AKC Herding Group vs. Working Group
 

Recently, the question was asked to American club members - is our breed better served by being in the Working Group or the Herding Group of the AKC?

Currently, just like the FCI, we are in the Herding Group. AKC groups it's dogs differently however. Our groups are:
Sporting
Hound
Herding
Working
Terrier
Toy
Non-Sporting

The working group is made up of dogs that do different kinds of work, and includes Komondors, Kuvasz, Portuguese Water Dogs, Siberian Huskies, Samoyeds, Akitas, Boxers, Rottweilers, Etc. It's AKC definition is:

"Dogs of the Working Group were bred to perform such jobs as guarding property, pulling sleds and performing water rescues. They have been invaluable assets to man throughout the ages. The Doberman Pinscher, Siberian Husky and Great Dane are included in this Group, to name just a few. Quick to learn, these intelligent, capable animals make solid companions. Their considerable dimensions and strength alone, however, make many working dogs unsuitable as pets for average families. And again, by virtue of their size alone, these dogs must be properly trained."

The herding group (which became seperate from the working group in 1983) is very similar to the FCI Sheepdog/Cattle Dog group in makeup, and has this AKC definition:

"The Herding Group, created in 1983, is the newest AKC classification; its members were formerly members of the Working Group. All breeds share the fabulous ability to control the movement of other animals. A remarkable example is the low-set Corgi, perhaps one foot tall at the shoulders, that can drive a herd of cows many times its size to pasture by leaping and nipping at their heels. The vast majority of Herding dogs, as household pets, never cross paths with a farm animal. Nevertheless, pure instinct prompts many of these dogs to gently herd their owners, especially the children of the family. In general, these intelligent dogs make excellent companions and respond beautifully to training exercises."

It is generally understood that the CSV was never bred for herding/moving animals, though it's ancestor, the GSD, was. The CSV was bred for work, however. I am curious what the thoughts are from the international community?

In the FCi they are members of the herding group but per definition they are of course better of in the working group.

Regards
Ina

Marcy, put them in "Trailing group" :p

Best regards / Mikael

Lol, Mikael, I think the closest we come to that is the Hound group...boy, wouldn't that shock some people in the dog world!:shock:

Here is AKC's definition for the Hound group:

"Most hounds share the common ancestral trait of being used for hunting. Some use acute scenting powers to follow a trail. Others demonstrate a phenomenal gift of stamina as they relentlessly run down quarry. Beyond this, however, generalizations about hounds are hard to come by, since the Group encompasses quite a diverse lot. There are Pharaoh Hounds, Norwegian Elkhounds, Afghans and Beagles, among others. Some hounds share the distinct ability to produce a unique sound known as baying. You'd best sample this sound before you decide to get a hound of your own to be sure it's your cup of tea."

Of course, then people would refer to them as Czechoslovakian Wolfhounds...wait, some misinformed people already do! :lol:

I think the general consensus in the US is that they should be assigned to the AKC Working Group (initially they did have other purposes besides trailing, afterall)...but of course, none of us want to unintentionally offend the FCI member countries either by asking to assign them to a new group, and will leave them in the Herding Group if that is the case. It's why we hope to solicit some opinions outside of our country...maybe in a way it's not too important, but perhaps it could change a little what judges look for (in shows and performance trials) in our breed - and once AKC accepts something, it is pretty difficult to change for some time. We are in the process of formalizing our club with AKC, so we want to make sure things are "just as they should be" starting off.

I think working group

I have to agree - the working group fits them better (Shadow has been herded by sheep on occasion, not the other way around :lol:)

Here's a thought - non-sporting group.

Talk about a misnomer, though I do think based on the dogs that comprise that group, the CsV fits there quite well.

.. that's my two cents on the AKC. ;)

Ugh. Non-sporting. I have never fully understood that group...most of the dogs have no real purpose, other than to be companions. Others (like the dalmation) had a working purpose, and still others were actually SPORTING dogs - like the poodle and the Lundehund. Most it seems...AKC just didn't know where to put them, or they became very disillusioned from their original purpose (like the show poodle!). Vlcaks were bred for (even if maybe not 100% successful in their purpose) for work though...so...

Never really 'got' that group either, and the name is really not descriptive or helpful. I see a few companion dogs but like you said there are also a bunch of dogs that were/are working or sporting heritage, including Shiba for flushing/hunting, the Schip an all-purpose dog, Dals and Poodles, the Lundies though I guess their job is obsolete now, I mean, heck, even the Bulldog was purpose bred up until their current manifestation.

Our breed does originally have working purpose among other things but their uses and strengths seem as diverse to me as the dogs placed in non-sporting.

But I don't think besides me there is anyone who is thinking of anything other than Working or Herding, is there? :lol:

Well, I think I see your point. ;-)
Maybe it would help in breeding dogs that TRULY correspond to what is said in their standards to be their purpose/function, if the placement into a particular FCI/AKC groub should be EARNED. :rock_3
-I.e. to be placed in the herding group for example, a certain number of individuals of a breed should annually pass a herding test. If that is not to happen, then the breed would be removed to another group that better describes it's characteristics and purpose. :p :p :p
In the long run this would propably devide many breeds into several different types/breeding lines that should eventually be placed in different groups...
-but isn't that allready happened/happening in many breeds??!! :lol:

That's what I mean. For example, why is the Great Dane or Mastiff still in "Working Group"? To me that's way misleading.. I understand it's a matter of tradition and history but the way I see it it should also be how the breed is applicable in contemporary times.

Quick to learn, these intelligent, capable animals make solid companions. Their considerable dimensions and strength alone, however, make many working dogs unsuitable as pets for average families. And again, by virtue of their size alone, these dogs must be properly trained."

Working group imo