Breeding Rough to smooth mating -necessity or not?

Rough to smooth mating -necessity or not?

Dianne: I am proposing a new topic - not as one of my firmly held beliefs, but as something I toy with as an idea and I would like to share this subject to hear your ideas. This topic is the result of a lot of reading I have done on this forum and my reactions to various statements of ideas and beliefs I have seen here. So here goes. Given that all herding dogs in the British Isles probably had a common ancestor, these dogs were developed in different ways with different talents and various coats to deal with the climatic and working conditions of the dogs in question. A shepherd dog working on mountains might need some protective coat to protect him from gorse, heather and any other brambles or thorny bushes found there. The coat could not be too heavy because it would be weighed down by ice and snow. A drover's dog, working more in fields and on the roads, would not need this protective coat, but would none-the-less, need a warm undercoat against the cold. Here is the scene set for the rough shepherd's dog and the smooth drover's dog. The famous engraving by Bewick in his 1790 book, "A General History of Quadrupeds", of a smooth docked dog called a cur dog or collie doesn't need any introduction to you.So we can say that the smooth collie as a type of dog existed long before show dogs were developed and roughs were mixed with smooths to give the smooths pedigrees. (As they were introduced to showing slightly earlier, the roughs already benefited from a few generations of pedigree) So, if we are face with two already established and morphologically similar breeds (who, because of showing, share an almost identical standard and can be considered as two branches of a similar type of dog), why hanker after breeding rough to smooth again? As we distance ourselves from rough to smooth mating, perhaps the original smooth is re-emerging - do we want to lose this dog again? PS -There have been no wolves in England since the 12th century and none in Scotland since they were hunted to extinction in the late 1700s, so the collie has had no need of a vocation as a "wolf dog" for quite some time, hence, some people say, his gentler nature.

- 43, : 1 2 3 All

Alertness: Very interesting topic Dianne. If we take your excellent summary as the starting point for discussion I'd say there isn't any need for breeding smooths to roughs again as long as we're happy with the way the smooth has kept its physical and mental traits and want to keep it that way. On the other hand I think there are certain other concerns to take into consideration, and that is the breed's genetic variation. For a breed to survive staying healthy for any length of time it requires a minimum of genes in circulation within the breed. If the gene pool narrows too much there will invariably be problems. If a geneticist was to look closely at the smooth population and study how many males and females were put to reproductive use I think they might lift a warning finger: Generally breeders are not good at making sure we preserve the whole breadth of the gene pool, instead in every generation certain few males are more popular than others effectively causing a lot of other males to never be used that carry another set of genes; genes that will then be lost in the next generation, and thus invariably narrowing the gene pool. Research has shown this to happen in the rough population in England, so much as to 90% of the gene material to have been lost in the last thirty/fourty years or so. Do we have any reason to believe it is any better in the smooth population? If this type of breeding (only selecting a few winning studs/dams for breeding) goes on for much longer we will have no option but to outcross to rough collies (either directly to roughs or indirectly by using smooths from countries where rough/smooth crossings are allowed). I think there is a very good reason why the country of origin allowed rough/smooth matings to take place at intervals throughout the breed's history: The smooth collie would otherwise not have survived with its tiny gene pool. I believe this has not changed today: Yes, the smooth population has grown throughout Europe, but sheer numbers alone is not enough when these smooths all carry the same genes; most European smooths are very heavily related to eachother. Berit

myrnash: I agree with Berit. In fact, the smooth doesn't have much to gain from the roughs, overall the smooths are much better in construction, movement, and even temperament; the real advantage for smooths of breeding smooths to roughs at times is to increase the gene pool. Myrna

Dianne: Thanks, Alertness, for your very rational and concerned reply. You are so right to point out the problems of our restrained gene pool. We are limited by several factors - our desire to produce dogs as close to the standard as possible and our concerns in trying to eliminate certain genetic defects such as CEA and MDR/1. If we try to keep these factors juggling in the air and in balance all at the same time, then we are really going to end up with an extremely limited gene pool. I asked if we should let the smooth collie emerge as the dog it was at its beginnings before becoming a show dog. Your answer is clear that after the second world war, there were so few smooths left, that rough to smooth mating was begun again to increase the gene pool. But, we are gradually reducing the gene pool again, eliminating rough genes, by not mating rough factored smooth to rough factored smooth in order not to produce rough smooths which for the most part can only be sold as pets and not used for reproduction. Many among us love these dogs. Jack Mack's recently put up a photo of a particularly beautiful example from her breeding which will be used for mating with rough dogs in Italy. I have to salute the courage of one of my French co-breeders who bred two smooth dogs who were pretty sure to produce rough smooths. And the interesting thing is that there is a demand for these dogs. The breeder will not have much difficulty placing her rough smooths, but they will be sold as pets only. She is well-placed to find homes for her rough smooth puppies because she is predominently a rough breeder and is having her first adventure with a smooth litter. People sometimes ask rough breeders for an "old fashioned smooth" and a rough smooth certainly fits this bill. Another different problem lies in the fact that in certain countries, breeders sell puppies with the stipulation that they are only for pets and they are not to be bred from. This is strange, because we know that a fairly ordinary dog or bitch can produce an outstanding litter, but we are limiting the gene pool by this policy too. I can sum up so far by saying that we are our own worst enemies and that the solution to our problem of the limited gene pool lies in our own hands - we should broaden our outlook and use more of the dogs available to us before resorting to mating with rough collies. If we did allow rough to smooth mating, many people on this forum would much prefer to mate with the "old fahioned" type of rough - and where does that exist? In rough smooth collies!!! At least if we could use them for breeding the rough blood inherent in the smooth would not be lost. Finally, would a rough smooth mating to smooth be best with a pure for smooth? Dianne A selection of collies


Spiritwind: Maybe its because I am far far far away from you all.. but I really do not understand what you are talking about.... Just a couple questions.. what is a rough smooth collie? I'm assuming you mean a rough factored smooth??? also what is an old fashioned smooth??? Any pictures?? Anyone who has imported a Rough Collie from the US or Canada more than likely has a rough collie with smooth blood behind it... same for anyone who has imported a smooth.. there is guaranteed rough dogs behind it. Dianne wrote: Another different problem lies in the fact that in certain countries, breeders sell puppies with the stipulation that they are only for pets and they are not to be bred from. This is strange, because we know that a fairly ordinary dog or bitch can produce an outstanding litter, but we are limiting the gene pool by this policy too. I do this... I'm sorry if someone comes to me looking for just a family pet, they are not allowed to breed the dog. I'm not going to let some person who has NO idea what they are doing, no idea what a show quality collie looks like, take a well bred dog, that I bred, and breed it to some ugly pet quality collie that lives down the road from him, just so they can have puppies. If they aren't going to show, then they do not need to breed. Obviously not all champions should be bred, and not all breeding dogs finish their championship, However if your goal is to just buy a family pet that they can breed in the future.. its not going to happen. Not from me anyway. I just had a guy contact me yesterday looking for a rough sable male mainly for a family pet... but he said he would possibly like to breed him in the future... but really had no interest in showing. I turned him down, he is not going to get a puppy from me for that purpose. Yes, I agree sometimes a fairly common, ordinary dog or bitch can produce very nicely, however the reason I do this has nothing to do with the dog its self... it has to do with the people. I'm not going to let someone who doesn't know the collie breed standard, doesn't know about health issues to be tested for, someone that doesn't have the slightest idea what goes on at a dog show and some one that just wants to breed their pet to have some puppies to sell... I'm not going to allow someone like this to take one of my dogs that I've spent several years breeding to produce beautiful healthy dogs... take one of my dogs and ruin the work I have done by breeding it to a less than quality bitch and then selling the puppies to more people who will do the same... I have no desire to let my dogs or their offspring get into the hands of a back-yard breeder..

Glenmorangie: Spiritwind wrote: what is a rough smooth collie? I'm assuming you mean a rough factored smooth??? No, Spiritwind. Dianne meant "roughs born from two rough factored smooths". Spiritwind wrote: also what is an old fashioned smooth??? She also certainly meant "old fashion roughs"..... in regard to the European "modern rough" type that you can see almost everywhere. --------- I believe that your mind is rather noble concerning pets collies and show collies. On the other hand, I also believe that you may be mistrusted by someone who wants a dog "for shows" and finally will never show that dog, let alone will never breed him, just because this person wants a very beautiful specimen of the breed as pet !!! What will you do then ? Isn't it everyone's right to want and to get a well standarded dog only to love ?... -------- Spiritwind wrote: Maybe its because I am far far far away from you all.. but I really do not understand what you are talking about.... You are answering yourself !!! Because American Collie breeders always have interbred roughs with smooths, you can not understand our concern about the loose of our smooth collie gene pool while we are obliged to breed them separately since 1993. Maybe you have a wider open mind than us in breeding with a large variety of collies, in any colours and coat. Please, just wonder how you should manage your breeding program if you were living in Europe Best regards, Françoise

Glenmorangie: Dianne wrote: many people on this forum would much prefer to mate with the "old fahioned" type of rough - and where does that exist? In Great-Britain No, I am not laughing. Fortunately for the Rough Collie, it still exist few (old) breeders who have kept it in the Standard : Corydon, Brooklynson, Ingledene.... and some younger like Wicani, Ladnar..... Brooklynson upset a certain French "elite" two years ago at Cruft's when Ch. Brooklynson From Rio won the CC : this dog is sired by the Brasilian sable-white Ch. Lakefield Love Is In The Air and the mother is from Corydon and Jefsfire lines : http://www.collie-online.com/pedigree/genealogie.php?parametre=Brooklynson%20From%20Rio In the same vein, Ch. Brooklynson De Carvalho is living in Germany. Also in Italy with Maria-Teresa Garabelli's Cambiano rough Collies. Currently, sable-white Ch. Xtraordinario di Cambiano is one of these dogs that I really would love to have at home Seriously, where is the interest for the (pure) Smooth to mate it with roughs from smooth since they have exactly the same origins ? The interest for the Smooth is in breeding it with the True Type Rough Collie in order to bring back 50% of fresh new blood in the puppies. But WARNING : it does not matter to do anything in the simple goal of new blood. Carefully choosing the bloodline and the top quality sires is most importance. The interests for the Rough is using roughs from Smooths in order to bring back 50% of fresh new blood in the puppies AND to give back the Rough the look that many people want because it is the only one which fit to their (our) mind. But finally, why to discuss about that topic since the country of origin and others do not want to hear of another (necessary) interbreeding program It seems that breed clubs and national kennel clubs are definitely close-minded about the Collie survival. Best regards, Françoise

Spiritwind: Glenmorangie wrote: No, Spiritwind. Dianne meant "roughs born from two rough factored smooths". Ok.. thanks. I really wasn't sure what she was talking about. Haha.. I just call roughs from 2 smooth parents.... Roughs, because that's what they are lol Glenmorangie wrote: She also certainly meant "old fashion roughs"..... in regard to the European "modern rough" type that you can see almost everywhere. Ok.. I understand this now. Yes, I've seen pictures of the two types of European roughs. Glenmorangie wrote: I believe that your mind is rather noble concerning pets collies and show collies. On the other hand, I also believe that you may be mistrusted by someone who wants a dog "for shows" and finally will never show that dog, let alone will never breed him, just because this person wants a very beautiful specimen of the breed as pet !!! What will you do then ? Isn't it everyone's right to want and to get a well standarded dog only to love ?... Oh.. I have sold plenty of show quality dogs to people as pets. I have no problem selling show dogs as pets. I understand someone wanting a well bred pet, however if they go to pet homes, they are not allowed to be bred. The majority of the dogs I sell go to pet homes, with a select few that I don't keep going to show homes, usually to breeders I know. I have on occasion sold a show prospect puppy to a pet home on co-ownership because they weren't sure if they really wanted to show.. and being on co-ownership I would have say on whether the dog was bred or not. I have also sold dogs with a contractual agreement stating the dog had to have a minimum number of points towards his championship title before it could be bred. I won't, however sell a puppy to someone who just wants a family pet they can breed. If you don't go to dog shows, if you don't study the breed and learn what is correct and what is not... more than likely when it comes time to breed that dog, that person is going to go find the first collie available to breed to their dog, just to have puppies, and more than likely the collie they found to breed to theirs is going to be a badly bred pet that is no where near the breed standard. Glenmorangie wrote: You are answering yourself !!! Because American Collie breeders always have interbred roughs with smooths, you can not understand our concern about the loose of our smooth collie gene pool while we are obliged to breed them separately since 1993. Maybe you have a wider open mind than us in breeding with a large variety of collies, in any colours and coat. Please, just wonder how you should manage your breeding program if you were living in Europe Oh, I have no idea how I could do it! The majority of my litters are from rough x smooth breedings (I have a Rough x Smooth litter due Sept 12th).... and I have bred blue merle x sable several times.. and have kept sables from those breedings. Actually the bitch I have that is due to have a litter in September is a sable bitch from a blue x sable breeding. I've done a couple rough x rough breedings.. and I have done one smooth x smooth breeding, but I really prefer to do rough x smooth! Here is my litter from last year And this is the bitch I kept from that litter pictured above Ptd. Spiritwind Galway Girl Glenmorangie wrote: Brooklynson upset a certain French "elite" two years ago at Cruft's when Ch. Brooklynson From Rio won the CC : this dog is sired by the Brasilian sable-white Ch. Lakefield Love Is In The Air and the mother is from Corydon and Jefsfire lines : http://www.collie-online.com/pedigree/genealogie.php?parametre=Brooklynson%20From%20Rio I've seen pictures of this dog, CH Brooklynson From Rio, and this is a very nice dog! I actually really like him!

Glenmorangie: Spiritwind wrote: Haha.. I just call roughs from 2 smooth parents.... Roughs, because that's what they are lol Right ! So they are !!! But once again, if it is quite natural for you to call a Rough... a Rough, it is totally different here then we must precise "Rough from Smooths" to make sure we are speaking about the "Rough from Smooths" and not about the "Rough"...... Crazy, isn't it ? Spiritwind wrote: and I have bred blue merle x sable several times.. In Europe, most of the countries (France for example) still have the chance to breed any colour together BUT NOT ROUGHS X SMOOTHS Spiritwind wrote: Here is my litter from last year I really like the colour of the blue in the midle, light and "flashy" I hope this puppy kept this quality with age..... And I really love the "big" first sable, he seems to be so present and he holds his teat so firmly For sure, he will never give his place even for gold Spiritwind wrote: And this is the bitch I kept from that litter pictured above Pretty, pretty lady Congratulations and good luck for the future Best regards, Françoise

Dianne: Hi Françoise - thanks for correcting my mistake - of course I meant old-fashioned rough. Writing late at night, my old brain gets tired and in spite of copy-reading my post several times, I did not pick up my mistake!! Also, I started by writing one thing and changed it completely because as I wrote, I saw I was changing my mind and going elsewhere with my reasoning. Yes, it's difficult for Spiritwind to understand where we are coming from as they are free to breed as they wish in the USA. The link below is where the rough smooth collie from a smooth /smooth mating can be seen. She has been exported to Italy registered as a rough collie and can be used for breeding with rough collies. This is a great triumph for Jack Mack's that this bitch can be used for breeding in Italy, whereas in Germany, her country of origin, breeding from her would not be allowed. How long before this loophole is closed? Congrats to her new owner with the courage to be different. Why are "the powers that be" so ignorant about genetics ( a rough from a smooth/smooth mating being genetically a rough) and so scared of rough smooths? http://smoothcollie.forum24.ru/?1-3-0-00000012-000-20-0 I am pretty sure this bitch is of pure American descent, but can't find the records on JM's web page - if JM could give us the pedigree of this girl it would be useful.Thanks, Dianne I also exported a rough smooth from a smooth /smooth mating from France with a rough birth certificate thanks to help from JM and to our collie club which permitted the puppy to have a rough certificate. unfortunately the new owner was not interested in breeding - she uses the dog for agility and has trained him as a social dog. I believe we can no longer register rough smooths as roughs here, but am investigating this. Congrats to Spiritwind for her super litter.

Dianne: This engraving is by Sydenham Edwards 1768-1819. It was created for the Cynographica Britannica, an encyclopedia of British dog breeds which was never, in fact, finished. http://www.gis.net/~shepdog/BC_Museum/Permanent/SydenhamEdwards/Edwards.html For Bewick: http://www.gis.net/~shepdog/BC_Museum/Permanent/Bewick/Bewick.html For Caius: http://www.gis.net/~shepdog/BC_Museum/Permanent/Caius/Caius.html

Jack Mack: Dianne, I must correct one thing, this sable was not the bitch that went to Italy, that one was a tri sister of her. The sable stayed in Germany with a rough collie breeder and since the official of the stud register promised me (and did it for the bitch in Italy) to register her as rough, we believed it would be all ok. But now our club management is in a huge outburst because he did something he should not have done and they kicked him out of the ??? well, he is not allowed to vote any more in the gremium that reigns the club he now gets payed to do the stud register as he is told to do!! We are again placing a petition to go back to the former habit of registering roughs from smooth x smooth as roughs. This was stopped by our club in 2003 after the stud book was seperated for roughs and smooths. Our breeding rules still allow rough to smooth matings

Jack Mack: upps, wrong button........ rough to smooth matings if allowed from the club's breeding official. How would they proceed in those cases???? Yes, my "half 'n' half" litter was from american parents, I expected to have rough puppies but not as many , from the eight puppies I had 4 roughs, 3 rough-factored smooths and 1 pure for smooth. I now used the same male again with a pure for smooth bitch and had a nice smooth litter, for now I have not yet tested them who is rough factored. But this for me is secondary and I would always do it again it is only so frustrating if rough breeders like what you do and they can not use the roughs. On my homepage one can find all information to the litters by starting from the bitches, from there you can go to the litters of them. Spiritwind, one thing I want to aks: I had an american breeder interested in one of the rough puppies but when I told her the price I get for a pet puppy she was astonished and lost interest and she was shocked about the price I had payed for the mother of the puppies. Are the prices in America so different ??? In our breed club all smooths go for about the same price.

Spiritwind: Jack Mack wrote: Spiritwind, one thing I want to aks: I had an american breeder interested in one of the rough puppies but when I told her the price I get for a pet puppy she was astonished and lost interest and she was shocked about the price I had payed for the mother of the puppies. Are the prices in America so different ??? In our breed club all smooths go for about the same price. Jack Mack, the person interested was in fact a breeder?? I'm really kind of interested in who the person was, but I understand not wanting to post someones name here. The reason I ask is.... in the US (and Canada)... maybe you also have them in Europe, but we have REAL breeders... who breed for health, structure, temperament and soundness. The breeders that show their dogs, and health test their dogs. Dogs from these breeders can be rather expensive. Then we have "Back-yard" breeders. Breeders who buy the first collie they can for the cheapest they can, usually from another bad breeder... whether its show quality or not... they breed it to the first collie they find just to produce puppies to sell. Most often they don't have health tests, but sometimes these "breeders" do eye checks. Sometimes these people will have a kennel, but most of the time they own 2-3 maybe 4 dogs that they breed, and sell for very cheap. My very first collie, a rough male, was purchased for me by my grandparents. He came from one of these breeders, he didn't even have his eyes checked. He was $250. USD. VERY VERY cheap. I'm just curious as to whether this person was a real show breeder... or a back-yard breeder, who thinks they breed show quality dogs... when in reality they are far from it!.. This is the reason, when I sell a puppy to a pet home... whether the puppy is show quality or not, its not allowed to be bred. I don't want it or its offspring falling into the hands of these back-yard breeders. So yes, in the US and Canada there is a HUGE range of prices. I know one breeder who sell both show and pet puppies for $600. I know another breeder who sells pet puppies for $800... and show puppies start at $1000-$1200 USD. Show quality adults are even more. Because of the backyard breeders who sell their dogs for $200-$300 many people don't understand why reputable breeders sell their dogs for so much more. But Back-yard breeders just breed two dogs together to produce puppies. They don't research health, or the pedigrees... most don't even do eye checks or give a health guarantee. You get that and more from a reputable breeder. However I sold a Rough adult male to Europe about 1 1/2 yrs ago.. and the lady who got the dog at first was really surprised by my price, she said it was higher than she expected. Then because he was an adult, and needed a 500 vari kennel to ship it, it was VERY expensive to ship him over seas!

Jack Mack: Spiritwind - she was a well know breeder, maybe not up to date but earlier.........so no name here. And I payed a lot more for my two bitches, the first one I bought as a puppy (for a heck lot more money than you mentioned) but then her breeder would not want to let her go and we compromised upon her keeping and showing her for a 1 year. Then I picked up an American Champion who won an Award of Merit on the National 2004 and she was shown in Europe and qualified for Crufts the year after, so she was worth it. By the way, she is the mother of my half 'n' half litter Ok, she is Am./Swiss/German and International Champion Kimegan Cozy at Jack Mack My latest import, she was already 6 years old when I saw her and she caught my eye right away, she really took my breath away even at that age! She gave birth to 14 puppies at my home, I was able to raise 11 (9 boys, 2 girls). She gained her ROM last year and was nr. 1 brood bitch (rough and smooth). And she is Am.Champion Byluc's Drama Queen ROM I am so happy and proud to have them

Spiritwind: I will say when American/Canadian breeders sell dogs overseas they tend to sell them for more than they would to breeders in North America. When I sell show prospect puppies I usually sell them on co-ownership with the agreement that we either split a litter from the bitch.... or I get the bitch back for a litter at some point, so the purchase price is less because I would get a litter back from the bitch as well.. or if its a male I keep stud rights to the dog for any bitch I lease, own or co-own. When they sell them overseas they tend to be more expensive because typically we can't get them back for litters or split litters out of them.... or at least you can't do that as easily. I just got a rough blue bitch that I bred, but sold on co-ownership. I just got her back a few weeks ago for a litter.. and she'll be bred this fall. Now if I sold a show puppy bitch overseas, it would be more than $1200 because the likely hood of me getting her back for a litter would be slim. The male I sold to Europe last year I sold for MUCH MUCH more than that, and he really was the pick male from that litter! I had to think long and hard before I finally decided to sell him. I also wanted to add that the prices I posted above, the breeders I know, the the prices above are just the starting price for a puppy, they can go up or even down depending on the terms and agreement the dogs are sold on. A mature adult, or proven stud dog, or a proven bitch... a finished champion... etc.. costs of these dogs will be higher..

Spiritwind: Glenmorangie wrote: I really like the colour of the blue in the midle, light and "flashy" I hope this puppy kept this quality with age..... And I really love the "big" first sable, he seems to be so present and he holds his teat so firmly For sure, he will never give his place even for gold The blue in the middle kept that nice clear blue coloring. I LOVE the coloring, I still have her actually, but I think she may be going to a pet home (non-breeding).... I just don't feel she has as good of body and structure as her littermates. Beautiful color and very pretty head and expression though!... I can't remember which puppy that first sable was. There was only one male in the litter, and he was sable.. and 2 sable bitches, but one of the bitches was VERY fat and large... so thats either the male or the large sable bitch, they had the same exact markings so I can't remember which one that was lol.... Bree the bitch I kept was the smaller sable bitch... Bree ended up probably about the size of a large European bred bitch (maybe just under 22 inches)..... where Paris, the mother is almost 24" tall.... or very close to 24 inches.

Dianne: This has gone rather far from rough to smooth mating javascript:pst3(' !!!!!!!!!

Spiritwind: Found this pic... always loved it. This is Aiden (Left) and Andy (right), they are litter brothers. Andy is the one that I sold to Europe. This picture was taken at around 14 months of age, a few months before he left.

Dianne: Hi Jack Mack - I am getting more and more concerned about the fate of the rough smooth in Europe. Some years back, I was allowed to register such a dog as rough and he was exported to Switzerland. You know about this as you helped me find the new puppy owner. Now there are new terms for such dogs and no-one seems to understand what these terms mean, but most people seem to think that rough smooths cannot be confirmed as pedigree dogs or used in breeding. I am trying to find the relevant information. Glenmorangie has already spoken about this and it would be great if she would explain again where she found the information and what it really means. Some people have interpreted the ruling differently. What seems to be needed is a Europe-wide petition to decide the fate of the rough smooth. As he will breed true for rough, there doesn't seem to be any valid reason for excluding him from breeding. Myrnash in Israel has bred with rough smooths to great effect. I have found something very interesting in "Smooth Collie Pedigrees - a selection 1900 to 2004" produced by the Smooth Collie Club of Great Britain: Quote: While I appreciate that a single ancestor appearing in the distant past would have virtually no influence on descendants decades later, I find it interesting to realise that Rough collies born in Smooth litters bred on and played a part in shaping both breeds in a way that, due to current legislation, they cannot do today.Brenda Kennedy with special thanks to Dareen Bridge. This means that in the past, rough smooths were used in breeding and one begins to wonder what all the fuss is about!!!! Dianne

Spiritwind: Dianne wrote: This means that in the past, rough smooths were used in breeding and one begins to wonder what all the fuss is about!!!! I think its pretty obvious at one point roughs from smooth parents were used for breeding in Europe, since up until, when was it? the early 90's (correct me if I'm wrong) you could still breed rough x smooth. Even when the two varieties were more similar than they are today, in Europe... I'll have to look for the site I found it on.. it was one of the collie breed history pages I read, but it states on there that there are NO rough collies, in which smooth collies do not appear in the pedigrees.. you just have to go back in the pedigree far enough.

myrnash: With all the discussion of the different types and so on, I thought this article would be interesting - I found it excellent. http://www.thedogplace.org/Articles/Breeder/0901-Preferred-Type_Gammill.htm

Alertness: I don't have this directly from any reliable source, but it is said (?) that rough breeders in England discontinued trying to use roughs (with smooth parents) in rough breeding as they were not happy with the coat of the offspring even several generations later: The big, very abundant/excessive coat they had worked so hard to develop through lots of generations were ruined by introducing these very moderately coated roughs into the breeding programme. I don't know if this is true as American breeders don't seem to have any trouble keeping the big coat on their roughs despite rough/smooth matings or rough/rough from smooth parent matings. Berit

myrnash: I agree with you, Berit, that the American dogs don't seem to suffer coatwise from having smooths in their background. In my opinion, the coat texture of the American roughs is much better and more correct than these huge, profuse, soft coat we see in the English lines...

Dianne: Spiritwind wrote I think its pretty obvious at one point roughs from smooth parents were used for breeding in Europe, since up until, when was it? the early 90's (correct me if I'm wrong) you could still breed rough x smooth. Even when the two varieties were more similar than they are today, in Europe... Roughs were bred with smooths to produce smooth litters until 1993. On the contrary, smooths were not used to breed with roughs to produce rough puppies. Rough puppies from smooth litters would be sold as pets. What I quoted here refers to some time in the far past. I will enquire in England to see if anyone remembers rough smooths being "bred on" in living memory, but I very much doubt it. I have found something very interesting in "Smooth Collie Pedigrees - a selection 1900 to 2004" produced by the Smooth Collie Club of Great Britain: Quote: While I appreciate that a single ancestor appearing in the distant past would have virtually no influence on descendants decades later, I find it interesting to realise that Rough collies born in Smooth litters bred on and played a part in shaping both breeds in a way that, due to current legislation, they cannot do today.Brenda Kennedy with special thanks to Dareen Bridge. Berit - it would be interesting to see some photos of roughs from smooth litters in America - I have the impression that the smooths have more coat on them than we would find on many smooths here and probably the rough smooths have more coat on them too. One example would be the Jack Mack's dog that was from an American litter and was exported to Italy. As roughs and smooths are mixed more than they are here, presumably, there is more consistency in the coats. But again, I would like some statistics. I feel that once again, in the states, it is the smooth breeders that enjoy cross breeding and the rough breeders not so. Any information on this would be welcome. Dianne

Dianne: Hi again Berit - in another forum, you said If you look at the American smooths and roughs that are being interbred generation upon generation you see that there are no "inbetweens"; the result will never be a collie that is neither smooth nor rough, it will not be like a border collie with semi-long coat. Yes, the smooths may get a little thicker and more "open" coat, but it will never be long. And the roughs from such breedings do tend to get a less abundant coat (not as excessive), but they will never be short-haired. These roughs from smooth litters may actually look a lot like the early rough historic collie with a more moderate and functional coat (but still long). Personally I find the roughs from smooth litters very fascinating; they're like a living history book . They show us what roughs really are supposed to look like if breeders hadn't worked hard to breed for the massive, excessive coat of today's modern collies. Berit This is a very valuable observation for this discussion. It seems to me that as smooths were bred to roughs at the beginning of the 20th century and again after the second world war, rough smooths contain some very ancient genetic material - a living history book as you say. All the more reason to use them for breeding with smooths.(let alone for bringing modern roughs back to some semblance of their traditional look) Dianne

Dianne: Hi Myrna - I thought I had thanked you for your interesting link and said how sadly true the article is, but I seem to have lost the post - so - - - thanks Dianne

Spiritwind: Dianne wrote: Roughs were bred with smooths to produce smooth litters until 1993. On the contrary, smooths were not used to breed with roughs to produce rough puppies. Rough puppies from smooth litters would be sold as pets. I guess this would be a downfall to the European Collie then, as I don't think a good Collie should be judge on coat alone! Dianne wrote: I feel that once again, in the states, it is the smooth breeders that enjoy cross breeding and the rough breeders not so. Any information on this would be welcome. This is incorrect!! First I don't consider myself a smooth Collie breeder... and I don't consider myself a Rough Collie breeder. I consider myself a Collie Breeder. In the US we sure have breeders who only breed Roughs.... we have breeders who only breed Smooths... and we have breeders who do both. The pedigrees are still mixed with each other. A smooth breeder sells a smooth puppy to someone who breeds both varieties... or vise versa. Sure breeders have preferences as to whether they like roughs or smooths more, but they are still thought of as ONE breed by everyone! I know its hard for me to understand some things that go on in Europe in regards to breeding Collies, because we don't have the restrictions that you do... as far as breeding rough x smooth.. or blue to sable... But I don't think you can fully understand what breeders here think, as far as breeding, when we look at our dogs as COLLIES (not rough collies, not smooth collies, but Collies!).... and look at them and their virtues and qualities before even looking at whether they are rough or smooth... or tri or sable.. or sable merles. I think the majority of Collie breeders in the US breed both varieties. MOST (but not all) of the big name breeders in the US breed both rough and smooth variety. When Roughs and Smooths are thought of as two varieties of the SAME breed it really changes how you think. I know so many people think breeding roughs x smooth will give you roughs with less coat.... I have yet to EVER see this in the breedings I have done. I must also add that IF American Rough Collies EVER had the amount of coat most European bred Rough Collies have, I would not own them. I think the coat of the majority of the European roughs in completely nonfunctional. Having a coat that big serves no purpose. I have never seen an American Collie with a coat as big as so many of the European Roughs...even when their pedigrees are mostly roughs. Just the same, I know many roughs down from mostly smooth collies, who have great coats, with correct amount and texture. my smooth bitch that is due in Sept was bred to a rough male down from mostly roughs... I don't expect the roughs in the litter to have any less coat because their mother is a smooth. This is just stupid, because a rough cannot carry a smooth gene!...

Dianne: Hi Spirit wind - at the moment, roughs from smooth matings do not have heavy coats. Their genes must go back to earlier collies before heavy coats were developed in Europe. On my site, section "Puppies in their new homes", Arion is an extreme example having very little coat and practically no ruff around the neck.Dianne

Jencolcollies: Spiritwind said: In the US we sure have breeders who only breed Roughs.... we have breeders who only breed Smooths... and we have breeders who do both. The pedigrees are still mixed with each other. A smooth breeder sells a smooth puppy to someone who breeds both varieties... or vise versa. Sure breeders have preferences as to whether they like roughs or smooths more, but they are still thought of as ONE breed by everyone! This is an interesting comment you make. I think it points out a marked difference in the way of thinking between Collie Breeders in Europe and the USA. The difference being in Europe that the Collie Smooth is seen as a breed in its own right as opposed to in the USA where they consider them a different variety of the same breed. My thoughts are that the Smooth Collie has its own breed standard with subtle but still differences from the Rough Collie standard and therefore should be considered as a breed in its own right. This said I have done intervariety matings in the past and think that as a breed it is a good thing that this is still allowed for the sake of genetic diversity within the Smooth Collie (I am aware that not all countries allow intervariety matings thankfully Australia still does). JMO Jenny

Spiritwind: Jencolcollies wrote: My thoughts are that the Smooth Collie has its own breed standard with subtle but still differences from the Rough Collie standard and therefore should be considered as a breed in its own right. However in the US and Canada the Rough and Smooth share the same breed standard. There is no difference, other than coat, between the rough and smooth breed standard in North America.

Glenmorangie: Spiritwind wrote: But I don't think you can fully understand what breeders here think, as far as breeding, when we look at our dogs as COLLIES (not rough collies, not smooth collies, but Collies!).... and look at them and their virtues and qualities before even looking at whether they are rough or smooth... or tri or sable.. or sable merles. Well.... Would I be the unique person in Europe who (maybe) can understand the American's mind in their Collie breeding matter ? I am quite "jealous" of your freedom in breeding Collie I am personally deeply frustrated to have to manage my breeding program in such restricted conditions because I feel, I "know" that if I had this freedom I would be able to bring "my stone" in the Collie's improvement, whatever Rough or Smooth. I gave up the rough because it is long time that this "variety" does no longer fit to my idea of what a Collie must be. It is bred for more 20 years so far from the Standard That said, after 16 years of separation, I think the two bloodlines are turning around within themselves and are led to a big enough amount of inbreeding. This long time separation could be a real chance for European Collie breeders (at least those who are convinced that Rough and Smooth are two varieties of the same breed) to reintroduce Rough x Smooth matings in order to bring back a new genetic diversity. Spiritwind wrote: When Roughs and Smooths are thought of as two varieties of the SAME breed it really changes how you think. How obvious it is (at least for me) Freedom leads to Light, increasing restrictions lead to Darkness. In MIND. Spiritwind wrote: I think the coat of the majority of the European roughs in completely nonfunctional. Having a coat that big serves no purpose. Not only this HUGE coat serves no purposes but it is quite OUT OF STANDARD Still the today Rough Standard precises that the coat must fit to the body and does not mask the body's outlines. So the Standard remains quite functional in its sayings. But huge coat is not the only thing which "handicaps" the today Rough Collie. The "elephantish" bone is another marking element in the non functional serve. Why having made the bone so big and heavy I will never get any logical response for sure. Our thirty years old Rough Collies had finer bone and still they were quite able to stand up, to trot for hours, to run the same, had great reflexes and reactions both in their brain and their body. Having developped such a big bone, the dogs must also develop muscles, tendons and ligaments in the same proportion. Add to this the fact they have been shortened and enlarged in all parts, you have what you see for more two decades. WHYYYYY Dianne wrote: at the moment, roughs from smooth matings do not have heavy coats. Their genes must go back to earlier collies before heavy coats were developed in Europe. On my site, section "Puppies in their new homes", Arion is an extreme example having very little coat and practically no ruff around the neck. This is normal. The length's coat is not led by only one gene. Of course that gene is dominant (or homozygous recessive) over all the other genes but lots of genetical elements can interact with this gene. Why Roughs bred from Smooths for very long time still have a correct amount of coat ? Because the "Long Coat" gene is present in Smooths for generations resulting in a more or less slight decrease of the "Short Coat Power". In this case, even Pure for Smooth Smooths have a fair amount of coat and especially undercoat. Why Arion has not the correct amount of long coat ? Because he is from a long time Smooth breeding and consequently the "Short Coat" gene is more dominant over the "Long Coat Power". I hope my explaination is clear enough to be understood, my English is not perfect.... You can see examples of Roughs from Smooths bred in some kennels in Europe here : http://www.glenmorangie-collies.com/genpoil.html Jencolcollies wrote: My thoughts are that the Smooth Collie has its own breed standard with subtle but still differences from the Rough Collie standard and therefore should be considered as a breed in its own right. As far as I remember (from 1975), there was a unique British (thus FCI...) Standard for both Rough and Smooth Collies. Thus it was the same for the two varieties, the Smooth Collie was only described in its difference of length coat in few lines. Unfortunately, in the early 80's in England, some True Typed Rough Collie breeders began to develop what they call "the modern rough collie" in the type that everyone knows today. How did they do so and what dogs were used to produce their "new collie" is quite a mystery for me I dare not advance any theory but....... if you compare the today rough collie's type with the type of certain other breeds which normally have nothing to do with the Collie, *maybe* you will find some similarities However, it remains two mysteries for me : the too small eyes and the so large, heavy and badly set ears. Where do they come from Best regards, Françoise

Glenmorangie: Spiritwind When will you stop to post your writings just short time before me ? Best regards, Françoise

Dianne: Hello Jenny - thanks for your interesting answer. I agree with everything you say, (the smooth collie is a breed in its own right) and am interested that you can still do rough to smooth matings in Australia. As a matter of interest, how large is your population of smooths over there? Are there a growing number of breeders as in Europe? If your population is small, interbreeding would be necessary. Dianne

Dianne: Hello Françoise - thanks for your link - I will study it tomorrow with a less tired brain!! Plus your ideas about coat. Are these ideas conjecture or scientific ?- à suivre - - - - -? Please look at my introduction to this topic where I think I prove collies smooth and collies rough were originally separate breeds. The standards may have been the same after the introduction of showing, but before this, the smooth was not the same dog as the rough. Do please look at my engraving of collies by Sydenham Edwards dated 1800 and the comment about the collies at that time. I can quote you book after book about collies where the smooth was considered a separate breed from the rough in its early manifestation.Don't forget that "collie " covers the Border, the Smooth, the Rough and the Shetland, but not the Bobtail.

Dianne: If you were free to mate rough to smooth, where would you find the roughs to mate with? In which country or from which breeder? Dianne

Spiritwind: Glenmorangie wrote: I am quite "jealous" of your freedom in breeding Collie I am personally deeply frustrated to have to manage my breeding program in such restricted conditions because I feel, I "know" that if I had this freedom I would be able to bring "my stone" in the Collie's improvement, whatever Rough or Smooth. Like I said in another post, I really do not know how I could manage to breed Collies and live in Europe. I like the ability to breed what I feel is correct, not want some "laws" say is correct. If I want to breed rough x smooth... or sable x blue merle, because its the PERFECT match for the two dogs. I really do not understand the reasoning for them to be against sable merles. Its really not that difficult to tell a sable merle from a regular sable... either as an adult and as puppies, its easy to tell. PLUS now that they have DNA tests, to test the color of your dog, even if some breeder really wasn't smart enough to be able to tell the difference, there is a test for it! I think breeding a dog to the one that is perfect for it, as far as health, structure, temperament and head quality..... that just happens to be a sable x blue breeding. I think those are far more important things to consider than color.... Glenmorangie wrote: Not only this HUGE coat serves no purposes but it is quite OUT OF STANDARD Still the today Rough Standard precises that the coat must fit to the body and does not mask the body's outlines. So the Standard remains quite functional in its sayings. But huge coat is not the only thing which "handicaps" the today Rough Collie. The "elephantish" bone is another marking element in the non functional serve. Why having made the bone so big and heavy I will never get any logical response for sure. Our thirty years old Rough Collies had finer bone and still they were quite able to stand up, to trot for hours, to run the same, had great reflexes and reactions both in their brain and their body. RIGHT the coat is supposed to be "fitted" and not hide the body outline, which MOST of the European Roughs coats do! I really do not understand why the rough breeders do not understand this??? Or choose to ignore it? I go to a Rough Collie Forum as well, based in Europe and MUCH MUCH prefer this one. You can check out the Rough Forum if you want too: http://collie.heavenforum.com/ Its really kind of scary the way so many of the people on their think. The funny thing is.. I've never noticed or thought of the European dogs as having to much bone, so I'm going to have to go back and look at pictures of some! I will say when a dog has TONS of coat, the coat on the legs is usually also very thick and makes them look like they have more bone than they really do. I'll also have to try to get some pics of my 4 month old rough puppy girl, and see what you all think of her. What I have noticed with the European Roughs... besides coat, is they appear to be very short backed, no neck, short curly tails, to much stop, not enough muzzle, they seem to lack undersjaw, funny eye placement and shape and low wide set ears. However, I do not like fine boned dogs. I don't want a dog to have so much bone they look clunky, but I can't stand fined bone, stick legs either. What really gets me though, is why breeders of European Collies can look at pictures of top winning Collies in the late 1800's or early 1900's and think their dogs resemble them more, than the American Roughs. GGlenmorangie wrote: Freedom leads to Light, increasing restrictions lead to Darkness. In MIND. Totally agree!!! GGlenmorangie wrote: You can see examples of Roughs from Smooths bred in some kennels in Europe here : http://www.glenmorangie-collies.com/genpoil.html I went to this website. I have to say, I really like the roughs on this site... well actually all the dogs look very nice, but the roughs are VERY familiar looking because they look more American than European! Dianne wrote: Please look at my introduction to this topic where I think I prove collies smooth and collies rough were originally separate breeds. The standards may have been the same after the introduction of showing, but before this, the smooth was not the same dog as the rough. Maybe I didn't read what you posted, correctly, but I haven't yet seen where you have proven they were originally two separate breeds? How far back do you have to go to prove this? More than the late 1800's, because by then they were pretty well established. Every Collie book I have read states that the very early history of the "Collie" is pretty much unknown. The fact of the matter is, even if they were two separate breeds, they have been interbred for over 150 yrs, (until they split them up as two breeds in Europe in the mid 90's), in the US and also it seems in Australia. The breed standards have been the same for YEARS and YEARS in most countries, until they split them up in Europe, and it seems then t he standards changed. Thankfully there are still a few places left that consider them the same breed... and also allow interbreeding. From one of my Collie History sites: "A point of interest here is that the mother of Ch Christopher's great grandsire, Scott, was a Smooth Collie by the name of "Ch Waite". She was the very first Smooth Collie champion, and thru Ch. Christopher, is an ancestor of all Collies today. Thus there exist no Rough Collie lines in which Smooth Collies do not appear. " CH Christopher was born in 1887 (The Collie Club of America was formed in 1886 by the way.. so they were already established in the US at that point as well) so CH Christopher's great grandsire was out of a smooth bitch, so that would be his great great grandmother. If she was in fact a smooth... then at the very least one of her parents were smooths.. and so on and so on.

myrnash: I competely agree with what Spiritwind says about the European roughs. It is possible to find some good roughs in Europe, of a good and correct type, but you really have to search hard to find them...As a long time breeder that has seen both the American and European lines from the late 1960's on, and as a judge that has judged them in many places, the European tendency to these short necked, curly tailed fluff balls is the farthest I have seen anywhere from the intention of the standard and from what collies were in the beginning of the breed. I find it very sad. But I am enocuraged to see that there are breeders that see that it is necessary to improve, and that are making efforts to do so.

Dianne: Hi in answer to Spirit wind - my introduction to the subject is the first post here. All my reading in books in my own possession, some of them dating from the 19th century, and some other reading I have done on the web, lead me to believe that the smooth and the rough were two different races before interbreeding for show purposes.There is a parallel topic about rough smooths, so some information appears in the other topic. When I say the two breeds were separate, I am certainly talking about a period before the late 18oos. If you could take the time to look at the engraving I posted on page one of this topic and look at the three web sites underneath, you will see other engravings of the collie before his alliance with the rough. I quoted from an American book on a parallel topic which says Here is an example of an extract on smooth collie history from an American work Excerpt from Working Dogs The Breeds and Standards as recognised by The American Kennel Club 1935. Printed by G. Howard Wyatt, Inc New York Rough and Smooth collies have been identical in form, aside from the coat , for almost three quarters of a century, but there are many reasons for believing that in early days, they were two separate breeds. Few types of dog have been more developed and improvedin appearancethan the Collies, and it is difficult to say just how breeders undertook this task. But it is a matter of record that by 1885, when the first speciality show was held for the breed in England, roughs and smooths often were found in the same litter. Here is an engraving by the artist Sydenham Edwards dating from around 1800. More information can be found about this here http://www.gis.net/~shepdog/BC_Museum/Permanent/SydenhamEdwards/Edwards.html I could go on and on, quoting Bewick and other sources, but this requires more time than I have to devote to the subject here are the three references again http://www.gis.net/~shepdog/BC_Museum/Permanent/SydenhamEdwards/Edwards.html For Bewick: http://www.gis.net/~shepdog/BC_Museum/Permanent/Bewick/Bewick.html For Caius: http://www.gis.net/~shepdog/BC_Museum/Permanent/Caius/Caius.html Hope I have cleared up any problems over my "proofs" Dianne

Alertness: Than you Dianne for a thorough research . I recall reading something similar, that the smooth and the rough variety might have been separate "breeds" (or rather varieties produced for slightly different working functions) in the very early days before they became "breeds" and pedigrees were written down. If this ought to have any impact on how we practize our breeding regarding smooth/rough today I don't know. There is the fact of a very narrow gene pool on the smooth's part to take into consideration. Berit

Spiritwind: I'm assuming that was written in 1935 then, since it says for almost 3/4 of a century. As I said before roughs and smooths have been in the same litters for close to 150yrs now. The very early history of the collie is not really known, people can only guess, because as Alertness said, the early breeders did not keep record of pedigrees. They bred their dogs for their ability not their looks... regardless of breed, they needed to be good working dogs. The fact is, even if they were separate breeds originally, they haven't been separate breeds for well more than 100 yrs, the pedigrees are all mixed together. I'm not really sure what the picture of 4 dogs in supposed to illustrate, other than just showing pictures of some working dogs. None of them look like smooths to me, even early smooths. The one without a tail, is not a smooth, its a Cur Dog. Here is something you might find interesting. I'm not saying its totally accurate, no one really knows.. but its the possible collie family tree.. I have to leave for work so, but when I have time, I'll try to read those pages more... read some of them... still not really seeing how any of them really prove roughs and smooths were once separate breeds.

Dianne: Alertness wrote: I recall reading something similar, that the smooth and the rough variety might have been separate "breeds" (or rather varieties produced for slightly different working functions) in the very early days before they became "breeds" and pedigrees were written down.[/ Hello Alertness - thanks for your message. I have to admit that the evidence is conflicting as to whether the smooth and rough collie are varieties of the same breed or two separate breeds. I realise, that there is no proof either way, but although it is mainly conjecture, reading I have done leads me to come down on the side of there being two distinct breeds. But as you say, it does somehow boil down to the definitions of "breeds" and "varieties." That said, I have just looked at another book in my library called: Old Farm Dogs by David Hancock. It is published by Shire Albums in 1999. ISBN0 7478 0429 X He talks about different varieties of sheepdog living in both Britain and Europe. He emphasises the fact that sheepdogs were bred very specifically in small areas for very specific needs. He also points out that sheepdogs also had to be versatile dogs carrying out other roles than that of sheepdog. After all, how many dogs can a farm support? Different roles that a dog could fulfill would be to control, drive, herd, pen heel or even pin cattle, sheep and other farm animals and also to hunt. The book is illustrated with photos from any time from the 1800s to the early 1900s. In one photo, a group of farmers have been fox hunting and a collie is a member of the team. Multifunctional!!!! David Hancock points out that climate also played a large role in the selective breeding of farm dogs. So many breeds have been lost says Mr Hancock- the building of the railways removed the need for drovers - perhaps if our smooths were drovers as is often claimed, then we owe their survival to showing. I remember that, as a child, living in Birmingham, we always referred to the Welsh Collie (is this the same as Welsh Hillman?) - Scotland was far away for us - Wales much nearer - the farm dogs we knew of were Welsh collies. Where is he now? Ha ha - I have just found that the Welsh collie is alive and well - just Google "Welsh collie" Many other types of sheepdog are mentioned - a Cotswold bearded sheepdog, a Scottish black and tan, a Blue Shag, Welsh Grey, a Black Merle, and of course, the Border, the Bearded and the Old English, the Corgi and many more. Among so many, the smooth is only briefly mentioned. Finally in this book, is a very is a very interesting speculation. The lurcher is a collie greyhound/ cross which is bred and used today. Two of my friends have had lurchers for many years.The book says quote "Drovers needed to feed themselves on their long journeys and used a sheepdog cross greyhound, known as a lurcher, to fill their pots with meat. The smooth Collie is considered by some experts, to have developed from such a cross. If any of these other lost farm dogs had been picked out as show dogs, their story would have been different. Sorry to go on at such great length. Hope that someone will want to comment and add to this subject, which as usual, started out as a very different topic. Dianne

Alertness: Hi Dianne Again very interesting read . I like the idea of the smooth collie originating from the lurchers; I've always been fascinated by them and their history. Even though the early history of the smooth and rough collie is very cloudy at its best, it seems the two varieties might have been put to slightly different use, apart from being low and high land based (climatic differences requiring a longer and thicker coat for the rough). Berit

Dianne: Hi Berit - my thinking is going along the same lines, but we are changing our ideas as we exchange our ideas - and they are only ideas - we shall never know as you say. Still, it is interesting and hopefully, we will go on researching and talking about the origins of the smooth. Whether this affects the question of mating rough to smooth, I don't know, but it could throw some light on it. Dianne