Post by Hardcastle on Feb 28, 2023 19:29:13 GMT
Wyatt
You better get in here...
Larger version.
Environmental factors associated with success rates of Australian stock herding dogs
According to this study, success rates for the different breeds rank as follows-
"Other" - 68%
Cattle dog - 67%
Kelpie - 66%
Kelpie X - 64%
Coolie X - 63%
Border Collie - 60%
Coolie - 58%
Border Collie X - 52%
Cattle dog X - 30%
Ranking in popularity (number of individual dogs in study)-
Kelpie (1078)
Border Collie (288)
Kelpie Cross (151)
Border Collie cross (127)
"Other" (71)
Coolie (26)
Cattle dog (24)
Cattle dog X (20)
Coolie X (19)
Some thoughts;
"Other" I believe would be primarily lineages crafted by the farmer's ancestors (or those of a close family friend) which don't have a name as they go back "to time immemorial" from before all these breed names even came to pass. A significant percentage of farmers run such dogs. Just "their families" dogs. This for me would align with the high success rate, they are specifically honed to work in tune with the way the particular farmer (and farm) they are paired with operates. This is speculation on my part, but I feel quite educated speculation (if I do say so myself).
Cattle dogs doing very well and cattle dog crosses doing poorly is a discrepancy which actually makes perfect sense. Cattle dogs are a very specific thing. "One of these things is not like the others", you could say. Those with pure cattle dogs know what they are, know what they want, and are happy with them (they actually have a relatively easy job compared to the others). Those with cattle dog crosses? That doesn't make much sense. Those people perhaps want a herding dog like the others, and then have a cattle dog cross probably biting their sheep or whatever, so 70% of these are actually "flunking out". This shows cattle dogs make good cattle mustering dogs (very commendable high working success rate for a recognised pure breed), but aren't a good ingredient in a general herding dog because they bite and aren't actual herding dogs like the others here. It's actually easier for them to get a passing grade than the others because their job is very loose mustering with rough brutish persuasion, but that's only if their human knows what they are and knows what to expect. Those with pure heelers do, those with crosses obviously don't, and then the heeler crosses are "failing" to live up to their expectations (they are probably expecting kelpie performance).
To me the one that comes out smelling like roses the most in all this is the kelpie. The extremely high representation among serious working stock dogs speaks for itself, and then this SHOULD actually punish them in the success rate stakes, but it doesn't. They have a very high success rate. You could say they from this quite confidently that they dominate the stock herding scene in Australia.
Wyatt I tagged you because your beloved border collies aren't crushing the competition like you would have probably expected. What say you? They're doing fine, and have very good representation, but I think you would have expected them to be number 1.
You better get in here...
Larger version.
Environmental factors associated with success rates of Australian stock herding dogs
According to this study, success rates for the different breeds rank as follows-
"Other" - 68%
Cattle dog - 67%
Kelpie - 66%
Kelpie X - 64%
Coolie X - 63%
Border Collie - 60%
Coolie - 58%
Border Collie X - 52%
Cattle dog X - 30%
Ranking in popularity (number of individual dogs in study)-
Kelpie (1078)
Border Collie (288)
Kelpie Cross (151)
Border Collie cross (127)
"Other" (71)
Coolie (26)
Cattle dog (24)
Cattle dog X (20)
Coolie X (19)
Some thoughts;
"Other" I believe would be primarily lineages crafted by the farmer's ancestors (or those of a close family friend) which don't have a name as they go back "to time immemorial" from before all these breed names even came to pass. A significant percentage of farmers run such dogs. Just "their families" dogs. This for me would align with the high success rate, they are specifically honed to work in tune with the way the particular farmer (and farm) they are paired with operates. This is speculation on my part, but I feel quite educated speculation (if I do say so myself).
Cattle dogs doing very well and cattle dog crosses doing poorly is a discrepancy which actually makes perfect sense. Cattle dogs are a very specific thing. "One of these things is not like the others", you could say. Those with pure cattle dogs know what they are, know what they want, and are happy with them (they actually have a relatively easy job compared to the others). Those with cattle dog crosses? That doesn't make much sense. Those people perhaps want a herding dog like the others, and then have a cattle dog cross probably biting their sheep or whatever, so 70% of these are actually "flunking out". This shows cattle dogs make good cattle mustering dogs (very commendable high working success rate for a recognised pure breed), but aren't a good ingredient in a general herding dog because they bite and aren't actual herding dogs like the others here. It's actually easier for them to get a passing grade than the others because their job is very loose mustering with rough brutish persuasion, but that's only if their human knows what they are and knows what to expect. Those with pure heelers do, those with crosses obviously don't, and then the heeler crosses are "failing" to live up to their expectations (they are probably expecting kelpie performance).
To me the one that comes out smelling like roses the most in all this is the kelpie. The extremely high representation among serious working stock dogs speaks for itself, and then this SHOULD actually punish them in the success rate stakes, but it doesn't. They have a very high success rate. You could say they from this quite confidently that they dominate the stock herding scene in Australia.
Wyatt I tagged you because your beloved border collies aren't crushing the competition like you would have probably expected. What say you? They're doing fine, and have very good representation, but I think you would have expected them to be number 1.