I believe you, Will. I guess I just think working dogs are very pretty! But I have no knowledge of breed standards at all. I was thinking more that if a working dog happened to fit the conformation standards, why should we hold that against them? I realize that dog is rare, just pondering
I guess

Still it seems an odd policy to punish membership who do happen to do both. There is a difference between encouragement towards a behavior and punishment for doing a behavior. Why not say they'll only continue to register dogs which meet their minimum standard of behavior in an herding evaluation like the JRTCA uses an exam to enter their studbook?

To me it's just another club waiving a flag that says our way is the ONLY way. Maybe I'm missing something though since I'm not involved in BC politics.

But here is what happens when those lame conformation organizations/clubs hold a working evaluation:
The judging will be so watered down that absolutely crappy performance ( in any working dog handler's eyes ) will be judged as "outstanding" or "pronounced".

I've seen that happen literally dozens of times, and it sickens me.

But we're talking about cross registries... different organizations, different goals. We can assign value accordingly based upon values we seek.
If a Sch dog happens to get a confirmation title in in some other organization does that make it's Sch title worth less, the value of that dog worth less, or does it help confirm the standard of that organization meets the expectation of a working dog?

 Quote: Will Rambeau

Sadly, very few dogs that are bred for conformation have *any* type of working ability left in their genetic makeup, we've seen that in the GSD world for better than two decades now.

The Border Collies that are being bred for conformation will be afraid of sheep, take my word for it.

I see where you're going with this Will, but I have to disagree. Sure, there are some breeders who may be selecting only for conformation. However, I have met more than one BC breeder who breeds for both working ability and conformation and actually works their dogs out on stock, not just in pens at herding trials. While the GSD and some other breeds have suffered due to breeding to the AKC conformation standards, I don't think this statement can or should be generalized to all breeds. For example, the Brittany has more dual champions (CH in field trials & conformation) than all of the sporting breeds combined. I also know a couple who use Golden Retrievers from show lines in both search and rescue and field trials - and successfully at that. It's just not fair to assume that all dogs bred for conformation have no type of working ability left in their genetic makeup. It varies between breeds and their breeders.

 Quote:

ABCA is an interesting group. I like their focus on the working dog but their downright disdain for confirmation is an interesting policy. I am also amazed that they are able to be a closed registry.

I'll take a stab at better explaining the reasoning. The Border Collie breed has been around and was perfected without the use of a conformation standard. It had become a sought after breed for doing stockwork most of all but also a dog who could perform at high levels in obedience, agility, SAR all because they were bred to a working standard. The idea is when you start breeding for anything besides the ability to work, you can exclude good working genetics and start to focus on something else as important. And they proved that the breed can excel in just about anything by breeding to that working standard.

Then about 15 years ago the AKC stepped in and said "we'll come up with the perfect conformation standard these dogs should be bred to". Why do you need to "fix" a breed that isn't broken? Why do you need to have it in your registry at all? Hmm, maybe because the folks breeding them had done such a good job they they had inadvertently created the perfect sport dog and the AKC could now cash in on it.

There are breeds out there that the conformation standard is very helpful to, they were developed with it and it's part of what makes the breed the breed. Border Collies are not one of those breeds. Some dogs fit the conformation standard and there is nothing wrong with that, but anyone who is out actively pursuing a conformation championship on their dog is most likely not interested in proving their dog can work livestock at the gold standard. And so the ABCA decided that it was detrimental to the breed as a whole.

Dual championships have been tried in Great Britain. And the working portion has been watered down as conformation folk complained it's too difficult. The breed is first and foremost a stock working breed.

I have 2 border collies. One is a 21.5" medium rough coated 39# female. The other is a 17.5" slick coated 30# male. They are both structurally sound, healthy and have demonstrated excellent ability for stock work. AKC standards would exclude both of them as the "perfect" border collie based on looks alone.

This is the standard a Border Collie should be bred to world sheepdog finals 2008 - Aled Owen everything else is secondary.

Ms. Dillon this is quite simple. Laura Sandborn explained it better than I ever could when she wrote,


"Your ODDS of finding *competent* working dogs are much higher within the
lines bred to excel in work than within the showlines of the same breed.
and
Your ODDS of finding *excellent* working dogs are much higher within the
lines bred to excel in work than within the showlines of the same breed

You keep bringing up the red herring about "absolutes". Yet we keep saying
it's not about absolutes, it's about probabilities".

 Quote: Will Rambeau

Wow......a show comprised of mostly gangster wannabes showing dogs in crappy shape ( those dogs have *zero* muscle tone ).
And they actually *wanted* people to see that crap and put it up on YouTube?
< shakes head >

I could see these guys walk into a real show (like the one they have in Chicago around Easter at McCormick place can't remember the name of it), they'd stick out like a sore thumb, not to mention that dog with the gladiator outfit would be sent straight to the clown section. How can somone be a dog handler with their shoes untied and jeans halfway down their butt?! And where on earth does one keep the treats?

Some derive faulty conclusions from "working titles" that they don't understand, or misinterpret the (often weak) fragments of working abilities they see in their dogs when they don't understand how to assess those fragments. Doesn't it seem logical that those who are actually *involved* in the work might have a better basis for knowing how many show bred dogs vs. working bred dogs have been tested for work, therefore would be better able to assess those working abilities.

This "breeder" reminds me of the many So Cal people I've met with their Puggles and other designer dogs. I met a couple once who got their Puggle from a pet store, for $2500! From a pet store! It pains me for all the pups in shelters right now, many of who I'm sure are Pug/Beagle mixes. And these dogs are probably healthier than one coming from a pet store. It also breaks my heart to think that many of the other "Puggles" in shelters are probably ones that have been given up by their owners when they realize that dogs aren't fashion accessories or pieces of household furniture. That said, I'm sure there are many responsible "designer breed" owners, I just think the idea is just one more reason we have so many animals being killed in shelters.