The small elite group of conformation breeders are Platonists; they believe that the substantive reality of Border Collies is only a reflection of a higher truth, and their activity is the key to divining that perfect essence. The small elite group of trial breeders also believes that there is a higher truth to the Border Collie, that their activity is the key to approaching that truth, and that their philosophy stands above and to the exclusion of all others. But they are not Platonists, as their search is accomplished on a field, not in the mind. The ideal Border Collie is discerned by function, not by a proposed ideal form.
This new Plato seemed familiar to common-sensical Victorians. What do we mean when we use the word “table” if not a real object which resembles more or less well the ideal “table”? Aren’t our real-world tables imperfect examples (“Platonic shadows”) of the ideal?
And living, breathing dog — are they not slightly imperfect versions of the ideal foxhoud or greyhound, setter or collie?
– Donal McCaig, The Dog Wars p185
The AKC Border Collie Breed Standard is tantamount to a bible. It describes the ideal, the platonic, and the perfect. It is the good book that should be followed and mere mortals can’t hope to change what is written. Border Collie conformation faithful are left to interpret the whims of the demi-god judges as they lay out judgment without any sort of feedback or critique; understanding why events happen the way they do is like trying to divine the will of god.
Dog fanciers and their creature, the AKC, really do believe that what is most valuable about any dog can be judged in the show ring, that the show ring is the sole legitimate purpose and reward of all dog breeding. They even believe, against all evidence, that the show ring “improves” breeds.
-Donald McCaig, The Dog Wars p153
The priesthood are those people who are attached to the registry because the dogma of the registry is their dogma, regardless of the practicalities of what other things the registry does. The Third Estate doesn’t have a single platonic breed standard nor a single unified activity. And for what is has in enthusiasm, it lacks in lock-step uniformity and an easy to recite mantra. It is that lack of uniformity that makes the Third Estate easy to dismiss by the koolaid drinking elite within the AKC and ABCA.
The priesthood of the ABCA are the top trialers and their jock-sniffers who are interested and active in the governance and politics and the priesthood of the AKC are conformation showers and their groupies who are likewise active in the governance and politics. Conformation and Trialing are the moral centers, the raison d’etre and the loss-leaders of the two registries.
The priesthood is only capable of surviving because of the large and largely ignorant masses–who use the services of the registries without knowing or caring about what happens in the inner sanctum–pay the bills. The AKC loses big money putting on dog shows and the ABCA admits that without the the majority of their dogs being registered to the hoi polloi pet buyers they’d be financially unable to carry on their mission.
Despite the rhetoric being about the “future of the breed” … the war is really over people, not dogs. The trialers will always be able to breed dogs to suit their herding needs and the show people will always be able to breed pretty dogs. The “breed” is not at stake with either of those groups because they have and always will have the power to breed what they want.
To the First Estate, the Border Collie breed is what it does: a dog that herds sheep with eye. To the Second Estate, the Border Collie breed is what it looks like. The former are Existentialists of function, the later Platonists of form. The First Estate probably wouldn’t care what the other three estates did with their dogs as long as they didn’t call them Border Collies when those dogs aren’t bred specifically for the purpose of herding sheep with eye.
But the First Estate lost the battle over exclusive rights to the name “Border Collie” (who knew there’d come a time when you’d have to trademark the name of a dog breed to ensure artistic control?), and they don’t seem satisfied renaming their dogs to the original and older classification of “working sheepdog.” If the trialists couldn’t own “Border Collie” outright, then they’d have to compete in the open and free market for market-share of the breed. That’s tough since, as Donald McCaig says in this The Dog Wars:
Americans have accepted the dog show credo: “a dog is what it looks like.”
– p53
Americans are thus Platonists instead of Existentialists when it comes to their dogs. This poses a problem to the First and Third Estates who ostensibly desire function over form, and when they do desire form, it is to serve function; e.g., shepherds in the hot dusty Southwest have emphasized a smooth coated dog more appropriate for that environment and flyball breeders have emphasized their dogs’ speed making for thinner and lighter animals with a sleek appearance.
Although trialers and conformationists will always be able to breed dogs to meet their needs, they won’t be guaranteed to sell the cast offs to the pet market without competition. Thus, it’s the large and un-indoctrinated pet market that is the real spoils of the Border Collie War. They are the crude grease that allows the smaller and more sophisticated parts to function.
Registries are at their core simply record keepers of dog sex. That’s it. But that isn’t where the first two Estates stop. To them, simply handing out pedigrees is like the world’s great religions simply handing out genealogies. Religions don’t stop there, they launch campaigns to expand membership, to out-breed the competition, to nitpick who gets to play in their sandbox and who doesn’t. And they establish elaborate bureaucracies and get mired in internal power struggles.
In addition to genealogies, they hand out Bibles and Korans and Torahs, and they exploit elements in those documents to get the masses to turn over their trust, their time, and things of value. Their purview is more than simple facts and objective standards;they deal in morality and ethics and metaphysics. But that’s not how they measure success. They measure success by the number of converts. We have mo
re warm bodies than you.
So despite talking a good game in the churches and mosques and synagogues hoping that their wisdom will shine through and draw in the crowds, history tells us that the most successful religious campaigns happen at the tips of spears, and not the allegorical Spear Longinus. Very real and very contemporary spears of forced conversion and coercion.
It was with one such spear that many members of the Third Estate of Border Collies were marched from the ABCA camp into the AKC camp, never to return again.
* * *
Comments and disagreements are welcome, but be sure to read the Comment Policy. If this post made you think and you'd like to read more like it, consider a donation to my 4 Border Collies' Treat and Toy Fund. They'll be glad you did. You can subscribe to the feed or enter your e-mail in the field on the left to receive notice of new content. You can also like BorderWars on Facebook for more frequent musings and curiosities.
* * *
Anton
Christopher
Lawrence Dillard
Lech
Stephanie
Essere
The german shepard breed standard for sloped rear ends is a great example of a standard ruining a breed. The slope actually leads to hip displasia at an early age.
While I breed for conformation I don’t just conform blindly to breed standards. I have met other breeders who do not either and they certainly do not conform to my standards.
Part of why American standards are not my ideal is I have seen border collies when I was in Australia. And besides that we all have individual taste.
I had no idea that the AKC looses money on dog shows.
Dog shows are not profitable for the AKC. They lose $10+ Million a year on “events.” Since local clubs are the ones who actually put on dog shows, the AKC’s cut from those shows is all based on how many dogs show up, not on any other cost saving measures. They get a fee from each entry, and they report that to even break even they’d need $20-25 more than they get now per entry.
This would probably double the cost at the event level for no apparent benefit.
This is why the AKC has embraced puppy mill registrations. Their registrations operation is profitable, although they have had a steady decline of those in recent years and are quickly heading into the red.
See page 6 of the Sept. 2006 AKC Board report:
http://www.akc.org/pdfs/about/delegates_meeting/sept06.pdf
I have not gone to a dog show in a long time but when I did it seemed like there was a dog show in northern California every weekend. If the AKC just held less dog shows they would loose less money. They could even hold a third as many dog shows.
No, it’s not that they put on too many shows. Local clubs put on shows. It’s that the AKC’s overhead is not being met by what they get from the shows that are put on.
More shows, or a higher fee from each show, would close that gap.
The AKC is currently still profitable, but they are in decline from registrations. And that’s money they get and do no work for. They don’t have any _direct_ expenses for all those litters that get registered at $20+ per puppy.
There’s a reason that the AKC is advertising a credit card on their front page. When companies like Sears found that they made more money off of putting their name on Credit Cards than they did on selling items, many big companies tried to tap that market.
It’s really a desperation move by the AKC.
From: http://www.akc.org/about/chairmans_report/2008.cfm?page=9
I have heard that having a well known handler at a conformation show will improve a dog’s chances of winning. Who knows why this is?
I have also heard of people spending over one hundred thousand dollars a year to advertise their dog to judges. Who knows why this is done?
But perhaps I am wrong in saying that this happens.
I don’t know if anyone has ever put numbers behind the observation, but let’s assume that it’s true, that a professional handler will significantly improve the single show and career prospects of your dog.
It could be innocent, that a Pro knows how to best display the dog’s qualities. That a Pro would not waste their time on a dog unlikely to win, or that owners of such dogs would not likely hire a Pro; so that Pro handled dogs are almost pre-judged for quality.
But it could also be more sinister. That community pressures account for rewarding fellow members of the club. Judges, who themselves have sunk small fortunes of time and money into the pageant may consciously or subconsciously feel better about Pros and the dogs they show than those poor cheap newb bastards who gave fluffy a bath and are bumbling around the ring.
The Pros have “paid their dues” and are fellow true believers. Those other dogs and their owners, well they might not be with the program. They might not believe the right things, or act the right way, or respect the right people and show proper deference.
I know in my other hobbies that people who are there to win are treated differently by the establishment than people who are there to have fun.
It’s not just a profit motive, because the people who make decisions are losing money left and right. It’s a cultural motive. The owners don’t ever make money on a dog. The breeders rarely make money. The judges aren’t getting rich. Nor is the AKC in general. They are all actually subsidizing the lifestyle.
But the groomers, the handlers, and the vendors who sell luxury scissors and shampoos and leads, they put food on the table doing what they do.
There is a professional end to the first two estates. Attend a dog show and gaze out on the exhibitor parking and you will be viewing millions of dollars in motor homes, trailers, buses and vehicles. The parking in these areas is generally controlled by the PHA (professional handlers Association) and parking spots close to the rings are, like everything else at dog shows including Best of Breed ribbons and Group placements, awarded according to an accepted hierarchy. Professional handlers may handle as many dogs as their vehicle can accommodate and many hired junior handlers to groom or show dogs they cannot due to scheduling or ring conflicts. These dogs are boarded and trained during the week ($$$$$) then transported (more $$$$$) and then shown (even more $$$$$) and if they place, win BOB (Best of Breed) a group placements (all dogs belong to a group like herding dogs) – (add more $$$$$$$) or win the Holy Grail- Best in Show, there is even more $$$$$$$$$$$$). Add photographers that used to serve the purpose of verifying a win, but now are used almost exclusively for advertising purposes (many also provide digital retouching services), dog show supplies which is a huge business, massive publications that provide space to brag about big wins that are distributed freely to judges, dog food companies, etc etc and you can see the dollar signs quickly add up to a rather sizable money making industry. The same is true for the second estate but on a much smaller level. The judging tends to be less manipulated, there is the USBCHA but they are not much like the PHA, there is a ‘clinic’ industry, but it is based on actual accomplishments in trials, and the parking lot of more of a practical nature. There may be dog trailers and motor homes but they tend to be on the practical side for the most part and size is not based on how many dogs one can haul because very few good handlers handle outside dogs, mainly because owners want to see and handle their own dogs because they tend to have their own stock (sometimes as pets for their pets and sometimes for real). The second estate is profitable for a few elite handlers and breeders, but it is much less so that the first estate which is more or less the Miss America of dogs. There is nothing innocent about it. It is essentially corrupt from top to bottom. If one has a reasonably good dog or the resources to procure such a dog, then hires a well known handler, can pay for campaigning and advertising and travel, it is essentially a ‘poor man’s’ show horse. There is a fourth estate. Those that have what is called using dogs and using horses. They sometimes enter trials but they are much less ‘refined’ tend to have BC’s that handle cattle and are more loose eyed and pushy, and they base worth on the ability to handle rank or wild cattle. Most of them really trial for fun or bragging rights but tend to just work as stockmen as that is their livelihood.
I tried to edit my post but the site wouldn’t let me. I see I didn’t keep my ‘estates’ clear.
The trial and registry people are not as profitable as the AKC conformation professionals, but they have many of the same trappings. There are those that actually use BC’s for stock work and they may participate in the ABC for certain practical reasons but not so much in USBCHA events. They tend to have their own more practical events like the Red Bluff Bull sale. This year the top dog sold for $10,200 and the lowest sold for $3200. The average price for a cow dog was $4181. There is also a sizable number of AKC people that try herding with an AKC conformation bred dog and become dissatisfied and go out and buy a trial or working bred BC or Kelpie and AKC loses them forever or they may dabble in each for a time and then leave AKC. It is not a small number.