On titles and codes of ethics
- Thread starter DryCreek
- Start date
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.
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.
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.
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...
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.
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...
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.
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?
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
: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.
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.
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.
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.
IThere 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.
