From Kathi L. Schwengel:

The Aussie Working Description

Back to comment list

 

From Jane Harrell:

For background, I got my first Aussie in the early 1980's.  Over the years, I bred and exhibited and titled Aussies in obedience, conformation and finally got around to working them on stock.  I say, finally, because it unfortunately took me quite a while to realize that as a responsible breeder, I needed to be using my dogs for the purpose that they were bred. I was fortunate and had the opportunity to work with several outstanding Border Collie trialists/trainers including Nathan Mooney, Cheryl Jagger Williams, Jack Knox and Bill Berhow.  During these early years, I had an opportunity to work my Mickey (CH. Topper's Mickey the Shenanigan, CD, STD-d,s,c) on a Border Collie Novice-Novice course.  When I completed the course and got the sheep in the free standing pen (albeit a bit rough), I was so excited I could hardly stand it!  I knew then that the open field is where I wanted to work and trial.  I also learned that to ask my Aussie to be competitive in that venue would be unfair to him.  If I was going to compete in the open field trials, I needed the breed that was bred to handle that - the Border Collie.

I am terribly disappointed that there are those who think they can justify changing the Aussie's working characteristics.  Haven't these people considered the fact that the Aussie's working characteristics were developed decades ago for the very purpose that this dog excels in what he does?...he's a Jack of all trades.  Bob Carrillo once called this dog a junkyard dog.  And he meant it as a compliment.  Bob was one of the individuals who helped develop ASCA's stock dog program which still excels today.  The other "arena trial programs" pale in comparison when providing the loose-eyed, upright dog a place to show their working talents.  The one thing that makes the Aussie so incredibly wonderful, is that after the job is done, he's a guardian, a playmate for your children and the utmost wonderful companion.  There is no need to make him a strong-eyed dog, an intense,  wide working dog - there's already a breed that will do that - and
they won't be a guardian, much less any kind of companion.  There is no need
to change the Aussie.

If a person needs a dog to do work far a field - then get the dog that's bred to do that - don't change the one you have.   Yes, and an Aussie can be trained to do a more "workmanlike" outrun, etc. - Mickey was a good example of that - he learned to rate his stock - to stay back - I was lucky to be working with trainers who valued a dog's natural instinct and talents and worked hard to build on those - not to change them.  Mickey excelled with sheep, and I did get early titles on cattle, too, before Cancer took  him from me.  Aussies can be trained to do a credible job without making them mechanical, but if you need to go beyond that line, then you really need a different breed of dog.

I was talking to one of my BC friends this past summer - she used to have Aussies years ago - anyway, she was so excited because she had just gotten an Aussie from a rescue group - and was just overjoyed with the dog.  Her thought is that everyone should have an Aussie for the jobs around the house.   Her BC's won't come in and readily do the close up work when they're shearing, banding, etc. - I know only too well how that works, especially with trial dogs that you are working so hard to "get back" all the time.  If a person at all values the guardian instincts of these little dogs - that alone is worth a fortune.  As a general rule, BC's are not guard dogs of any kind - they don't care, period.

My good friends in Iowa had a very interesting situation occur awhile back. Chance, their youngest son, was 3.  Their middle son, Cordell, was 5.  Mom and Dad were out in the bean field harvesting the soy beans.  The kids were told they could play in the yard, but not to go anywhere else.  They had an 18 month old Aussie bitch named Sadie.  Well, one of Chance's toys rolled under a paddock fence, so he rolled under the fence to retrieve it.  He didn't know that a young, over zealous bull was being kept in that pen. With cows in heat just over in the next pen, this young bull had already worked himself into a heightened state of frustration.  When he saw little Chance, he headed right for him.  Cordell screamed and Sadie was on her way. She ran up and gripped that bull's nose, hard.  Cordell said the bull threw her across the pen and she yelped when she hit the ground, but was up and after the bull again - and again - and again - until Chance got out of the pen.  Sadie, exhausted, bleeding and badly injured, got herself out of the pen, too, finally - a vet examination showed a broken hip and multiple lacerations (from being thrown against the fencing).  Now, this was an 18
month old puppy that had absolutely no formal training whatsoever - other than "Sadie, Come!" "Sadie - get!"   - and so on.  She had never been used to move cattle, pen cattle or anything like that.  But when Cordell screamed, she reacted and in a split second saw that her Chance was in danger and she did what she knew, instinctively, to do.  Would a BC have done that?  NO!  Now, that's an Aussie for you...we need to do everything we can to keep the Aussie just like that... Janie

Jane Harrell
ABCA Working Border Collies
Royse City, TX
 

Back to comment list

From Gail Karamalegos:

Regarding "standards".... It's the way of purebred dogs, regardless of whether it's a breed standard or working standard/description. The parent clubs of at least half of the breeds in the AKC herding group seem to feel strongly enough about preservation that they have working descriptions for their breeds. They realized that their own respective breeds' original functions were disappearing, and they wanted something out there that stated what their breeds' original purpose was and how they typically went about doing it. The standards themselves are not at fault for what happens to breed type and soundness and working instinct-- that particular sin belongs to BREEDERS and those who want to WIN at all cost. It's not about "interpretation" so much as personal preference. It's the same everywhere you go. It is the modern trend toward specialization that is largely at fault. Trialers (not all, but SOME) often just want a dog that will kick butt in the arena, and don't give a flip for how it's done, whether the dog even resembles its supposed breed or has proper character, or whether the dog is a good ranch/farm dog, which is the Aussie's original purpose for existence. Same thing happens in the breed ring. I am no less disturbed to see some so-called Aussies winning there as well. Judges are just as likely to ignore what's in a breed standard, as are the multitude of people breeding those dogs who haven't read the standard, and if they have, don't understand it or don't care. All these things don't justify NOT having a standard, however, as there has to be some barometer of comparison. Otherwise, we might as well throw out the whole concept of purebred dogs. I suspect that most of the opposition to a WD is due more to FEAR of how it will be used, rather than of the description itself. - Gail Karamalegos

Back to comment list