to own WHATEVER breed or mix, we want...so long as we can provide for it. There are people who DON'T want that...and they are the enemy...not anyone else who is breeding responsibly,...owning responsibly...and loves their dog or breed.

[Dekka]

Well as long as there are conformation (and other shows) there will always be the 'my dogs are better' etc going on.

And I will just have to agree to disagree. I don't see why the working traits in dogs can't be kept. Its those traits that cause people to fall in love with the breeds in the first place. If it wasn't for a group of working terriermen (and women I am sure) there would be no JRTs just Fox terriers. I like fox terries, but I, and many others (pet people included!) LOVE JRTs. Sure the average JRT isn't suitable for the average Joe. But many good pet owners have great JRTs. I have worked in rescue, I have seen some great homes. Why should all of us who love the tenacity and drive of these little dogs have to sacrifice this so people who could own a bichon (great small family dogs!) can own a JRT?

I don't see how lowering the bar and making all dogs similar and easy is going to help anyone, people or dogs. So we will just have to agree to disagree.

[Gempress]

And I will just have to agree to disagree. I don't see why the working traits in dogs can't be kept. Its those traits that cause people to fall in love with the breeds in the first place.

They can certainly be kept. I don't think that was ever in debate. I think the division was over whether ALL dogs in a breed should be bred specifically to be work-capable.

And in that, I think you're right in that we can only agree to disagree.

[HoundedByHounds]

I don't think I said anywhere that instincts can't be kept, or shouldn't be kept...perhaps you are confusing my posts with GP's?...in fact I think I stated examples of how "working breeds" are owned just fine and dandy by JQP.

I think there's a natural range of instinct/drive in any dog breed...some are great and some are only so so. So what? that range needn't be jacked up so high nor so low, IMO. the range of people breeding for different things is good for a breed....you never know when you might need an unrelated genetic group within the same breed...ask the Basenji people.

[Dekka]

lol yes I know about the basenji's I looked into them (can't find a breeder I like that will sell me one while I have JRTs) They had to go to africa to get new stock as all the dogs in NA were descended from 8 dogs.
(sorry if I misunderstood your posts..ug so tired need to go to bed earlier)

[HoundedByHounds]

Dekka, it's no problem. I think we have different views on some things...but that is okay. I love that you care so much about the heritage of your breed...and do your part to keep that strong. I think that is admirable.

[RD]

Gemp:

In a WORKING BREED I do think the dogs should be bred to be capable of work. Key word is "should". They aren't, I can accept that, but all I can do as a breed enthusiast is support the breeding practices that I believe in. Maybe it is elitist. Dog shows are also elitist, no? What about agility? Not everyone has the dog with the right appearance for the show ring, not everyone can afford to do agility... So should we not breed dogs for these activities too just because some people won't be able to do it?

I don't own livestock, but I take Eve to sheep whenever I get the chance. I don't own a full agility course but I take lessons with Dakota when I can. But I suppose I'm not worthy of having either dog because I'm a pet owner without the financial abundance to have both a farm and regulation agility course.

If breeders bred dogs to suit the majority, we wouldn't have wonderful specialized breeds like Border Collies or Dobermans or Filas. Work is what these breeds were created for, and only by breeding for the same work can you preserve the breed.

I've never said that someone looking for a pet border collie shouldn't get one from working lines. If they are the right home for a Border Collie, then they're the right home for one from working lines. If a sedentery person is dead-set on a BC and won't change their mind and go for a different breed, then yes maybe a "less intense pet version" would be useful. But that's not really a Border Collie they're getting, as far as breeding goes. They got a descendent of the Border Collie . . . It's morphed into a different breed, it just kept the same name as its working counterparts.

[HoundedByHounds]

Gemp:

In a WORKING BREED I do think the dogs should be bred to be capable of work. Key word is "should". They aren't, I can accept that, but all I can do as a breed enthusiast is support the breeding practices that I believe in. Maybe it is elitist. Dog shows are also elitist, no? What about agility? Not everyone has the dog with the right appearance for the show ring, not everyone can afford to do agility... So should we not breed dogs for these activities too just because some people won't be able to do it?

.

Nope...but neither need we ridicule belittle or make less of their aims and goals as breeders and dog owners.

[Lilavati]

just a last thought. The AR movement is here and it is real. The time for the sort of divisive writing in the woman's blog...is past. the time for sniping at one another's breeding programmes...aims...goals...is past. The time for "my dog's better than yours" is past...the time for blaming he she or it for the way a breed looks now...is past.

We must all accept that in spite of our differences WE ALL LOVE DOGS...and we all would like to be able to own WHATEVER breed or mix, we want...so long as we can provide for it. There are people who DON'T want that...and they are the enemy...not anyone else who is breeding responsibly,...owning responsibly...and loves their dog or breed.
:hail: :hail: :hail: :hail:

Amen. Though I certainly have my critiques of some breeding programs, etc, I will back this wholeheartly . . . we must all stand together against AR. And we must do it because we love dogs. What ever our internal squabbles are, about confirmation vs. working vs. pet . . . the precise definition of "responsible breeder" . . . etc . . . we need to stand together against those who would take away our dogs. This doesn't mean we shouldn't have those debates! They are important . . . but we should not abandon fellow dog lovers to ARists and oppressive legislation because of these quarrels. If the ARist wins, purebred/mixedbred, standard/not standard, working/confirmation . . . none of it will matter any more.

[RD]

My last post in this thread: Dekka, great posts. HBH, I couldn't agree more that dog enthusiasts of all kinds need to stick together, and I actually saw that in my breed during the proposed AB1634 (or whatever. Mandatory spay/neuter stuff) in California. When the pressure's on, people stick together more. Unfortunately it often takes AR throwing us all into a ring of fire to bring us together. ;)

Luisa's issue (and one I agree with) is that if legislation like this had passed, TITLES would be the only way AC would identify a "working" or "breeding quality" dog. Most working sheepdogs never get a title in their lives, and most people who brag about their low-level AKC "herding" titles on Border Collies probably own dogs that are a poor example of the breed as far as working ability goes. I would even go as far as to say that most of the people with the best Border Collies *don't* bother with the arena trials that give out titles. It's like putting a college-educated person in pre-school. They might be indicative of breeding quality in another breed but not in this one.

Anyway, I really don't mean to bash show breeders. They can do what they want, but I take offense when they claim that their dog, so far removed from their original purpose that they wouldn't recognize a sheep if it fell on them, can work just as well as my "ugly mutt" that was bred specifically TO work. If that's true then my "ugly mutt" can beat their dog in the show ring. ;) I

There IS a big demand for pets, and in the long run I'd rather see a pet dog come from a breeder who health tests, at the very least. So in that sense I am thankful for show breeders in Border Collies, if they are kind enough to newbies and pet owners to give them a chance - it keeps them from going to a BYB or mill for their puppy. Because face it, just because a breeder turns down a good, determined potential owner doesn't mean that they're going to kick all hopes of owning that breed. They just go to a different breeder. And I'd rather see them supporting breeders who, at the very least, are breeding HEALTHY dogs with sound temperaments.

Ack I'm rambling again. I knew I shouldn't have gotten into this thread, lol. Thanks for the discussion, ladies.

[Miakoda]

Dekka & RD, I've truly enjoyed y'alls posts! :)