Contrary to popular myth, early trials were gentry sponsored and therefore heavily freighted with elite values concerning the nature of the shepherds’ craft. Early trials accented speed, agility and obedience in the dog, as well as sheer entertainment value, arising often from debacles that might ensue in any given run. The trials, too, remained adjuncts to elite, Kennel-club style dog-shows, with their focus on conformation and the physical beauty of the animal.
– Professor Albion Urdank The Rationalisation of Rural Sport: British Sheepdog Trials, 1873-1946
Competitors at the Muswell Hill Trials, London in 1876, just three years after the first recorded trial in Bala, Wales.
Breed histories for almost all dogs are plagued by romantic fictions that are meant to reinforce the brand, distinguish the product from similar competitors, and manufacture an ethos of importance and continuity. Our dogs are valuable, unique, and special. Our dogs are not to be confused with those dogs. Our dogs have history behind them, we do it this way because we’ve always done it this way: time tested, a legacy, not to be changed or questioned. Border Collies are no exception.
The mythology of Border Collie origins is that they grew out of a pressing need for agricultural improvement, borne of Scottish eugenic engineering to create the perfect sheep dog through combat by trials. Ignorant farmers who just didn’t know or appreciate the value of a good dog could witness just how much more successful they could be in their toils if they only had a Champion’s offspring! This simply isn’t the truth.
Sheep dog trials began as pure entertainment for the rich and titled to watch as their underlings and their dogs battled the chaos of unruly sheep.
It has become commonplace among enthusiasts of sheepdog trials today that the sport of sheep herding with border collies must have originated with British shepherds wagering who among them owned the better working dog. As one local historian [Barbara Carpenter] recently observed, ‘I suspect that shepherds, though leading isolated lives, still found chances to prove the clever working abilities of their dogs to one another in local matches’. The ‘trial’ thus became in popular imagination not only a pure ‘test’ of canine working ability, but a sport initiated by working men for their own pleasure, independently of their ‘betters’, a pure artifact of plebeian culture. Evidence for shepherds’ matches remains scant, however, while the first recorded trial held at Bala, Wales in 1873, offered a contrary model for such competitions, rooted in the long tradition of gentry patronage, which soon became widely emulated. The Bala trial reproduced the traditional social hierarchy as a cultural event, and by doing so gave it a quality freighted with elite values and notions of what properly constituted the shepherds’ craft.
1876 Sheep Dog Trials at Alexandra Palace.
Professor Albion Urdank, who himself is an accomplished American sheep trialer, investigated the early years of sheep trialing and contrasted the historical trials with their modern counterparts. He makes it clear that the ISDS instituted changes over time which were to better reflect the work of the shepherd, but the most revelatory findings of his research reveal the surprising fact that trials were entertainments for the rich, not agricultural improvements for the industry of animal husbandry.
Both in its composition and assumptions about the nature of the shepherd’s craft, the first trial at Bala diverged notably from the characteristics and standards later adopted in ISDS trials. Bala was no mere local trial, but a regional event with ‘some colleys hailing even from the far north putting in an appearance’. Initiated by J. Lloyd Price, Esq., of Rhiwlas estate, it took place under the direct patronage of such worthies as the Viscount Combermere, the Marquis of Exeter, and Viscount Down of Yarmouth, to name but a few members of the trial’s organizing committee. ‘Ladies [too] were present on the ground’, while some two hundred farmers and shepherds, comprising two-thirds of the unpredictably large crowd of spectators, took their places as well. Such social mingling mirrored the persistence of ‘face-to-face’ relations characteristic of customary society; yet the hierarchical features of that society clearly revealed themselves with each stratum represented in its expected order: gentry-landlords, their farmers, and the shepherds the farmers employed as agricultural workers. The trial, too, was organised idiosyncratically, with only two elements of the shepherd’s work tested, and in a manner allowing a ramshackle quality to the event, even if due deference was paid to the idea of the dog’s virtuosity. Judges valued highly the speed and agility with which the dog negotiated obstacles, as if it were engaged in a race, and its obedience to commands in performing complex tasks, especially when runs went awry.
1882 Sheepdog Trial at Alexandra Palace.
Today, the Border Collie war is most fiercely fought between those who preach for “work” against those who worship at the altar of “show.” The evaluation and rewarding of a dog based upon its looks is anathema to the modern trialists. They neither perceive their endeavor as sport, nor see any place for aesthetics to trump performance or even contribute to the final tally of a dog’s worth. Thus the fact that trials were born as conjoined twins with conformation shows is not a fond memory to preserve in the trial culture.
The trial was structured in two parts: a preliminary round with nine handler-dog teams selected to test their penning abilities, followed by a final round of the top four placings to test the gathering abilities of the dogs. The winner of the final round would be declared the overall winner of the trial. But curiously these series of tests began with a ‘beauty contest’, in which a show ring was formed and the competing dogs judged both for their good looks and how well they seemed ‘put together’ physically. James Thompson’s Tweed, ‘a small black and tan dog, with a white forefoot, very compactly built, with an intelligent foxy head and fair coat’, won both the beauty contest and the working trial, seeming to vindicate the view of gentry stock-breeders and middle class dog fanciers that the quality of the animal’s utility for which it was bred should flow naturally from its physical conformation and appearance. ‘The old saw of Handsome is as Handsome does was here fully exemplified’, the trial chronicler exulted.
1875 Pontypridd Trial and Beauty Pageant.
And it’s not just the shallow nature of a beauty pageant that modern trialists rebel against. They have ample venom for mere entertainments that modern dog sports like agility, obedience, and others offer. They aren’t serious enough. They are entertainment, not work (folly, not feeding your family). But we can see that the same sort of criticisms we find against dog sports today apply to the foundational trials.
Indeed, this preliminary round of the Bala trial had something of a circus-like atmosphere, reminiscent of the rough and tumble of traditional popular sports.
…
The pen tended to be set up as an additional obstacle, typically ‘with an opening of 22 inches, or just wide enough to allow one sheep to enter one at a time’. Not approximating the kind of pen found on a farm, the trial pen bore only an indirect relation to work and more an affinity to the show ring, with its accent on entertainment.
…
The shape of the Wirral trial course, coupled with the trial’s accent on the dog’s speed, obedience, agility, and working style in moving the sheep, became prototypical of a type of sheepdog trial which, like the first Bala event, appealed to elite sensibilities. Indeed, its setting at a racetrack inspired allusions to ‘equine events’, presumably horse-racing and show jumping. The Wirral trial possessed antecedents not only in Bala, but in a competition staged in 1876 at the Alexandra Palace Park, under the curious auspices of the show-ring oriented Kennel Club. It would find successors in even more refined versions, in which flags would combine with physical hurdles to make obstacles more of a challenge.
Here’s a program from the Alexandra Palace inaugural Kennel Club “Colley Trials” where there are judges for both “WORK” and “APPEARANCE:”
1876 Alexandria Sheep Trial and Pageant.
In addition to reiterating a dozen times how the ISDS trials eventually would be changed to align with the work of sheepdogs, Professor Albion’s essay also covers the foundation of the ISDS at a time when socialist notions were growing in the UK leading to the formation of the Labour party: an interesting observation that I’ll discuss more in a future post.
* * *
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
I sent this link to a friend. I had shown him earlier, the link to Blue Ribbon Kennels as the type of USDA approved “puppy mill” that the changes to the AWA seem to be supporting. The conversation led from that to said friend remarking that not all “loving” breeders are so loving, as they are not necessarily in the dogs they breed for the cash, but more for the ego; case in point breeding ridgebacks and culling, then claiming that dermoid sinus is not an issue for THEIR dogs.
I also recently experiences some quick defensiveness on a Berger Picard page over the simple question of whether or not their breed has problems TO SOME DEGREE ( my very words) because of the shaggier hair. The first response was “Why on earth would you think the coat would be a problem?” My response was “the drag” and from there I was accused of being a troll simply for bringing that up, as well as the belief that these dogs were SOMEWHAT less driven than BCs or Belgian Mals; not with NO drive, just not AS driven.
Though my examples may not match your post exactly, the point I’m making is, MAN, ego and emotional over-investment make normal communication next to impossible sometimes!
I’m about sick of it.
You can’t question the hive-mind. Something I’m very experienced in regarding Border Collies.
Hive minds are tough, and yet somehow I dont’ find resistance futile. I find it crucial.
This is my avatar on another forum:
Resistance is worthwhile.
With all due respect Christopher, the Abstract from Albion’s paper is a presentation of the social construct of the day and how those and trials changed as the Victorian Age transpired. To say sheepdog trials are rooted in conformation shows is certainly a product of interpretation.
As Albion infers in citing the attendants, the land and facilities themselves were owned by the titled gentry as was the livestock. Gambling amongst the estate owners and their employees was not uncommon. (See Downton Abbey!) Up to WWI the the peasants worked for the estates and used dogs in service of the estate. With the infusion of some lurcher blood they might poach some stock at night with a fast and silent dog to sustain themselves hoping to never be caught and banished from the estate to the countryside. (read ‘A Way of Life’ by H. Glyn Jones and Barbara Collins). These were not exactly virtuous men, they worked hard and drank harder and life on the estate was not easy. We do have the supposed history that Bala was the first recorded trial, but you can bet that idea didn’t come from the privileged but from a few shepherds after a few rounds in the pub and needed the sponsorship of the gentry to transpire.
Since we are talking about the middle of the Victorian era it would seem logical that some of the fashion of the day would be required, that being the new found pursuit of viewing dogs as livestock and since the owners of the estates were already involved in crossing livestock and dog breeding and showing as fashion (hence the attendance of the ladies), that the practical competitions would take on some of the mores of the day. These were the days of the vast British Empire and the crossing of various forms of livestock with hybrid vigor verifying their efforts as evidence by some of the exaggerated and sometimes grotesque illustrations we can still see of Victorian era livestock.
So are we surprised that as the Victorian Era wore on and the turn of the century brought world conflict and wealth destruction to the landed gentry that the trials took on a more practical nature? I’m not surprised at all. I would call this a transitional period where the trials started as unrecorded (for fear of prosecution or banishment) informal competitions amongst shepherds that were later adopted by the estate owners and subsequently returned to the working shepherds as society evolved to something more akin to it’s current form.
The same would happen after a similar cycle in Australia during WWII when men went to war and working dogs were once again needed to sustain that effort. But it wasn’t before the desire for conformation shows necessitated the help and assistance of the agricultural stations and veterinary geneticists to re-establish the working Kelpies, cattle dogs and Border Collies downunder. If you can find a copy, there is a very interesting book by R.B Kelley, DVM that documents this effort. Kelley established the F.D. McMaster Field Station where he studied fertility in Merino sheep, the crossing of Zebu cattle to increase resistance to various tropical conditions on British cattle breeds and breeding and training working sheep and cattle dogs. He wrote a book for graziers and drovers during WWII to assist in that effort.
I’m positive you would be interested in his work where he developed a breeding method he called ‘controlled heterosis’ using the inbreeding co-efficient and test breeding to achieve desired results while controlling inbreeding. He also made extensive use of historical trial results from both Great Britain and Australia as well as a wealth of information from graziers and station hands. The book was published and sold to raise funds for the war effort.
> To say sheepdog trials are rooted in conformation shows is certainly a product of interpretation.
Well, as Professor Urdank is decidedly a sheeple — that is someone deeply invested in the hobby of trial sport — his interpretation is given credibility because it’s an admission against interest of the prevailing culture. As someone who is clearly sympathetic to the working aspect of trials and who is likely derisive of fancy shows, the fact that Urdank documents the decades of association with pageants is rather convincing. In fact, I’ll note that while he is making those many admissions against interest, Urdank is sure to remind us that supposedly the ISDS reforms make it all different and better and more work-focused. I think he protests a little too much, but as you say the results are open to interpretation.
The firm association between the two, however, is rather well documented. So there’s really no need for interpretation to say that Sheep Trials began and continued with beauty pageants.
Have you met Albion? I have. The information he presented speaks for itself but it is also proof there was life before the Victorian era. The dogs in the competitions didn’t appear out of thin air, they were bred, just like the domestic sheep at Bala. A hill dog capable of competition didn’t just show up, it was developed, which is what led up to some of the manipulations of Victorian times. Observing a slice in time and saying it is the beginning when in fact the dogs were obviously in existence and working hill farms before Bala isn’t exactly conclusive evidence. Afterall, Bala was almost the exact middle of Victorian influence and dog shows were part and parcel of the times as was Cricket, hunting and Polo. It would be like observing NASCAR racing and ignoring the years of rum running and whiskey smuggling that lead to the Southern dominance of stock car auto racing to say NASCAR was the beginning, when in fact it is the product of earlier endeavors and less formal competitions. The trouble with trying to make definitive statements from history is information is so spotty and fractious. That’s why it is studied and researched, it is not definitive by it’s very nature. Even when it is well documented and seemingly undebateable it is somehow open to interpretation and debate.
> Observing a slice in time and saying it is the beginning when in fact the dogs were obviously in existence and working hill farms before Bala isn’t exactly conclusive evidence.
You’re changing the argument. The ARGUMENT is that SHEEP DOG TRIALS were founded with beauty pageants. It is NOT that sheep DOGS were created by beauty pageants nor that the dogs appeared out of thin air.
> A hill dog capable of competition didn’t just show up, it was developed, which is what led up to some of the manipulations of Victorian times.
And among those manipulations was breeding for trial sport, no? The SPORT of sheep trials mimics the hobby-competition of beauty pageants in many respects, not least of which is the artificial concepts of breed purity, pedigree, kennel blindness, and extreme over-use of popular sires. Just as beauty shows lead to dogs bred for a narrow set of genes, so too do sheep trials by selecting dogs that must behave according to a fashion: out runs must look like this, not that. This behavior is correct, that behavior is not. This shape of line will get you points removed, that shape will not. This time limit is good, more than this is not. etc.
I’m glad you brought up NASCAR, because a friend has called sheep dog trials Dog NASCAR, and I agree. And the notion that NASCAR are stock cars is about as ridiculous as Border Collies being stock dogs. They are not. They are trial dogs bred to win trials and perform a specific set of behaviors that are rewarded at trials. That’s what sets apart Border Collies from all the other stock breeds that existed before and after. The sheep trial. That is the defining standard, nothing else. Certainly not normal farm work. There are plenty of other breeds who have a better claim to that ad hoc status. The English Shepherd, the Farm Collie, the Old Time Scotch Collie, the McNab dog, the Kelpie, the Australian Shepherd, and any number of other mixes and regional variations.
Trial Border Collies are like NASCAR. They might have started in practical stock that had a working purpose, but they now are tuned to the spectacle of a race with conveniences the rest of us would not want to do without in our dogs. No air conditioning in those cars, it hurts performance. Trial dogs are wired enough to exacerbate OCD behaviors on and off the field. Versatility doesn’t matter in NASCAR, they only have to go forward and turn in one direction and when they’re worn out they’re quickly discarded. Some of us actually want to live with our dogs for life and don’t want to trade them and discard them like athletes. We also want to do more things with them than drive in one direction and turn just one way.
Professor Urdank reiterates himself so often it’s almost a stutter when telling us that the ISDS changed the trials, but how much were they really changed? The aspects don’t seem so profoundly different to me, the layman, nor do I see an impressive amount of change coming in the years since. American range land and livestock methods are significantly different than the UK, and yet our sheep trials here have not adapted to our customs.
And I think the hint of why comes in Professor Urdank’s first paragraph pleading for stock people to come watch trial dogs to learn how wonderful they can be. Apparently in the hundred years since trial sport took off they’ve failed to appreciate the trials as worth their consideration? It actually reads as quite the presumptive statement… that someone with a serious hobby of pushing sheep around for a competition is in any position to tell someone who raises stock for a living what they’re doing wrong. I don’t make this presumption. I don’t tell stock people how to do their jobs, nor do I tell trial people how to win more ribbons. But I will scold them where our concern for the dogs overlaps, mainly the genetic health of the population and calling them out on their romantic bullshit which they use as an excuse to place tradition over reason, idyll thinking over reality, and socialistic hippie back to the farm lifestyle choices above modernity.
Nice find on the story !
I thought this would fit nicely …
“The Kelpie most closely works like a Border Collie and has a similar personality. Note the work similar, as the Kelpie is typically more independent and tries to do their own thinking in tough stock situations. One major difference is that many Border Collie lines have become either 3-5 sheep trial dogs or Frisbee catchers, with very little thinking ability as there is a whistle being blasted into their ears and a down command every three seconds. Don’t get me wrong, as the Border Collie is a great breed and there are many breeders now focused on breeding dogs for the real needs of a farm or ranch. We still keep a couple around our ranch and always will.”
— Burradoo Ranch http://burradooranch.com/pages_new/letter.htm
These guys work thousands of sheep and hundreds of cattle
I’ve spoken to enough WK folks to know this natural behavior that gets ranchers what they want, and need for few commands, is what has made kelpies so valuable.
Trial folks get an ego about their superior dogs, but that’s because they win the trials designed for them.
Some kelpies have done rather well in these trials. There IS a variation in biddability, but it’s not a broad expectation. Tony Parsons has written many books on the breed, most recently a large hardcover simply titled “The Kelpie.” In it he has written that many a kelpie has nary learned more than 3 -6 sounds/commands in its entire lifetime. Any more than that, or excess need to use them, deems the dog a bother.
There are some breeders breeding for a bit more biddability, but that seems to be in response to people wanting these dogs for trials and sport competitions like agility. I think Noonbarra may be a good example of this, but I’m only going by their website.
“The dogs we sell for close stock work and knock-about yard work are often good dogs for Agility and dog sport people. These are dogs that can run across the backs of moving sheep and jump across the gaps and take a few knocks. They are fast and agile. The competitive world of Dog Agility is similar in some ways.”
CLOSE yard work and knock about yard work likely asks for a dog taking more direction. Not the same as independently bringing in a mob of tough merino sheep from thousands from many kilometers away, the original purpose for the kelpie.
http://www.noonbarra.com/pets.htm
You could look around and find other breeders with different goals, who are loathe to send puppies out to anyone but a ranching situation. Some may occasionally have a pup that really cannot suit such a job, and they might find another home, or quite possibly meet the shoot-and-shovel methodology, because the rancher fears an imperfect reputation or simply sees little value in the animal. Sad, cold but still true even today. I’ve been told so from the horse’s mouth so to speak.
“Trial folks get an ego about their superior dogs, but that’s because they win the trials designed for them.”
SHould have qualified that in this one sentence I refer to the BCs Chris speaks of.
Interesting that this should get brought up — I have seen a distinct difference between the working lines of BCs and the trialing or showing lines.
The working line dogs do distinctly have a more independent minded streak (although they are quick learners and retain what they learn well — they don’t hang on the handler’s commands as much and can “talk back” if they think they are on the right track with the work and are called off; in fact, they seem to get irritated at an excess of commands and will shut down a bit if directed too much). They also seem to be a bit harder overall (although this is a fine distinction — I wouldn’t call any of them truly hard — my dad had a couple of Chesapeaks in his kennel; talk about a hard working dog that will nonetheless fly you the bird if they think you don’t know what you’re doing).
I’ve only ran into one Kelpie (lovely dog; Kelpies are on my list of: dogs I wouldn’t mind at all crossbreeding too; them and English Shepherd…if they could be found in this area), but I’ve come across plenty of Heelers (non-show bred), and the working line BCs share some of the mental characteristics of both of these (although much less tough minded than the Heelers I’ve met).
Anyway, they can come as a bit of a surprise to people not used to that type of BC — even in the trialing ring, but especially with people who are used to more of the conformation type. They do not train up and interact in exactly the same way (some of the show dog people who have run acropper of them call them hard headed and disobedient — probably from having some troubles with them — I think that’s unfair: they just don’t work or train up the same way…and I’m not so positive that there aren’t some other breeds sitting in their genetic woodpile…as the working people didn’t/don’t really care much if the dog does its job, and even fudging papers isn’t exactly an unknown event).
There is evidence of this in Lassie Come Home. The guy who buys the dog is a wealthy man who wants her for her handsome appearance as much as for her skill as a herding dog.
Yup. Life imitates art and vice versa.
If you read ‘Bred for Perfection’ by Margaret Derry, it confirms that it was relatively common for fanciers to see an attractive dog at a farm or elsewhere and purchase it to show. Interesting book, talks about Collies, Shorthorn cattle, and Arabian horses.
DesertWindHounds recently posted..My Dearest Readers…
The dog in “Lassie Come-Home” was a pet, not a sheepdog. The Duke of Rudling wanted to buy her as a show dog, and her first owner was a coal miner. I don’t think the family had any stock.
Lassie was portrayed as a sheepdog in some of the movies, though. In “The Courage of Lassie”, the dog is a stray puppy found by a young girl whose family raises sheep. Initially, her mother refuses to train “Bill” as a sheepdog because he’s a show-type collie, “a pet, not a working dog”.