Offended a Breeder

"Melanie L Chang" <mlchang RemoveThis @mail1.sas.upenn.edu> wrote in message
news:bhp3rb$aqeu$1@netnews.upenn.edu...
>
> There's a really pronounced tendency for breeders of "performance" Border
> Collies (also known as the "have it all" dogs) to select for color when
> planning litters. If you don't select for color, you end up with a
> population that looks like what you see at the average sheepdog trial --
> 90% or more black and white or black tri, one or two red dogs maybe, and
> once in a great while a merle, or a sable. If you do select for color,
> you end up with what you see at the average agility trial, which is lots
> of big, square Border Collies in many fashion colors. Solo fits right in,
> and people want to know where I got him and even, sometimes, if he's
> intact and going to be bred. Even when they haven't seen him run yet!
> (Yes, he is that handsome in person!) There's so much that's wrong with
> sports breeding programs even if you leave the color question out of it --
> anyway, maybe that's why I hate color breeding so much. I like pretty
> colors as much as the next person, but I still know which population of
> Border Collies I'm going to select my next dog from.

Perhaps this is a regional thing, but in my area (So. Cal.) there are only a
couple of "performance" (not sure if this is synonymous with AKC but not in
my useage) BC breeders that are doing any signifigant amount of breeding, in
that I see multiple dogs of their breeding in the agility ring. Those
breeders do have dogs of colors other than black and white - there are reds,
blues, and tris in their lines. But even though those breeders are
registering their dogs with AKC, the majority seem to be only a generation
or two away from working stock (I haven't seen all the pedigrees of all
their dogs, so they could all be that way.) I actually can understand why
breeding for the conformation ring, with Australian/NZ lines that don't have
working dogs for many generations, would be frowned upon by dedicated BC
fanciers. I don't understand looking down on breeders who are breeding for
something other than looks (agility, obedience, herding, etc.) - especially
if the dogs share the genes of dogs bred by working breeders. I've said this
before, but I feel strongly that a "performance" breeder who is proving
there dogs in some manner and doing health testing and screening homes is
far superior to the "working dog" breeder who breeds his non-AKC dogs, sells
them a flea market to anyone with a buck and who does no health or
temperament testing whatsoever. It is not black and white (and many of their
dogs are not,either, or else there wouldn't be rescues full of reds, blues
and tris...)

Christy
 >> Stay informed about: Offended a Breeder 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Offended a Breeder 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Offended a Breeder 

Andrea <andrea.stone2 DeleteThis @NOSPAM.verizon.net> wrote:
>"dianne marie schoenberg" <diannes DeleteThis @u.washington.edu> wrote:
>Personally, I think
>> I am much happier with my tawny-with-an-overlay (a color
>> that many in my breed consider EXTREMELY ugly) than I
>> would be with most all of the clear reds I've seen.
>
>WHAT? That's perposterous. Your dogs are lovely!

<*blushing*> Why, thank you! Of course you have seen
Patience at her very best--doing something she loves...

But until you have seen someone turn away from a dog
this color with a look of absolute disgust on her face,
and other people literally turn their backs when they
see one coming--you can't understand the depth of
animosity towards this color right now.

True story: a tawny-with-an-overlay won a specialty
best a few years back (only one to have done so, as
far as I know). And there was a group of people
who were TOTALLY steamed about it. Apparently they
approached the judge (Carl Liepmann) and said,
"How could you put dog up? He has a disqualifying
fault![1]" Apparently he just looked at them
and said "I didn't see any faults on that dog."
*Perfect* response IMHO.

My own personal opinion on this subject? "A
good dog can't be a bad color."

Dianne

[1] Of course it's not a disqualifying fault; in
fact it's not a fault at all and is explicitly
allowed in our standard.
 >> Stay informed about: Offended a Breeder 

Earth2Fan <earth2fan RemoveThis @aol.com> wrote:
>>Personally, I think
>>I am much happier with my tawny-with-an-overlay (a color
>>that many in my breed consider EXTREMELY ugly) than I
>>would be with most all of the clear reds I've seen.
>
>Oh we have that in poms too. People want a tiny white or (they'll settle for)
>cream female. And are willing to go to BYBs and pay $900 for the privelege, for
>a dog with a flat coat, huge ears, looong muzzle that looks nothing like the
>breed. Meanwhile a friend of mine can't place a 14mos old, Ch sire & dam,
>housebroken, leash broken, perfectly beautiful orange male for $400...

Hmmm... maybe she could get away with selling him as
a Briard puppy? She'd find people falling all over
themselves for a puppy that color :-(.

Dianne
 >> Stay informed about: Offended a Breeder 

"Amy Dahl" <amy DeleteThis @oakhillkennel.com> wrote in message
news:3F40351C.95FEA837@oakhillkennel.com...

>
> Of course, the numbers of CBRs, the proportion of owners who are
> Club members, and the number of affected CBRs all played a role in
> the establishment of the test. I personally know a lot more CBRs
> than Basenjis. Are there really more? I think around 5000 are
> registered each year. Also, breeders and Club members had already
> paid PRA a lot of attention, so many were primed to participate.
>
> Anyway, having someone in the breed club take up the cause can
> really make a difference.

I think that, in that instance, the Belgian Sheepdog Club has been
really on the ball. I am unsure, however, if they got the idea from
the Terv club or not. Both run very close in registration numbers*,
but it seems like the Terv club is usually one step ahead in adding
certain health testing to their roster. IIRC, they've not got the CHIC
health registry through AKC. Tervuren include OFA (hips & elbows),
CERF (for PRA, among other things) and Thyroid. However, the
BSCA only included OFA & CERF, but no thyroid. Why? Because
that's what the breed club members that were present at the time
voted on. <shrug>
But...just because it's not included, doesn't mean one doesn't have
to screen for it!

*both clubs run approximately 325-350 registrations per year.
Shelly & The Boys
 >> Stay informed about: Offended a Breeder 

"Melanie L Chang" <mlchang.DeleteThis@mail1.sas.upenn.edu> wrote in message
news:bhphru$b14u$1@netnews.upenn.edu...
>
> Well, we disagree on this. I believe that to select for other than
> working ability is to totally ignore breed type for this breed, just as it
> would be pointless to select for solid-colored Dalmatians or giant
> Chihuahuas. I don't think that breeds are defined solely on the basis of
> common descent.

Fair enough. I think the only disagreement really is definition of working
ability. I consider it more encompassing than just herding, or hunting, or
schutzhund, or earthdog, or whatever particular work is closely associated
with a particular breed.


> Yeah, but that's a red herring. (I've said that before, too.) The
> "performance" breeder you describe above is both responsible and
> producing nice dogs, but they are either not good examples of the breed
> (can't work) or have not proven breedworthiness (have never been
> evaluated in a realistic manner on stock).

You know this for a fact? Purely on the basis of AKC registration? For what
its worth, both the breeders I'm thinking of have either bred or bred to
herding champions, and actively work their dogs in herding as well as the
other sports. Whether one agrees that AKC herding is realistic or not, it
seems as though that aspect of working is not being ignored.


The "working" breeder you
> describe isn't a "working" breeder, he's a puppy mill or BYB. Just
> because a breeder has dogs registered with ABCA (or, at least, "not AKC")
> and doesn't do conformation/sports with them, does not automatically make
> that person a "working dog" breeder, nor does it make his dogs from
> "working lines."

Well, if the AKC is to blame for BCs being fluffy show dogs, then ABCA must
be to blame for those puppy mills/bybs. I happen to disagree with both
opinions, as I don't think that the registering body has control over the
actions of the breeders who use them.
And yes, there are certainly different qualities of breeders of BCs whether
they are AKC, ABCA or whatever, but the majority of all of them are
irresponsible (as are the majority of breeders of allmost all breeds.) So I
am very supportive of those breeders who choose to breed responsibly by
taking into account health, temperament, and careful placement of their
puppies, whether they choose to register in any particular registry and
whether they choose to prove their dogs via herding or even (gasp)
conformation.

>
> For what it's worth, I don't think there's anything wrong with breeding
> for looks, in breeds where such a thing is appropriate. To me there is
> nothing inherently better about breeding for performance than breeding
> for looks.

As long as the other hallmarks of responsible breeding are met, I agree.

Both are ends meant to serve human vanity; we have purebred
> dogs primarily for fun, after all, may as well breed them for looks as
> anything else. Agility is something I enjoy, but it is a human leisure
> activity, and essentially frivolous, although it is easy to forget this
> when I spend most of my time hanging out with dog people who like the
> same sorts of things I do. There is still a real need for talented
> working dogs out there, which is easy to forget when most of us don't
> raise livestock for a living.

I can't imagine there is nearly as high a demand as there is a supply,
unfortunately. And as urban sprawl takes over open space, the demand is
going to dwindle even more. I can certainly see why one would not want to
imagine a future where the only work for BCs is agility and obedience, but
it isn't unimaginable.

Christy
 >> Stay informed about: Offended a Breeder 

"Shelly & The Boys" <snjb DeleteThis @BADBOYSpacifier.com> wrote in message
news:vk1ff38g527p88@corp.supernews.com...
> certain health testing to their roster. IIRC, they've not got the CHIC
> health registry through AKC.

Sorry, that should read "they've NOW got the CHIC..."
Shelly (Fully caffinated, now) & The Boys
 >> Stay informed about: Offended a Breeder 

diannes.TakeThisOut@u.washington.edu (dianne marie schoenberg) wrote in news:bhpl22
$qd0$1@nntp3.u.washington.edu:


> True story: a tawny-with-an-overlay won a specialty
> best a few years back (only one to have done so, as
> far as I know). And there was a group of people
> who were TOTALLY steamed about it. Apparently they
> approached the judge (Carl Liepmann) and said,
> "How could you put dog up? He has a disqualifying
> fault![1]" Apparently he just looked at them
> and said "I didn't see any faults on that dog."
> *Perfect* response IMHO.
>
> My own personal opinion on this subject? "A
> good dog can't be a bad color."
>
[]

> [1] Of course it's not a disqualifying fault; in
> fact it's not a fault at all and is explicitly
> allowed in our standard.


Good for him!!! I will specifically look for him since I have one of
those unpopular colors. <g> (red headed tricolor PWC) I totally
appreciate a judge who KNOWS his standards and isn't swayed by trends.


--
-Abby

Pems, Aussie, and a Pug

****Remove shoes to reply****
 >> Stay informed about: Offended a Breeder 

dianne marie schoenberg wrote:
>
> True story: a tawny-with-an-overlay won a specialty
> best a few years back (only one to have done so, as
> far as I know). And there was a group of people
> who were TOTALLY steamed about it. Apparently they
> approached the judge (Carl Liepmann) and said,
> "How could you put dog up? He has a disqualifying
> fault![1]" Apparently he just looked at them
> and said "I didn't see any faults on that dog."
> *Perfect* response IMHO.
>
Hah! I know very few show people, but I've met Carl.
That sounds totally in character. Good for him.

Amy Dahl
 >> Stay informed about: Offended a Breeder 

"Earth2Fan" <earth2fan RemoveThis @aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030817214306.10944.00000238@mb-m14.aol.com...
> >Personally, I think
> >I am much happier with my tawny-with-an-overlay (a color
> >that many in my breed consider EXTREMELY ugly) than I
> >would be with most all of the clear reds I've seen.
>
> Oh we have that in poms too. People want a tiny white or (they'll settle
for)
> cream female. And are willing to go to BYBs and pay $900 for the
privelege, for
> a dog with a flat coat, huge ears, looong muzzle that looks nothing like
the
> breed. Meanwhile a friend of mine can't place a 14mos old, Ch sire & dam,
> housebroken, leash broken, perfectly beautiful orange male for $400...
>

In collies - both rescue and with breeders, people want "Lassie" or
"Laddie" - sable roughs. Oddly enough sable headed whites are also very
popular. However tris and blue merles are a hard sell. In smoothies, tris
seem to be the favorite of pet buyers (the sleek tuxedo look is very
attractive) with Sables next. But blue merles, especially if they have blue
eyes are desired only by hard core collie fanciers - JQ Public will have no
part of them. Heck from what I understand most of JQ Public refused to
believe that blue merle smoothies are collies. So many owners of such call
them "Rare Scottish Hyena Dogs" which Average Joe on the street will accept
as gospel.

Chris, hoping to get a Rare Scottish Hyena Dog of her every own someday and
her smoothies,
Zeffie and Pablo
 >> Stay informed about: Offended a Breeder 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Offended a Breeder 

Melanie Chang wrote:

>There's a really pronounced tendency for breeders of "performance" Border
>Collies (also known as the "have it all" dogs) to select for color when
>planning litters. If you don't select for color, you end up with a
>population that looks like what you see at the average sheepdog trial --
>90% or more black and white or black tri, one or two red dogs maybe, and
>once in a great while a merle, or a sable. If you do select for color,
>you end up with what you see at the average agility trial, which is lots
>of big, square Border Collies in many fashion colors. Solo fits right in,
>and people want to know where I got him and even, sometimes, if he's
>intact and going to be bred. Even when they haven't seen him run yet!
>(Yes, he is that handsome in person!) There's so much that's wrong with
>sports breeding programs even if you leave the color question out of it --
>anyway, maybe that's why I hate color breeding so much. I like pretty
>colors as much as the next person, but I still know which population of
>Border Collies I'm going to select my next dog from.

What I find really scary with the "sports bc" people is that I know someone
that went to a kennel specializing in red merle bcs to get a dog. She is happy
with the dog, he is a good performance dog, a good dog for her, etc. but he is
afraid of sheep. My understanding is that even from litters bred from
generations of herding dogs you can get a non-herder, but still, a bc afraid of
sheep just doesn't make sense to this non-bc person.
A couple of months ago I was talking to a bc person that along with her husband
has a small sheep farm. Their bcs not only work the sheep but they also do
obedience and agility with them. This woman was appalled by the fact that
there are people breeding for red merle. Her feeling on colour breeding was
similar to mine: breed for health and working ability and take what ever
colours pop up. (Why I have two black and reds when I prefer sables.)

Beth
 >> Stay informed about: Offended a Breeder