Border collie v working sheep dog Working Dogs

I've found one page with some good photos of double and single merles. Not the one I was thinking of but it does show the typical lack of skin pigment where the merle gene is involved. Some more pages are linked from this one too.

http://www.lethalwhites.com/doublemerle.html

He is D on the pics - his name is Defa. He is my agility lad, cat herder supreme, and has been an inspiration to me from day one :smt049 :smt049 :smt049

That main page does a good job of covering all the basics in one easy to read format, a useful intro for people just starting to look into the subject for sure. I have bookmarked it now so I can go through all the individual sections later on - it wasn`t a link I had before in my lost stuff so thats a nice new one for me, fanx

Thanks for the link. I will be going back to have another look when I have a bit more time.

Patch, I assume you are referring to the World Championships? This has nothing to do with the KC as it is run by the FCI and it is THEIR rule that only allows pedigree breeds to compete, I think this only applies to the World Championships, I am almost certain that non pedigree's are allowed in normal competition? The KC has no influence over the FCI and how they choose to run their competitions. I can think of no other competition in the UK where this occurs and to try out for the World Champs your dog has to be at senior level. rescue dogs in the UK are able to compete at both KC registered shows and unnafiliated shows regardless of whether they are on the breed register.

Yes thats the major comp I am refering to.
No the KC has no specific influence over the FCIs ridiculous elitism however by refusing to acknowledge Border Collies as Border Collies, instead calling them something which does not exist as a breed, they are playing a huge part in supporting the FCI snobbery as well as being highly insulting to the intelligence of every single owner of a Border Collie.

The pedigree only thing applies to all their official tests btw - from their rules :
======================

Eligible to enter:

a) Official agility tests sanctioned by the FCI, that award the FCI Agility Certificate and qualify for national competitions and the FCI World Championships:
All breeds over 18 months and in possession of a pedigree recognised by the FCI and are members of a club belonging to a National Cynological Organisation (Kennel Club) affiliated to the FCI.

=======================


Also, when dates of birth are known and submitted, the KC wont accept those as valid either which is pretty ridiculous considering there are minimum age limits within agility, for competing and for measuring. Anyone can easily lie to get their dog measured or to compete with a dog which is too young and the KC assist in this as far as I am concerned, by treating owners with contempt in refusing to acknowledge DOBs when they are known.

[ If anyone from the KC is reading this, my eldest BORDER COLLIE was born on the 4th of October 1994. His birthdate is not unknown, and nor is his BREED despite the KCs refusal to put it on the registration paper I paid for :smt075 :smt075 :smt075 ]

I am far from the only one who is sick of the way non-papered dogs are treated as second class in the KCs eyes no matter how much spin they try to use to try to say differently.

I am fully aware of rescue dogs in agility which I would guess that you may already know ;-)

Patch,

I have TWO unregistered dogs, I refer to them as border collies and I bought them from farms as BORDER COLLIES. I know their date of birth too although it appears as unknown on their registration. BUT nobody can say with absolute certainty that they are 100% BC. They look it, they act it but are they? There could be absolutely anything mixed in there with either of them. Kelly was bred for cattle and soemtimes he will get in front of deef and go for the nose, is this what BC's used on cattle do? I have seen kelpies do it and they were all tri colours in the litter with a couple looking distinctly kelpie like in appearance..... I only saw mum, she was a black tri, dad was from a neighbouring farm and I have no idea what he looked like. Kelly has a very long fluffy tail, like a spaniel that hasn't been docked, and LOADS of mottling.....maybe there is a little spaniel in there? I have seen BC's with his colouring but that doesn't mean he is one does it? Deef was bred for sheep, his mum was a mostly white bitch with one blue eye, a black patch on her bum and a black patch on her head. She looked all collie to me but again I never saw dad who was described as being "a big fluffy black and white dog from Stratford". Deef is tall, 23 1/2" in height and powerful with it. I used to get people asking what else was mixed in with him, although not for a while now, who knows where he got his size from? I think he is just a large collie, maybe there is something else in there? I cannot say for certain and neither can anyone else.

If I cannot say with absolute certainty that my dogs are BC then how on earth can the KC be expected to? If you don't have any paperwork to back up your claim why should they just accept it?:smt102

I am in no way a fan of the KC but I can see their reasons for not registering such dogs as BC. They have a register for pedigree dogs and a working register which is basically for non pedigree dogs, if people cannot prove the parentage of their dogs then they are not pedigree and as such could in fact have other breeds mixed in.

The only one I have that has a proven pedigree is Sol and he is on the ISDS register as a working sheepdog! He is the only one of my three that people question when I tell them he is a BC, they think I was conned because he is not the right colour.... :smt021 Come to think of it...... he is the only one that insists the postman is deadly and needs dealing with for putting paper through my door..... perhpas there is something else in there.........pit bull maybe? :smt077

I am still sure that non pedigree breeds are allowed to compete in europe, maybe it's not the FCI that allow it but another organisation?:?

That actually makes a lot more sense now. Thanks.

Well all I know is that a cattle herder needs to be a damn tough dog - so I imagine gripping is quite common.

I can see your point of view with the rest of your post though.

I can see your point here and in no way am I suggesting that dogs of unknown parentage should be registered on the KC breed register without further investigation* but, the way things stand at the moment, there is no way anyone can be certain of pedigree veracity of any dog, KC registered or not.

Miss matings do occur, either accidental or deliberate and until we have compulsory DNA profiling, there will always be a measure of doubt as far as pedigrees are concerned.

*The KC provides a means of registering dogs of unknown parentage in some circumstances but I'm not sure if this would apply here.

http://www.the-kennel-club.org.uk/p....asp?prId=811&page=1&type=undefined&q=bearded collie register

Could you explain the difference bettween ISDS registered BC and ISDS WSDs?

Thanks for the clarification. I had assumed you meant the KC

I have had people ask if my Defa has Borzoi in him because of being white - with a patch on his rump also - and on his head - and he is about the same height as your lad, as is dog A on the pics I put up further back in this thread.
One person actually calls my lad an honorary Borzoi but I dont think I would get away with entering him in ABC somehow

He is the one of mine with `proper` pedigree in the KCs eyes....
My Willow also has a patch on his rump the same size and shape as Defa`s. The rest of Willow is white. He is also known beyond all doubt to be 100% BC.
Similar markings [ head and rump ] are extremely common in mostly whites, its more normal for such a BC to have them than not ;-)

Its not about the breed register in any way. Its about registrations other than the breed register. Why should any dog be refused a shot at high level competitions if they are good enough just because they dont have a bit of paper which, frankly, could easily be forged, copied, or made up anyway ?

:smt023

It should not matter to the KC what the dog is, might be, or definately isnt, for the non-breed register

I soooo know the feeling

:smt005 :smt005 :smt005

Definately not the FCI in their official comps according to their rules. Makes me sick that they even say in their rules,

` The media (press, radio, TV etc.) should be contacted to ensure the necessary publicity in order to attract a large number of spectators and thereby promote Agility and the pure bred dog.`

What a great influence to keep dogs in rescue instead of fantastic potential agility homes because of such outrageous elitism which gives the impression that anything not from a breeder [ like they are all squeaky clean !! ], and without a pedigree as long as a dogs tail isnt `good enough` :smt010

Sorry, I could have made that clearer

With KC though, there is a class called ABC - anything but collies - in which BCs and BC crosses are not allowed to enter.

Now, as the KC refuses to acknowledge unpapered BCs as being `real` BCs, then technically all registered by them as Working Sheep Dogs can enter ABC because the KC says they are not BCs :smt018 and registration does not state what a dogs crossing is even when they are given it [ helloooo KC my Lurcher is a Lurcher with known cross of BC with Saluki ] but again I should be able to do ABC with him as well because the KC call him a crossbreed without denoting the crossing.

Hah - get out of that one KC :smt003

Looks like I need to put more entries in - show organisers, sorry, but the KC say my dogs are not BCs so they must be allowed to enter ABC after all :smt077

If all us BC agility people did this on that technicality, maybe we could get the KC and even the FCI to stop treating our dogs as second class !

There are some WSDs on the Activities register that have non BC/WSD bloodlines & they are actively being bred to. I could breed Rjj to a XB or other breed & register the puppies as pedigree unknown & call them all WSD They wouldn't be WSD of course but unless someone DNA screened them against all the known breeds no one would ever know ! BTW I'm not going to do the above of course I don't own any bitches ;-)

Patch, the rule is "for any breed except border collies working sheepdogs and their crosses" so no, you wouldn't get away with that as it obvious that your dogs do not fall into that category.;-) BUT there are dogs in the ABC classes and also collie lurchers which technically are allowed because they are not crosses........ maybe one or both of their parents were but they aren't......:smt077 there are also dogs that are crosses and still they get away with it.

A friend of mine has a lovely little rescue that was re-homed to her as a collie cross. I don't think there is even a sniff of a collie in her, I think she is a sheltie cross. She is gobby, full of attitude and totally full on, she's ace and she is a lovely golden colour with a fair bit of coat. She bears more resemblance in her looks and behaviour to shelties at shows than any collie I know BUT because she was rehomed as a cross and because my friend doesn't know for sure she won't run her in the class. Not everybody is that honest!

Sol's registration says:

"this is to certify that a working sheepdog (or border collie) the registered parents of which have been examined for, and at this date are free of progressive retinal atrophy and collie eye anomaly, has been registered with the society by the name of:-"

then it goes on to list all his details. So basically there is no difference, it is the KC that call them border collies. I can't repeat what I call him:smt077

Ah right thanks

Ahh but the KC wont acknowledge that they are BCs and there is no such breed as Working Sheep Dog so they [ all which the KC refuse to acknowledge properly ], are technically eligible as they must be something else :smt077

Eh ? All Lurchers are crosses unless several generations to the same level as those trying to get breed recognition in other breeds, but the KC will probably never recognise Lurchers anyway. Not a bad thing really, it would only cause even more of a breeding explosion as it does with all other new` breeds which then get wrecked and abused and do we need even more dogs like these in the wrong hands ?

Dont forget, a dog could be 3/4 Staffy, 1/8 Labrador, 1/8 whippet, and its still a Lurcher. If that bred with another similar, their offspring would be Lurchers, yes, but still crossbreeds.

My Lurcher would certainly not be allowed in ABC because he is half BC, and any other half or even quarter BC Lurcher is still a BC cross therefore not eligible.
Then there are Longdogs - sighthound to sighthound cross [ any variety ]. Still crosses but those would be ok in ABC.

The KC will never recognise Lurchers anyway because they are a type, not a breed, but being such a specific type I do feel its pretty ridiculous of them not to be recognised at least on non-breed registry. The KC has classified my Lurcher as a crossbreed...

If the parents were both Lurchers from crosses then the pups are still crosses ;-) Its no different to a Heinz, [ multiple crossing ], just with some Sighthound in there which tags them as Lurcher.

There are no formally acknowledged `pedigree` Lurchers [ not in UK anyway ! ], no matter how much those deliberately breeding them may claim so, [ like there are`nt enough unwanted accidental crossbreeds in pounds and rescues as it is without people doing it on purpose :smt075 ].
With such diversity in Lurchers, it would be impossible to say which lines `should` be bred to formulate them as a Pedigree Breed.

Oh I agree with you ! I have seen some dogs in ABC queues which were so obviously part BC that I would put money on them being so [ and I dont gamble ! ], and if they enter knowingly then shame on them :smt018

One of my students has a BC cross which she knows catagorically to be what she is, but she could easily get away with ABC as the dog doesnt appear so at all, however she would not do it either.

Agility does have its bad apples the same as any walk of life, but happily that type are few and far between

The notion of entering BCs in ABC on a technicality would be a good way to protest, if done collectively to make the point to the KC - I would never suggest people actually ran a BC or BC cross in it !

Will have to ponder on how to get BC owners to take a united stance on it direct to the KC to stop them shoving unpapered BCs aside as `unworthy` of their breed name ;-)

Patch I think you misunderstood, I didn't mean that lurchers are not crosses, I meant they are not technically collie/wsd crosses even if both parents are;-)

And as for WSD not being a breed, according to the ISDS they are, (I have one) ;-) and according to the ABC rules, no WSD crosses

It was when you put `and also collie lurchers which technically are allowed because they are not crosses`... ;-)
I have been told catagorically no to my Lurcher doing ABC however because he is clearly [ and known to be ] half BC.

WSD is a descriptive, not a separate breed, they are not genetically different from other Border Collies.
Perhaps they should revert to their original Gaelic name of Coley then the KC and ISDS can call them what they are - one distinct breed iow [ but just keeping them all as Border Collie would suffice for me ;-) ].