My breed has a size DQ and judges call the wicket fairly often. It definitely depends on how the standard is written though. Many have a range, and some have a “+/- 0.5 inch” or the like which makes it less strict.
I had a dog at the top of the standard and it’s no fun showing that way, because of the fear of having to stand for the wicket; an inexperienced judge might measure them out accidentally when they are that close.
Chickens too! They no longer weigh them at shows, and it’s well-known certain varieties shoot for over or under where they should be…
Want to climb down off that high horse you are sitting on? The Aussie breeders who have been a part of the breed even before the first foundation club split and became ASCA care. And many of those breeders they have mentored care.That’s why versatility is so important: to work stock, to be conformationally sound, to do agility, or scent work, or obedience, dock diving, rally.
They are not unrelated breeds! They are Aussies, different lineage, which in the genetic game is important. You can’t just keep line breeding. And yes, the stock lines tend to be smaller, quicker, less bone, more drive.
I have 8 Aussies. Every single one can work stock. Some work stock every day at my farm. They ALL have the drive, instinct, desire to work stock. Some are better at it than others, but not one doesn’t have that working, herding trait. NOT ONE.
It absolutely depends on what an owner wants. I tell prospective puppy buyers, if you are looking for a couch potato, you need to find a different breeder. I have shown most of my dogs in confirmation, and none of them liked it…so I stopped. It’s not their thing. It’s not my thing either. Neither are breed show classes for horses. But I can enjoy watching a beautiful horse on the triangle, and I can watch a beautiful dog in the ring.
There are breeders that love the confirmation ring, put emphasis on it, and breed their dogs towards that aim. Those dogs tend to be bigger, less working drive, and sometimes too much hind end drive in the movement category. Fine. Puppies from these kind of breedings are undoubtedly better for the average I Want An Aussie owner.
The reality is that Aussies have become ridiculously popular, and that’s too bad. But within this reality, is the number of Aussies in shelters, in rescues because their owners didn’t really understand what kind of dog they had. To put a stock dog Aussie in a suburban home, is asking for disaster.
The most coveted title in ASCA is MVA (most versatile Aussie) which includes confirmation, open dog sheep and cattle, advanced trial dog ducks, and either obedience, tracking, agility or rally. It is what many of the ASCA breeders aspire to, or have achieved with one or more dogs from their program.
You don’t get a versatile dog just breeding just for the confirmation ring…unless “your” goals of breeding are just to produce puppies to sell.
Someone on my facebook that I don’t really even know (isn’t it weird how that happens… how did this person and I end up “friends”?) has bred two litters of Aussies because, and I quote, “[her] dogs are the friendliest dogs she’s ever known.”
The last litter had 11 puppies and ended up with the bitch almost dying. Was it worth it? But but but they’re so FRIENDLY.
I could just puke. Have some standards, people.
I alllllmost asked her what the OFA results were on her dogs, but I could sense the crazy “I’ll do what I want” sitting right below the surface. So I just follow along, and roll my eyes.
I know all this about Aussies. I also know that In The Beginning, the word “versatile” as a goal to be bred for meant competent on a wide variety of livestock. It did not refer to conformation wins, much less to sports that were not even invented yet. At least, that is what people who were there at the very beginning of ASCA have told me. That’s exactly the reason the ASCA stock trials were originally set up as cattle/sheep/ducks at every trial.
I estimate that only about 5 to 10% of litters of ASCA-only Aussies are bred for stock work (the number of AKC working-bred Aussies is zero). The rest are either purely bred for conformation or for the new versatility, which is essentially dog sports plus conformation, often (but not always) accomplished by adding some working genes into your program. I have never heard of a 100% working line Aussie entered in a conformation class. In the olden days, yes, but I wasn’t around then. I’ve seen a lot of ‘versatility-bred’ Aussies in the stock arena though. I have never seen one close to match what a well-trained working Aussie can do with livestock. I’ve seen a lot of ASCA trials, I used to compete in them. I’ve been to a lot of stock dog clinics too. Maybe they are out there. But I never saw one on the west coast of North America that made me prick up my ears, so to speak.
Aussies were NEVER just “working” dogs, they were always multi-sport since about the time the ASCA took over their registration from the NSDR . Whomever told you otherwise has very narrow tunnel vision/ a tilted version of their history …hell, they were the original trick & frisbee dogs back in the day due to their drive, agility, & smaller size.
Just skimming the AKC rankings, you’ve got Alaska Gold Kennel with multiple dogs with CKC/ASCA/& AKC GCH front titles (up to silver) with multiple HSAs on the back end (along with rally, FDCs, trick, and obedience titles on the back). You’ve got Mi-T Kennel, run by an AKC breeder of merit, with multiple AKC champions with herding titles on the back. You’ve got Blessed Hope Kennel with their main stud being WTCH ASCA CH/AKC GCH/ UKC GCH Blessed Hope Above The Clouds HSAsc HIAds CGC TKN. I don’t know these kennels or breeders but they are doing it right as far as making sure their dogs can work for a living.
Sure, you can argue that herding titles don’t indicate “working bred Aussies” but they are aussies who are working AND kicking ass in the beauty pageant world as well. If you can have it all in one bloodline, (and jesus, I’m a dog sport person and I don’t know how these folks have time to put that many titles on dog after dog) why would you not aim for it?
All I will say is, the endless arguments are why I got out of Aussies. Could not take it any more. I know what I saw. I know what was said and who said it. And I kind of wish I had skipped the whole damn thing.
Hey, come on now. You claim “the number of working bred AKC Aussies is zero” but when presented with data showing AKC/ASCA champions with several serious herding titles, you just come back with “I know what I know, don’t bother me with the facts”? You can’t recognize–even a little–that it’s not quite as dire as you’ve painted with that very wide brush?
I will only say that, given enough money, skilled training and handling, and persistence, even a conformation-bred Aussie can attain to herding titles. It doesn’t necessarily mean they are particularly talented. I also did not refer to AKC Aussies with titles. I referred to those with working genetics. The people who want to preserve the working genetics in Aussies mostly shun AKC registration, and those that dual register are still drawing from ASCA, not AKC, genetics.
There’s a great gulf in understanding between those who feel titles are the definition of herding talent, and those who use herding breeds for managing the livestock that are part of their livelihood.
Even though Open Border Collie trials are miles more difficult than anything ASCA or AKC or AHBA comes up with, I personally know one sheep rancher and have read the opinions of others, who don’t think much of the dogs who place high in those trials either, feeling that those dogs are neither tough enough nor independent enough workers for their conditions – they rely on Kelpies, or ranch-bred BC’s, not trial-bred ones.
But there you have it – people make decisions and form opinions based on what they themselves value, and on their own experiences. And those differ wildly. That’s the long and short of it.
lol oh come on now you’re just being ridiculous.
I’m glad you said this, gives me a good reason to exit this thread.
Moving the goal posts again, I see.
So, if the only people breeding “real” Aussies are the ones using them for real actual herding work on real actual ranches, what do you propose will happen when that work is no longer done with dogs? We’re a generation, maybe two (maybe less) from that. So the breed, as you define it, will go extinct? Because the only test that can prove a real, actual Aussie will be gone. There is no value in preserving the breed, except for that work, which is quickly disappearing?
And I know sheep ranchers who have working dogs who also do herding competitions, even AKC herding competitions (so yes, those dogs are not ABCA registered). It can be a matter of scale because most competitions are going to be limited in how large of a flock but regardless, the dogs still work and still compete, some even also have a Ch. At the herding trials (AKC) that I’ve been to, we all seemed to be in agreement that getting any title on the dog wasn’t a defining measure, but it helped. And we all generally took the “farm dog certified” test as kind of a joke (that we did because that trial was one of the first to have the testing and why not?)
(btw Shelties were all around farm dogs and attractive tourist souvenirs, expecting the same level of drive as border collie isn’t fair, they were never meant to be that. We still get a good turnout at national specialty herding trials but it’s different than the BC trials)
Also known as “I’ll define what working dogs are and my definition does not include AKC titles, thank you very much”.
Look, I understand breeding for a job and breeding for looks and how the two CAN be at odds but to state that the two are completely incompatible with any breed is ridiculous, especially when the only PROOF that strangers can confirm is the titles on the dog. And aussies have plenty of examples to back up GCH or higher dogs that can do serious herding work.
brag time In my breed, it is VERY rare to see a GCH with no backend titles and I’m not talking CGC either. Most of our breeders prove their dogs’ trainability long before they breed them. Speaking of which, time to start putting some backend titles on my goober puppy.
Really late to the crossbreed discussion but
Now there is a wire haired visla - a crossbreed between the Griffon and the Visla. I believe it was to make a more robust (from the griffon) but maybe softer (visla) version. I happen to know one and she is a lovely dog and a good hunter - softer and less physically ruobust than her “brother” a full Griffon.
Some crossbreeds are purposefully done and may eventually become a breed.
Please report back and let us know how this turns out. I am sure the puppies will be adorable and worth squeeeing over no matter what.
I think that’s different that the plethora of “doodles”. There are a couple crosses like that in flyball, they are incredibly drivey dogs that are not appropriate for every home but there’s a purpose behind them (like “Border Jacks”, although I doubt that will become a widespread breed, it takes a certain kind of person to want one).
The wirehaired vizsla is a breed, developed in Hungary in the 1930’s with deliberate feature selection, by serious vizsla and GWP breeders: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirehaired_Vizsla
It became a fully recognized AKC breed in 2014.
If people are seriously making random crosses to create “wirehaired vizslas”, when this breed literally actually already exists, I am at a loss for words.
This is like people who breed horses saying their foal is “out of” their stallion. No excuses when anyone can google these things in 2 seconds.
millerra, this is not directed at you, but at the people who are choosing to do the breeding. If they want to do the cross for their own reasons (e.g. particularly like the stud dog and bitch) and for a purpose (as you stated), I personally have no problem with that, but they should not be misrepresenting the cross as a “wirehaired vizsla” to anyone, anywhere, at any time.
Wire-haired Vizslas have been recognized by the Canadian Kennel Club since the 1970’s.
Here’s a link to their published standard https://www.ckc.ca/CanadianKennelClub/media/Breed-Standards/Group%201/Vizsla-Wire-Haired.pdf
And the CKC description https://www.ckc.ca/en/Choosing-a-Dog/Choosing-a-Breed/Sporting-Dogs/Vizsla-Wire-haired
I don’t ever recall seeing a mention of Griffons being used, but of course it’s possible.
Edited to add that I have no issue with purpose bred dogs, assuming that parents are health tested. But misrepresenting a breed is a big no from me. And reinventing the wheel just seems silly. If some of these doodle and cross-breed people spent five minutes scrolling through the kennel club breed lists they would probably be surprised to see that the dog they’re imagining already exists.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
