# Breed standard **height**



## RWAVEGAS (Feb 15, 2016)

Throughout numerous posts and over hours and hours of reading i have yet to find an approach like this so please if the question has been asked before, i only ask that you provide the link. 

Would it be fair to say that the traditionalist are holding the German Shepherd back from more size and more power? 

Regarding the topic of height and with a modernization of today's height applied to it, i present this question. 



In consideration that the average German male height in 1889 was (167.67cm) during this breeds inception, and with the understanding that the GSD is (65cm). That leaves a gap of 102CM. if you want to do a 167/65cm ratio that's a good approach as well. What is that? 38.9% dog to person ratio? 

Fast forward to today and the average male height is 180CM now the gap between man and dog increases to 115cm. 

With pictures of wolves all over the internet that are currently larger than ever, was not the intention of this dog to protect the flock? Also in consideration of modern times and the growth of everything today being bigger. Why are we holding the Shepherd to a standard of almost 130 years ago when everything else is getting bigger? 

Should we not let the GSD increase with the world as other things have? If the breed founder was here today and if he was of average height, would he consider the standard a few inches short? 

I get the joints argument.... KINDA. But with that said, everybody in my family is between 6'2'' and 6'6'' even my daughters grandmother ( yes GRANDMA ) is 6'5" so i think i have more insight on joints and bones than most. i'm just saying this so we stay on topic... it's a math / ratio question.


----------



## Fodder (Oct 21, 2007)

there are other breeds of various heights that perform the same functions as the gsd and human height is not regarded. I'm not sure what you're getting at...?


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

This is the craziest question I've ever seen regarding height standard. 

What does a human's average height have to do with a German Shepherd's height? Unless a human is going to go herd sheep on all four limbs?

The size of the dog has ZERO to do with joints. It is a myth that the larger dogs have worse joints.

This is a working dog. This is a medium size dog. Agility, speed, ability to pivot, etc.


----------



## RWAVEGAS (Feb 15, 2016)

Its not crazy its called math. and a real question. if you don't get it i'm sorry. To fathom the idea that humans would get on all four limbs only tells me the more than i need to know about you and your sarcasm. 
To answer your question about what height has to do with anything...... WHERE DO YOU THINK THE BASIS TO HEIGHT COMES FROM WHEN MEASURING A DOG? 

A HUMAN vs DOG RATIO!!! 

It's Simply another way to look at things. don't be mean because i think outside the box. I even went as far as providing 2 separate mathematical ways of approaching the question because i was trying to avoid stuff like this. 

1)Ratio and 2)difference or gap. 

This is exactly what i was afraid of!!! GEEZ!


----------



## MineAreWorkingline (May 2, 2015)

Actually, I have always wondered if the size chosen for German Shepherds had any correlation to the height of people back then. Does anybody know why the GSD's standard height is what it is? 

One of the reasons for a Dobermann's standard height was so that a man did not have to bend over to hold the Dobe by the collar. People today are much taller than back then.

Is there any correlation?


----------



## viking (May 2, 2014)

RWAVEGAS,

I like your approach to this subject. Its a good faith argument and the historical proportions angle is interesting. However, I also think the performance quality produced by the existing standard is paramount. If a larger than standard GSD maintains the same quality of performance as the standard sized GSD, maybe exploring an expansion of the height standard is warranted? Because its always been this way is not a persuasive argument. 

I'm not saying there isn't a cogent rational for retaining the existing height standard, maybe there is, but you've presented an interesting approach to the subject.


----------



## J and J M (Sep 20, 2013)

This is a working dog. This is a medium size dog. Agility, speed, ability to pivot, etc.[/QUOTE]
THIS

The height was chosen because this is the height that the dog works best at. Or close to it. If you want a taller dog get another breed. The height of the dog and weight of the dog have nothing to do with the ratio to man. 
I've owed oversized and standard and even some on the smaller size of standard. The smaller or standard were always a little quicker "off the line" which is probably important for herding. The smaller ones where usually more agile. Not to say the larger ones were not but no so much as the standard. 
It's also supposed to be a medium sized dog. This is compared to other dogs not men.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

I think the traditionalist are trying to maintain the legacy of excellence of agility/versatility/working ability that comes with the size that has been proven to be best for this breed for over 100 years. There have always been GS bred and of the size you are equating with "size&power" but the overwhelming majority of them have been found to be less effective in working or the breed assessment tools( Sch/herding) created to maintain the versatility of this breed. So I don't think the traditionalist are holding back the breed as much as trying to maintain the breed as a superb working specimen. Moving out of the medium dog range will affect effectiveness( and this has been proven time and time again) of the breed. There are plenty of oversized GS out there today, if sport/working people found them to be more effective than the medium size dog they would be flocking to them....trust me


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

RWAVEGAS said:


> To answer your question about what height has to do with anything...... WHERE DO YOU THINK THE BASIS TO HEIGHT COMES FROM WHEN MEASURING A DOG?


The basis for the size of the dog comes from the job the dog is bred to do. If you theory is correct, then please explain Dachshunds, Corgis, Shelties, Border Collies. It's based on the job they were bred to do.

You claim wolves are bigger than ever. Basis? Studies? Facts?

While the Doberman was bred specifically to be a protector of people, thus the height could be related to the height of men. I don't know that as I don't own Dobermans.

The German Shepherd was bred to herd. Bred for utility. SAR, K9, herding. Agility is the key word here and Cliff described the why's of it best in his post above.


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

cliffson1 said:


> I think the traditionalist are trying to maintain the legacy of excellence of agility/versatility/working ability that comes with the size that has been proven to be best for this breed for over 100 years. There have always been GS bred and of the size you are equating with "size&power" but the overwhelming majority of them have been found to be less effective in working or the breed assessment tools( Sch/herding) created to maintain the versatility of this breed. So I don't think the traditionalist are holding back the breed as much as trying to maintain the breed as a superb working specimen. Moving out of the medium dog range will affect effectiveness( and this has been proven time and time again) of the breed. There are plenty of oversized GS out there today, if sport/working people found them to be more effective than the medium size dog they would be flocking to them....trust me


This ^^^


----------



## MichaelE (Dec 15, 2012)

Let's just breed smaller humans and leave the GSD standard alone.


----------



## edanzanders (Mar 23, 2015)

I can certainly appreciate the interest of the original question. There are just too many factors that would come into play when the idea of breeding larger dogs would be implemented. Given the overall musculature and function of the GSD, the question of height, can't be taken into account on it's own. What we're really talking about is scaling up the entire dog. Take a look at so called King Shepherds for instance.

The one given "constant" we observe with dogs, is that the larger a dog gets, the shorter its life expectancy becomes, the less agile it is, the more health problems, etc., all things being equal. There are tall dogs that live as long as a German Shepherd, but their frame is generally skinny, less muscular, generally less powerful than a GSD, and are not bred for the same purpose.

I suppose one could envision breeding taller dogs, limiting musculature and overall physique to compensate for the shorter lifespan, health effects. The resulting dog would also have different limits as to what it can and can't do. It's certainly possible, only then you essentially end up with a different breed.

As envisioned by their breeding standard, pound for pound, GSDs are truly capable, versatile, amazing dogs.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom (Mar 30, 2003)

RWAVEGAS said:


> Would it be fair to say that the traditionalist are holding the German Shepherd back from more size and more power?


You're equating size and power, which I don't think is a fair, or accurate statement.  Power and athleticism aren't just based on size, nor is speed. My 55 pound female is pretty powerful, and she's much more agile than my 75 pound male and her compact size makes her more versatile.


----------



## Black Kali (Aug 31, 2013)

Few years ago I read some text about size of GSD, and there was graph showing change trough history. On my surprise there ware a lot of OS GSDs in beginning. So there must be some reason they breed smaller dogs. 










And source: New Page 1


Strictly looking at math, things can be a bit tricky. 

We humans, we are taller now than 116 years ago. In USA male height difference between now and 116 y ago is about 6cm, from 170-176cm. That is about ~3.5% change in height. So if you want to compare that to GSD size it would mean that GSD now should be 67cm instead 65cm. Germans grew a bit more in last 116 y, from 169-181cm ~7% so if we are taking them as reference GSD should be 69.5cm. *So there is a 3cm difference depending on a reference point.*
But why would we be looking only at humans as reference? GSD is a herding dog so how about sheep average size trough history, how much did they changed? Are they taller and heavier than 116 y ago?


----------



## Stonevintage (Aug 26, 2014)

I looked for information on sheep today Kali. The only thing I could find is it took a lot longer for sheep to grow good value/quantity wool coats back then, I think they were larger as a result, not certain. Not so much now - plus there was loss for disease.

Re: The GSD - it would be interesting to pick up the more specific downsizing as compared to when people started leaving the ranches and farms and moving into towns and cities - I think there would probably be a relation here.In other words the conversion from the working farm or ranch dog to the pet.

Re: People in the USA lol. Yes, we're taller but also fatter. There are several countries who's populations are still going "up" and not "out". Apparently in the Neatherlands - they re-coding standard house door heights to accommodate!

I did see where height growth in humans is hampered in war torn/impoverished countries. But, apparently, the USA is no longer looked to for healthiest citizens. Avg BMI 29 - one point away from obesity......


----------



## RWAVEGAS (Feb 15, 2016)

viking said:


> RWAVEGAS,
> 
> I like your approach to this subject. Its a good faith argument and the historical proportions angle is interesting. However, I also think the performance quality produced by the existing standard is paramount. If a larger than standard GSD maintains the same quality of performance as the standard sized GSD, maybe exploring an expansion of the height standard is warranted? Because its always been this way is not a persuasive argument.
> 
> I'm not saying there isn't a cogent rational for retaining the existing height standard, maybe there is, but you've presented an interesting approach to the subject.



Viking, thank you so much for understanding my approach. I know i overthink things and with so much back and forth in the size department, i started thinking when i noticed how tall my female looked compared to my little old grandmother. HMMM, people were smaller back then, was the initial spark into this. So as we grow??? why not the GS as well is a very warranted question in my opinion. 

Thank you so much for the responses, they all have me thinking a little more today than yesterday.


----------



## Stonevintage (Aug 26, 2014)

Just the other side. We've grown (people) but, our "habitat" home and property has become smaller....

If the showline and sports fields are staying in their specified arenas - why should they grow? I don't see how growth would promote agility in the working/sport lines and most of your showline folks _ I think - aren't requiring broad pastures to participate in their interests either.

I like the way the GSD that is at least close to the standard looks.... I do not care for what happens to the head structure (and this in several breed dogs) when the larger size is sought out. Something looses the total package and IMO - the head/neck areas become something less refined and a perfect fit for the rest of the body.....

Would we, as humans - want a bigger head and neck or want to appear bigger (coat) or something so far away from the original that people) no... why should people have to ask what breed mix your dog is when it's a PB GSD? If you don't like the looks or the breed... there's some very other cool looking larger dogs out there......


----------



## RWAVEGAS (Feb 15, 2016)

edanzanders said:


> I can certainly appreciate the interest of the original question. There are just too many factors that would come into play when the idea of breeding larger dogs would be implemented.
> 
> I suppose one could envision breeding taller dogs, limiting musculature and overall physique to compensate for the shorter lifespan, health effects. The resulting dog would also have different limits as to what it can and can't do. It's certainly possible, only then you essentially end up with a different breed.
> 
> As envisioned by their breeding standard, pound for pound, GSDs are truly capable, versatile, amazing dogs.



Great approach, As diligent as i see that so many are regarding this breed & Breeding, I BELIEVE that with the right kennel(s) and attention to detail, somebody could achieve the right 70cm German Shepherd with all of the proper Length to width ratio's, neck, head, build....etc. as the standard is now. 
I also believe that the athleticism of the dog could be just as perfect as it is now. 5cm's larger has already been achieved, but has anybody focused on the overall in addition to the size they were breeding for? 

Me personally, i barely found out what a Croup was on a dog a few weeks ago when talking to a working line breeder. I am an experienced owner of over 15 years however i always just purchased our dogs, and went to protection training or paid for trainers, after all these years i'm finally learning what makes these dogs so great. ( now that i have the time ) 

Maybe getting into this more in depth and finding a Schutzhund club will be my new hobby.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline (May 2, 2015)

RWAVEGAS said:


> Great approach, As diligent as i see that so many are regarding this breed & Breeding, I BELIEVE that with the right kennel(s) and attention to detail, *somebody could achieve the right 70cm German Shepherd *with all of the proper Length to width ratio's, neck, head, build....etc. as the standard is now.
> I also believe that the athleticism of the dog could be just as perfect as it is now. 5cm's larger has already been achieved, but has anybody focused on the overall in addition to the size they were breeding for?
> 
> Me personally, i barely found out what a Croup was on a dog a few weeks ago when talking to a working line breeder. I am an experienced owner of over 15 years however i always just purchased our dogs, and went to protection training or paid for trainers, after all these years i'm finally learning what makes these dogs so great. ( now that i have the time )
> ...


I know that there are a lot of dogs this size out there today: ASL, WGSL, WGWL, Czech, DDR, etc. I don't believe that anybody is specifically breeding for that factor, but I do know that just because a good dog is oversized does not necessarily preclude it from the gene pool.


----------



## River-Otter (Jun 1, 2015)

Black Kali said:


> Few years ago I read some text about size of GSD, and there was graph showing change trough history. On my surprise there ware a lot of OS GSDs in beginning. So there must be some reason they breed smaller dogs.
> 
> But why would we be looking only at humans as reference? GSD is a herding dog so how about sheep average size trough history, how much did they changed? Are they taller and heavier than 116 y ago?



This and a couple of other posts have mentioned herding and the traditional use of a GSD.

I think I can shed a little light on this.
I have a GSD *because* I have a farm (and it took me a very long time to find one I'd trust around livestock, but that's a whole 'nother rant)
If you want to get into original reasons for size, you need to look at *farm* size and versatility. Yes, farm size - let me explain.
You do not need a large dog to move sheep across fields. Tiny, twenty pound, undersized border collies manage it just fine. If I had only large flocks of sheep and large acreage and my main need was to move those flocks across that acreage, I'd have a little black and white dog and not my big GSD. And she is big, at a lean, trim, 87#. 

What I have is a 10 acre farm, with a mixed assortment of livestock and a heavy predator problem (feral dogs, which are worse than wolves) Five to forty acres is a traditional size in quite a bit of Europe and varied stock is the type that most people had when the breed was established, so I am a good example
On 10 acres, I don't need an agile little dog to do large outruns and gathers. I need a dog that can body block my buck goat at the gate. I need a dog who can encourage the feeder pig to go on to the trailer. I need a dog that can keep the flock back while I fill the feeders. Most of the "dog moving livestock" that I need done is encouraging over-eager animals (of various types) to give me space, and for that, I need a good-sized dog. Trust me on this, 120# doesn't sound like a huge sheep, but 4 or 5 of them rushing the bucket in your hand will knock you down and trample the crap out of you.

I need a dog who can track a scent and find the baby that the ditzy first time mother left down by the creek bed. I need a dog who can track from the chicken coop to the fox's bolt-hole so I can stop it up, so scent work is important for my versatile farm dog. Size doesn't matter there, but versatility does.

And - and this is of HUGE importance - I need a dog who will keep my livestock safe. I need a dog who is big enough to kill an average size dog, because they are coming, they are coming in a pack, they have no problem attacking my dog to get to my flock and my every individual herd animal is worth at least $400 and that is a big loss, not even counting the fact that these are animals I see every day, care for every day, that I DO have feelings for and I can't even describe the horror of seeing my sweet milk goat, who I pressed my head against 2x a day for years and who my child took some of his first steps holding onto, lying gutted in a torn-up pasture with a big stray snarling at me guarding his kill - that is what happens on a farm that doesn't have a good "versatile farm dog" to look after it.
Again, this takes a dog of some size. A Border Collie or other dog that shepherds in the strictly moving livestock sense doesn't cut it.
Guarding my crops is a big deal too. The dog that can keep wildlife out of my garden is a huge asset. A large, boar raccoon can weigh 40# and does NOT want to leave my yummy corn. Dogs have been killed by raccoons, most coonhounds weigh 60+# or so because of this.

This same dog needs to not kill my chickens or molest my barn cats, needs to be good in public and non-aggressive with other dogs out in public.
If the dog is big enough to guard my truck full of expensive feed and fencing equipment when I am in the middle of a town run, and big enough to keep human thieves off my farm, all the better. But the dog still has to be versatile enough to not be a nuisance or a liability - biting the guy coming over the fence is ok, biting the meter reader as he walks through the gate in broad daylight is NOT. But if someone is thinking about messing with my fence (which happened pre-Sunni) I want the thought of the dog on the other side of it to be a strong deterrent.

This is what "versatile farm dog" means, and you can see that for the vast majority of it, I want a dog who is larger than average (not for the breed, per say, but bigger than the average roaming dog out there) Other places, where predators are not other canines or distance is more of a factor might want a smaller dog. But I assure you that nearly 90# of well-built GSD is plenty agile enough to spin and turn and get out of the way of the scared horse in the small stall or whip around on a dime to get the beastie getting past her or any other traditional farm need.

So, when we say that the GSD is XX size because it was originally a versatile farm dog, you can't really look at border collie field trials or Schutzhund events to tell you what a good size for that is. You have to look at the farms they were meant for. I don't necessarily want an over-size GSD. but a 50# one is not going to cut it, unless I have 2 of them working together. 
As far as a reason for breeding a smaller dog - if I didn't have a farm, size really wouldn't be anywhere near as much of an issue, unless you counted the square footage of my apartment, so why not feed less dog?


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

The above is good post about uses for this breed in utilitarian way of which is dog's legacy. For this specific instance this size dog has great value. If the farm was a 100 acres, things would shift some, in terms of herding, when large flocks of sheep( 200 to 400 ) then usually two dogs work in tandem in fighting predators and covering large areas as well as dealing with sheep. One of the dogs used to create this breed was a large protector type dog, so large will always show up in breed occasionally, but was not final design of breed.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

I can only speak to flyball and agility, but increasing height does not increase speed. By increasing height, you're increasing the length of the dog (since a GSD needs to meet a certain ratio, and by standard a rectangular dog). Longer dogs aren't faster because they are bigger. In fact, in the sports I compete in, longer dogs are typically slower because their strides are longer/wider. Dogs are faster "on land" (running) than "in the air" (jumping or suspended mid-stride), so small-medium to medium sized dogs are typically the fastest because their feet hit the ground more times. Anyone looking to be super competitive as far as speed goes (say flyball) knows a Whippet or Border Whippet is what you get, so look at their size and structure compared to a GSD. When you are doing flyball or agility, there is fixed distance between jumps or obstacles. The courses or lanes are not adjusted to accommodate the breed/length of the dog. Once a dog is a certain size or greater, their stride in flyball starts getting cramped between the jumps (I've seen this with my largest male GSD, who is still nowhere over standard GSD height at 24.5" tall). Same thing in agility. Dogs that are actually *running* are gaining speed and momentum. Every time their feet can touch the ground, they can dig in and maintain or increase their speed. They can also collect or change their direction while their feet are touching. But if they are a tall dog, which means a longer dog, their strides are longer, they might only take 2 strides between 2 obstacles where a Border Collie or even a Malinois (which is more square in shape) can take 3-4 strides in the same space. In flyball, training dogs to "triple stride" on and off the box is pretty standard, yet most GSDs cannot physically triple stride, they are too long (my three flyball GSDs all double stride, including the one that ran 3.9 seconds which is unprecedented for a GSD, but he's just psycho!).

Increasing height and thus size may increase "power", assuming that means how much force a dog can apply, in which case the size of the dog would correlate to the weight of the dog which would correlate to the force the dog can apply. But power is not important compared to speed, stamina, and agility (which I would loosely define as how well a dog can collect, how quickly a dog can change direction, how tightly a dog can wrap and turn, whether it's on an agility course, or chasing prey or foe, or herding).


----------

