Is This Wrong?

Originally Posted by RedyreRottweilers

AKC did not "get involved".

You must solicit the AKC to get a breed organized.

The Border Collie had been languishing in the Miscellaneous Class for many years, and they were told to make doody or get off the pot.

Sorry the AKC did get involved. Yes I"m quite aware that you have to approach them in theory, but in reality enough people like what the border collie was and wanted to show them as well. The AKC as the largest registry in the US should have some responsibility to maintain what a breed is. Instead they're more than happy to have shows collect your money and turn a fabulous breed that was hardly languishing, but rather a vibrant healthy working breed as it had been for years, into nothing but a "pretty" dog according to their standards. all one has to do is look at all the useful breeds that have been AKC recognized and after so many years, those dogs that are winning in the AKC and championed as the best of the breed are far from it. That's rather irresponsible and disgusting IMO.

[colliewog]

But there are other breeds being shown in AKC where their instinct is maintained (Vizslas come to mind, as well as ACD). I've seen a one-eye Cattledog in conformation - lost an eye working stock on the owner's ranch and it can still can compete because it was an "honorable injury". Or Vizslas with scars because they were injured in the field by underbrush.

Being AKC registered doesn't HAVE to be the end of a working dog, but the breeders have to maintain it.

Originally Posted by whatszmatter

Sorry the AKC did get involved. Yes I"m quite aware that you have to approach them in theory, but in reality enough people like what the border collie was and wanted to show them as well.

What happened was the AKC told the BC people that they could no longer stay in the Misc. Class to show in obedience. They HAD to form a breed club and apply for full recognition, or they were going to be dumped from Misc, and no longer able to show and earn AKC obedience titles.

The AKC as the largest registry in the US should have some responsibility to maintain what a breed is. Instead they're more than happy to have shows collect your money and turn a fabulous breed that was hardly languishing, but rather a vibrant healthy working breed as it had been for years, into nothing but a "pretty" dog according to their standards. all one has to do is look at all the useful breeds that have been AKC recognized and after so many years, those dogs that are winning in the AKC and championed as the best of the breed are far from it. That's rather irresponsible and disgusting IMO.

I think many people who breed working show dogs would take umbrance to your blanket generalizations.

In what way should the AKC take responsibility for what breeders bring to their show rings? The AKC is a REGISTRY. The National Clubs write the standards, and the breeders make the decisions on what to breed and what gets shown. Those breeders who don't choose to keep working ability important in their lines may lose it.

I'm interested in what plan you would implement to have AKC control the direction a breed takes when it's shown in AKC dog shows.

[tempura tantrum]

In what way should the AKC take responsibility for what breeders bring to their show rings? The AKC is a REGISTRY. The National Clubs write the standards, and the breeders make the decisions on what to breed and what gets shown. Those breeders who don't choose to keep working ability important in their lines may lose it.

How many different ways can we say this before people get it? I'm nearly at a loss as for what to try next!

The AKC as the largest registry in the US should have some responsibility to maintain what a breed is.

No they do not. Last time I checked that was the responsibility of the *breed club.* If you don't like what you see, well the only people you can blame are... the people actually breeding the dogs. AKC doesn't breed dogs. AKC doesn't draw up breed standards. It approves breeds, and it registers dogs so they can compete. Maybe it's a lovely idea in theory to have some AKC "breed police" making sure that everyone is doing right by their breed, but honestly, how realistic is that? And would you *want* that? I can tell you that I don't want anyone telling me how I should be breeding my dogs. When I want advice, I will go to mentors- people who have been in my breed for 15 years or more, not some yahoo that doesn't truly understand the Shiba standard, or what sort of linebreedings to stay away from when you've got a dog with a lot of Ryu in his pedigree.

I'm interested in what plan you would implement to have AKC control the direction a breed takes when it's shown in AKC dog shows.

I would be fascinated to hear this as well.

But there are other breeds being shown in AKC where their instinct is maintained (Vizslas come to mind, as well as ACD).

Excellent example! If it was purely an "AKC problem" then these breeds would be just as messed up as BCs. The truth is, the only people who can be blamed for this are some of the BC people themselves. I really love the ACD example myself. If you look at their standard, it's really the epitome of what a breed standard should be. They *explain* every reason behind the aesthetics of this animal. You know why the dog should have plenty of fill under the eye, you know why color disqualifications occur. I've been doing a lot of research on herding breeds lately, as I want something I can compete in agility with, and more and more I'm leaning towards an ACD. Somehow, the breeders seem to be getting it right with them.

The destiny of a breed lies in the breeders hands. Dogs do not magically turn into goofy slobs or pretty airheads the minute they enter a show ring. Blaming the AKC for ruining BCs is a bit like blaming the NFL for how badly your football team plays.

It's pure laziness in my opinion, for breeders to have all the tools at their disposal to FIX a problem, but choose instead to blame the one organizing body that can do nothing about it. If they really wanted to fix it they could be holding breed symposiums. Petition the one organizing body that not only CAN do something about it, but SHOULD: the BC national breed club!

[RD]

The destiny of a breed lies in the breeders hands. Dogs do not magically turn into goofy slobs or pretty airheads the minute they enter a show ring. Blaming the AKC for ruining BCs is a bit like blaming the NFL for how badly your football team plays.

Beautifully said, Tempura! I feel that the quoted statement in particular bears repeating.

I am not particularly fond of AKC, but if BC people are going to blame the registry for the breed's problems, they're barking up the wrong tree. I understand that the issue with the AKC is that it promotes the breeding of dogs for show purposes, but the registry never forced breeders to ignore working ability. The signing of the papers accepting the BC as a recognized breed had nothing to do with the breeder's decisions to breed only what would win.

[OutlineACDs]

Originally Posted by ihartgonzo

About the AKC getting "involved"... however it is that BC's were accepted, I completely feel the breed was better off as a whole before it was recognized.

You do realize that the "show dog" look of bc's that are showing in AKC actually came from imported dogs from New Zealand. The New Zealanders (or whatever they may be called ) were breeding for larger hairier dogs before America even thought about it. Then sent their dogs over here to make them American Champions, and the trend caught on. All of you are making assumptions that these dogs can't work, but I do know there are a number of Ch. border collies that do agility, obedience, herding etc. They did not breed the 'smarts' out of them, its still there. And there ARE people out there who show conformation and performance. Breed to their dogs.

[DanL]

I think one of the reasons that a dog like a Visla or ACD hasn't been bitten by the "breed them into a couch potato" bug is because they are not as popular. Border Collies are becoming a "soccer mom" type of dog where families want them but don't want to have to work them for hours a day, so eventually those drives get bred down to give the public what it wants. Same thing has happened with a lot of the the American GSD lines. People wanted GSDs but not ones that bounced off the walls because it's not out working like it should be. Obviously there are BC lines that are great working dogs and still can compete in conformation, but I imagine there are lines where some of the dog's basic working abilities are being subdued.

Originally Posted by RedyreRottweilers

I'm interested in what plan you would implement to have AKC control the direction a breed takes when it's shown in AKC dog shows.

Easy, you make the dog perform a suitable working test and show that it can still work, before giving and AKC champion anything to any dog. Then you don't have AKC champion being advertised as the best of the breed, when it can't even work.

and yes i'm well aware that breeders are responsible for the ultimate direction of the breed. But why is it so hard to see that the AKC may only be a registry, but most competitions that people will recognize are sanctioned by the AKC, you can't breed a dog (or not supposed to breed)without AKC registration. They are seen as a ruling body with power in this country, and with that comes responsibilities IMO.

To get to the NFL making my football team suck, in a way they do have control over that too. Your example, they set salary caps, they make rule changes, two years ago, teams with really aggressive bump and run corner backs that were very successful, had the rules, not changed, but re-interpreted by the NFL ruling body, to make them back off the recievers or face penalties. There were more than one or two teams that had there previously effective defensive styles rendered more defensless and instead of big inyour face strong corner backs they had to find smaller quicker guys that could run with you instead of out physical you down the field. So its easy to see how a ruling body can change a team, that was only one example.

DanL makes a great point

Originally Posted by whatszmatter

Easy, you make the dog perform a suitable working test and show that it can still work, before giving and AKC champion anything to any dog. Then you don't have AKC champion being advertised as the best of the breed, when it can't even work.

what test is suitable? For say a Rottweiler? What about a Pekingese? A Coon hound? An Afghan? A Chihuahua?

Do they all compete on a level playing field?Who will track the results? What about dogs who finish, or meet the requirements to do so, as puppies? Before they are old enough to be trained to pass a working test? Must you then alter the rules for obtaining a CH title so that some wins must be earned after 2 years of age?

and yes i'm well aware that breeders are responsible for the ultimate direction of the breed. But why is it so hard to see that the AKC may only be a registry, but most competitions that people will recognize are sanctioned by the AKC, you can't breed a dog (or not supposed to breed)without AKC registration. They are seen as a ruling body with power in this country, and with that comes responsibilities IMO.

So the American Kennel Club should become the referee for all the National Breed Clubs in the US (almost 150), making sure that each dog who completes the requirements for a CH title also has a working title?

What about the UKC registered breeds who don't come under the jurisdiction of the AKC? (there are many)

And ultimately, this would still not stop anyone from showing and breeding any dog. It is unrealistic to expect the AKC to supervise the breeding of dogs in the US. That is up to the BREEDERS.

I love the idea that a dog would have to achieve some kind of working title to achieve their CH. But how would this happen? Could a breed club make this happen just for your particular breed? Or would the entire AKC and AKC breeds have to make this a rule?