# When is a GSD not a GSD



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

I love the breeder threads because of their knowledge of the breed. 
I am puzzled though sometimes by the debate. 

Without a breed standard there is no breed. The GSD standard is very specific with regard to physical and temperamental characteristics.

So assume you have dogs with GSD pedigrees going all the way back.
Now say they are white, or weigh 130lbs, or they have too much angulation.
Then you have those folks that breed for specific traits. Like oversized or white.

These dogs by pedigree are GSD's but not to breed standard.
I'm not talking about minor faults like a little too tall or that type thing but about those who breed specifically for traits outside the breed standard.

So my question, which I'm sure will be really stupid to some, is when is a GSD not a GSD? Can you regularly an purposely breed outside the standard and call it a GSD. If so then what purpose does the breed standard have.

This has nothing to do with these dogs being beloved family companions no matter what color or size or anything else.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Yes, you can deliberately breed outside the standard and still have a GSD. The white GSD is an example, thought they have been trying to get recognition as a different breed. Blues and livers would also be examples of this. Breeding bitches that are large to dogs that produce large pups, to get large dogs, and then breeding those dogs to try to get larger dogs -- still GSDs. 

If you mix Great Pyranese or Alaskan Malamute or wolf in to increase the size -- then you have a mutt, not a GSD. 

If you breed for square dogs, or flat backs, or long collie-type snouts, you still have a GSD so long as you do not add any other breed in to get that trait.


----------



## Freestep (May 1, 2011)

Well, technically, a dog whose pedigree contains nothing but GSDs all the way back is still a GSD. However, if I see someone breeding 160 lb GSDs that are solid fawn with no black pigment, with narrow, collie-like heads, drooping ears, square proportions, sagging backs, and dull, lazy temperaments, I might be bold enough to say "that is NOT a GSD." Even though it technically is.

As a rhetorical situation, I wonder what would shake out if all the dogs in the world went extinct except for purebred GSDs, and these remaining GSDs were to breed randomly with no human intervention. What would the breed look like after, say, 50 years? Would we still want to call it a GSD?


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

selzer said:


> Yes, you can deliberately breed outside the standard and still have a GSD. The white GSD is an example, thought they have been trying to get recognition as a different breed. Blues and livers would also be examples of this. Breeding bitches that are large to dogs that produce large pups, to get large dogs, and then breeding those dogs to try to get larger dogs -- still GSDs.
> 
> If you mix Great Pyranese or Alaskan Malamute or wolf in to increase the size -- then you have a mutt, not a GSD.
> 
> If you breed for square dogs, or flat backs, or long collie-type snouts, you still have a GSD so long as you do not add any other breed in to get that trait.


That just doesn't seem right. It makes the breed standard seem like some vague document that means nothing as long as you have 2 dogs with pedigrees. Actually I would prefer 2 random GSD's to breeding for some personal characteristic or trait someone is shooting for that is not to the standard.


----------



## Whiteshepherds (Aug 21, 2010)

Jack's Dad said:


> That just doesn't seem right. It makes the breed standard seem like some vague document that means nothing as long as you have 2 dogs with pedigrees. Actually I would prefer 2 random GSD's to breeding for some personal characteristic or trait someone is shooting for that is not to the standard.


Let me start by saying I know your post is about people breeding against the standard and has nothing to do with those of us whose dogs fall into that category. So I get it, you aren't attacking anyone or their dogs on a personal level and I thank you for that. This is an interesting topic. So let me tell you why I support a breeder that breeds away from the standard. 

By going with the breeder I did I ended up with two healthy,confident, well balanced dogs that know the difference between a kitten and a mountain lion and act accordingly. They don't need special handling, respond well to training and show good basic instinct. They're loyal, gentle when they need to be, and amazingly loud when it's called for. I don't worry about hidden genetic problems in the line because the breeder is one of the founders of the White Shepherd Genetics Project. She understands genetics, and she understands dogs. The breeder doesn't import her dogs with titles, she raises them from pups, trains, handles and titles them.

This isn't an either or line. I didn't have to know the difference between working and show lines and decide what I wanted to do with my dogs before I got them. Therapy, K-9, Service, SAR, VCD2, CDX's, UDX's, TR3, TDX, FG70K, FMCH, OTCH, BH, family dogs, companions...they're all in the line. Versatility. The hallmark of a good shepherd. There's some CH's in there too but naturally, they're from clubs that don't discriminate based on color. It's never a matter of CAN my dogs do something it's always about whether or not I want to take the time to work with them. 

Now I might be an idiot but regardless of what the standard says, and regardless of how you or anyone else views the subject, I'm going to say that given the choice between what I have and what I see happening to the GSD as a breed, (always exceptions) I'm going to keep supporting the breeders that produce versatile, healthy, well balanced dogs and for now, I'm finding those dogs in the whites. 

As much as I respect the intended objectives of a breed standard, until Schutzhund becomes a real test and until show lines start doing more than stacking in the ring, (always exceptions in both cases) I don't see where the standard you're so attached to is doing much good anyway.


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

Some breed clubs (not with GSDs obviously) require more characteristics than just a pedigree for registration as a member of the breed.


----------



## paulag1955 (Jun 29, 2010)

It seems to me that the question behind the original question is, "What makes a GSD a GSD?" What, really, is the essence of the breed? Are German Shepherds just a bundle of physical characteristics? Or do their psychological and working characteristics make them German Shepherds?


----------



## Lucy Dog (Aug 10, 2008)

paulag1955 said:


> It seems to me that the question behind the original question is, "What makes a GSD a GSD?" What, really, is the essence of the breed? Are German Shepherds just a bundle of physical characteristics? Or do their psychological and working characteristics make them German Shepherds?


Probably depends who you ask... ask 10 people and you might get 10 different opinions. 

Ask the breeder who breeds specifically for pets and they'll probably tell you it's the registry where the dog can be registered. Ask the schutzhund enthusiast and they may tell you working ability. Ask the show people and they may tell you it's the physical characteristics. Ask the breed enthusiast and they might tell you all of the above.


----------



## Vandal (Dec 22, 2000)

When is a GSD not a GSD? Right now. In the year 2011, the GSD is the furthest away from being a GSD than it has ever been.


----------



## nitemares (Dec 15, 2005)

paulag1955 said:


> It seems to me that the question behind the original question is, "What makes a GSD a GSD?" What, really, is the essence of the breed? Are German Shepherds just a bundle of physical characteristics? Or do their psychological and working characteristics make them German Shepherds?


I believe it's all the above. There's a reason why it's called a standard, and it's not just about looks or working ability. It's a package. It is a shame whats happening to gsds these days, especially in my country. 
I love all dogs, purebreds and mutts. but i see people selling gsd pups around here from "pure bloodlines, champion parent" without any regard to temperament, nerves, or even physical characteristics, and honestly and i cant believe i'm saying this, they're ugly! 
To me that's not a GSD


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

Vandal said:


> When is a GSD not a GSD? Right now. In the year 2011, the GSD is the furthest away from being a GSD than it has ever been.


Amen.


----------



## BR870 (May 15, 2011)

Vandal said:


> When is a GSD not a GSD? Right now. In the year 2011, the GSD is the furthest away from being a GSD than it has ever been.


Without accepting the fact that everything changes, we cannot find perfect composure. But unfortunately, although it is true, it is difficult for us to accept it. Because we cannot accept the truth of transience, we suffer. ~Shunryu Suzuki


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

nitemares said:


> I believe it's all the above. There's a reason why it's called a standard, and it's not just about looks or working ability. It's a package. It is a shame whats happening to gsds these days, especially in my country.
> I love all dogs, purebreds and mutts. but i see people selling gsd pups around here from "pure bloodlines, champion parent" without any regard to temperament, nerves, or even physical characteristics, and honestly and i cant believe i'm saying this, they're ugly!
> To me that's not a GSD


Nitemares: What you said above is closer to what prompted the question.

Whiteshepherds: I'm only on my 2nd. pure bred GSD. I've had 2 others that were mostly GSD, the rest over the course of my life have all been mixes, mutts, several mixed labs, a Beagle and several other odd concoctions. I've only had one dog that was a real problem and that was a Border Collie. So with the exception of the BC they were all great family companions, healthy, no bites, ( except BC ). Your dogs are beautiful and I'm sure are everything you say they are. So it is not about dogs themselves. Not about WL vs SL. My question has to do with breeding for any particular characteristic. If you breed specifically for that long enough something else will surely be lost. So what do you wind up with. Maybe a loveable family companion, hopefully with decent nerves. But if it is nowhere near the accepted standard that defines what the breed is. Then what is it and what happens to the breed?
I agree with you that there are problems all around but that shouldn't open the door to do whatever anyone wants and still call it a GSD. 
Technically, as Selzer put it if the breeding pair has pedigrees it's a GSD.
That still leaves a lot of questions for me.
This is a GSD forum but I'll bet the same is happening to other breeds as well. Just guessing at that.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Samba said:


> Some breed clubs (not with GSDs obviously) require more characteristics than just a pedigree for registration as a member of the breed.


The SV, requires a number of things to produce a litter of puppies with pink papers. But the SV is a German Shepherd Club. In Germany, they do not have one overall club like the AKC that covers all the registrations, a pure-bred dog registry, with 200+ breeds. They have a Doberman Club, a GSD club, a Rottweiler Club and so on and so forth.

Each breed then can decide what hoops the breeding animals and breeders should jump through prior to breeding. And even with a show rating, breed survey, endurance test, titles, hip/elbow certifications, still many fanciers discount the dogs as not good enough. 

What we DO NOT want in the US is a similar system. The AKC would have to defer to each parent club. The parent club could then set up requirements. If the parent club determined what dogs can be worthy of registration, they will set the bar so that the AKC specialty line dogs can qualify. It will not help the breed any. Dogs must pass a temperament test, unless it is raining/thundering, LOL! _They _will not require protection work or a schutzhund test, and if they do, you think the sport is watered down now???

No, I think we are better off accepting that the AKC is an all-breed registry, and if you want a pure-bred dog that meets you own standards, you will go to breeders who follow guidelines you approve of in selecting breeding pairs.


----------



## WarrantsWifey (Dec 18, 2010)

*When is a GSD not a GSD? 

When it's a Lab.....  
*


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

I hoped the responses to this would also come from some of the other breeders. Similar to the educated responses on the $3000 dollar 4 month old puppy thread. 
That thread turned very educational towards the end even if it was miles off topic. Selzer responded as well as Vandal. Does anyone besides me think Vandal is not one for a lot of wasted words?


----------



## Catu (Sep 6, 2007)

selzer said:


> The SV, requires a number of things to produce a litter of puppies with pink papers. But the SV is a German Shepherd Club. In Germany, they do not have one overall club like the AKC that covers all the registrations, a pure-bred dog registry, with 200+ breeds. They have a Doberman Club, a GSD club, a Rottweiler Club and so on and so forth.


Yes, they have. It is called Verband für das Deutsche Hundewesen (VDH), the German Kennel Club, which on its part is member of the Fédération Cynologique Internationale (FCI).

The FCI has one member by country, and the Kennel club of that country has one club by breed, which follows the regulations of the parent club of the origin country of that breed. In the GSD case, the SV. It is no different than the AKC, the only difference is that the AKC is not a member of the FCI, but both recognize each other and have agreements signed.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

But it is the parent club, the SV that holds registrations, and sets down the requirements for registration. We do not have that here. And my point is that we do not want that here. We do not have the equivalent to the SV here. 

We have a parent club that is very much a specialty American Bred Show dog club, but it has no real power when it comes to what dogs can be registered.


----------



## tami97 (Sep 15, 2011)

I wanted a light sable with dark markings. I looked for a breeder with those traits. I did not get her to bred, only a family dog. Her dad was a dark sable and at the time weight 125lbs (still in touch with breeder and he is even bigger now.) and her mom was white and 85lbs. I think it is all about personal choice. She has her akc papers and is a pure breed. Some may say different because of the coloring or size. Im hope she gets anywhere between 85lbs and 100lbs. She is 8 months old and 68lbs now. She is all GSD. lol I agree with the other post that as long as both parents are pure breed with or without akc papers they are GSD. if mixed parents they are mixed. Sorry so long.


----------



## Emoore (Oct 9, 2002)

I think a breeding program needs to be judged more stringently than individual dogs. If you have a dog that you love, no matter if he's oversized, undersized, floppy ears, nervous, or an improper color, if he's a registered GSD or he looks like a GSD or you got him from a GSD rescue-- hey he's a GSD. 

Breeding is a whole 'nother ball of wax. You might be breeding purebred German Shepherd to purebred German Shepherd, but unless you're breeding to the standard, you're just breeding dogs. German Shepherd breeding is breeding to the standard.


----------



## Germanshepherdlova (Apr 16, 2011)

nitemares said:


> I believe it's all the above. There's a reason why it's called a standard, and it's not just about looks or working ability. It's a package. It is a shame whats happening to gsds these days, especially in my country.
> I love all dogs, purebreds and mutts. but i see people selling gsd pups around here from "*pure bloodlines*, champion parent" *without any regard to temperament, nerves, or even physical characteristics, and honestly and i cant believe i'm saying this, they're ugly! *
> To me that's not a GSD


I have one of those ugly GSD's,






he is afraid of thunder and is way bigger than the breed standard, ooops, according to you he isn't a GSD at all. 

While I agree that breeding purposefully outside of the breed standard should not be done, I do think it's a bit much to refer to dogs that don't meet the breed standard as ugly.


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

Emoore said:


> I think a breeding program needs to be judged more stringently than individual dogs. If you have a dog that you love, no matter if he's oversized, undersized, floppy ears, nervous, or an improper color, if he's a registered GSD or he looks like a GSD or you got him from a GSD rescue-- hey he's a GSD.
> 
> Breeding is a whole 'nother ball of wax. You might be breeding purebred German Shepherd to purebred German Shepherd, but unless you're breeding to the standard, you're just breeding dogs. German Shepherd breeding is breeding to the standard.


Yep. It's about breeding not any individual dog.


----------



## Uniballer (Mar 12, 2002)

Emoore said:


> German Shepherd breeding is breeding to the standard.


And, of course, we have no trouble agreeing on which standard is the *One True Standard*, right?


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Uniballer said:


> And, of course, we have no trouble agreeing on which standard is the *One True Standard*, right?


And how the standard ought to be interpreted


----------



## cta (May 24, 2011)

awww germanshepherdlova your brutus looks like a big lovey! i think he's a handsome gsd :wub:


----------



## Emoore (Oct 9, 2002)

Uniballer said:


> And, of course, we have no trouble agreeing on which standard is the *One True Standard*, right?





selzer said:


> And how the standard ought to be interpreted


There's interpreting the standard, there's arguing over AKC vs. SV, there's wiggle room. . . . .. and then there's just flat-out breeding against the standard.


----------



## Germanshepherdlova (Apr 16, 2011)

cta said:


> awww germanshepherdlova your brutus looks like a big lovey! i think he's a handsome gsd :wub:


I came back to read this thread bracing myself for an insult, and imagine my surprise when my boy received a compliment. Thank you cta.


----------



## Andaka (Jun 29, 2003)

I am a breeder of American showline dogs, but my dogs are not just show dogs, they do performance too. While I don't participate in Schutzhund, I choose to breed for temperament, health, and then good looks is the gravy on top.


----------



## sagelfn (Aug 13, 2009)

tami97 said:


> I wanted a light sable with dark markings. I looked for a breeder with those traits. I did not get her to bred, only a family dog. Her dad was a dark sable and at the time weight 125lbs (still in touch with breeder and he is even bigger now.) and her mom was white and 85lbs. I think it is all about personal choice. She has her akc papers and is a pure breed. Some may say different because of the coloring or size. Im hope she gets anywhere between 85lbs and 100lbs. She is 8 months old and 68lbs now. She is all GSD. lol I agree with the other post that as long as both parents are pure breed with or without akc papers they are GSD. if mixed parents they are mixed. Sorry so long.


No thoughts on temperament? To me a GSD is defined by its character. There will always be deviations from the physical standard but if at its core the dog is what it should be then you still have a GSD. You do not get that by taking 2 pure bred dogs and breeding them.

That is why we have so many labs/goldens/etc in GSD suits. I would rather a dog act like a GSD than look like one. What draws me to the breed is the temperament. The looks are a bonus.


----------



## tami97 (Sep 15, 2011)

Yes. I want a dog that was loyal and loving and protective. My hubby works night and Im here by myself. I used to worry but with Shasta, Im not. She is every thing a GSD should be in my eyes.


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

The breed club that sets the standards other than pedigree that I know of are not AKC. They are run predominantly by working dog breeders inkeeping with the origins of their breed. Not being AKC can be a good thing sometimes. 

I met some people in class who began owning GSDs as pets over 30 years ago. They have had a few since, but lamented that they can no longer find a dog like the earlier ones.

I think Anne's statement is THE answer to the question, unfortunately.


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

Samba said:


> The breed club that sets the standards other than pedigree that I know of are not AKC. They are run predominantly by working dog breeders inkeeping with the origins of their breed. Not being AKC can be a good thing sometimes.
> 
> I met some people in class who began owning GSDs as pets over 30 years ago. They have had a few since, but lamented that they can no longer find a dog like the earlier ones.
> 
> I think Anne's statement is THE answer to the question, unfortunately.


How many breed standards versions are there?

I've seen breeders advertise big GSD's. They tout the fact that there dogs are well over 100 lbs.,very gentle and are bred the way GSD's were meant to be. So who's standard is that to. Again this is not about any individual dog.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

All purebred German Shepherds are equal in the eyes of their owner and one above.


----------



## Emoore (Oct 9, 2002)

cliffson1 said:


> All purebred German Shepherds are equal in the eyes of their owner and one above.


Even the ones whose only papers are adoption papers. Or the papers they pee on.


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

cliffson1 said:


> All purebred German Shepherds are equal in the eyes of their owner and one above.



I've said that repeatedly in this thread.

If that's all that is required then why not just **** can the standard or standards as the case is. 

100lb. Border Collies anyone?


----------



## Emoore (Oct 9, 2002)

Jack's Dad said:


> How many breed standards versions are there?
> 
> I've seen breeders advertise big GSD's. They tout the fact that there dogs are well over 100 lbs.,very gentle and are bred the way GSD's were meant to be. So who's standard is that to. Again this is not about any individual dog.


There is the SV/FCI standard, and the AKC standard. They are very close to each other with some minor differences. Neither calls for oversized gentle giants. Breeders of Ye Olde Fashioned German Shepherds are breeding to a standard that is only in their mind.


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

I have a few Shepherds. I love and care for them all,but they are not equal.


----------



## Achielles UD (May 26, 2001)

Samba said:


> The breed club that sets the standards other than pedigree that I know of are not AKC. They are run predominantly by working dog breeders inkeeping with the origins of their breed. Not being AKC can be a good thing sometimes.


I think Samba is referring to clubs like the JRTCA and how they register their dogs: Jack Russell Terrier: JRTCA: The JRTCA Registry
and the ABCA:
American Border Collie Association: Promoting the Working Border Collie

Heck, JRTs can't even be considered for registration before 1 yr of age. The dogs with the JRTCA that I have seen in the past, were much better representitives of the breed than those I have seen since they were accepted into the AKC... :shrug:

I too, agree that Anne's answer is the most true. The dogs today that I see, are just not the GSDs of even 10 years ago. I don't know why that is. But there is something lacking.

Earlier, while reading responses to this thread, (though I don't remember which post) I was reminded of the Silver Fox breeding experiment/program.

They wanted to breed the silver foxes for the fur industry. But decided they wanted tamer foxes. In breeding for tameness, they ended up with spotted coats, dropped ears, and many variations. Were they still Silver Fox's? In "pedigree", yes. No other canid species was bred to them to produce tameness. But the overall reason of why they were being bred (for their fur) got lost when trying to make them into something they were not (tame).

I am feeling that the GSD is going that route  In breeding for specifics rather than the whole package, we are losing the essense of the GSD. 

So, when is a GSD, not a GSD? I say when the package has been opened and sifted through and then taped back up but missing key parts! (if you catch my meaning...)


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

So it's kind of like wanting a shorter, easier to handle thoroughbred. When it's legs are shorter and the horse is smaller it's easier to handle. However it can't race, do dressage, or jump but it's a nice little trail horse.


----------



## Emoore (Oct 9, 2002)

***The German Shepherd is not what it used to be*****

I was born in 1981. I didn't get anywhere near my first GSD until about 1998. I got Rocky in 2002. So I don't have much experience with what GSD's "used to be" but I have a good idea of what it's become after spending 9 years in GSD rescue. There are a whole heaping lot of (if you'll excuse my frankness) crappy German Shepherds running around. Poor temperament, bad conformation, weak nerves, no drive. . . you know the drill. Nice dogs, but not GSDs. Not really. They look like Rin-Tin-Tin and will make somebody a great pet, but they're not at all what Max envisioned. 

Then I met Cash. Yeah, he was lanky from being neutered too early and had floppy ears, but ho-lee crap! Blazingly intelligent, drivey as all get-out, strong nerves, no fear. . . . I adopted him the day after I brought him home as a foster. He was amazing. 

Then he passed away (RIP sweet boy)

And I got Kopper. 

He is. Fracking. Awesome. Like watching color TV after looking at black and white pictures all your life. Drivey and intelligent like Cash, but even more forward and outgoing, even more self-confident, even more present and watchful, even. . .(forgive me baby). . ._more_.

And I'm sure there are much better dogs than him out there, just waiting to be discovered. 

So no, I don't know that the GSD breed is dying out, not totally. In the US and elsewhere, it's being watered-down for the pet market, but I don't think the *true* GSD-- the jack of all trades, the dog who can do it all before breakfast-- is dying completely. Just becoming a little harder to find.


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

I sort of wish I was a hunter these days. I've been learning about the curs and fiests and other dogs bred for utility. They are generally very healthy with super working traits. Unfortunately, there is not a German Shepherd Dog type among them. But, they do impress with vitality, genetic vigor, drive, trainability. I commend those who breed and maintain the highly functional dog wherever it is.

It is that thing in dog breeding preserved from the agrarian lifestyle we have lost in many places. In the US, it is still found in pockets of them thar hills where life is behind the times and close to the earth. No fancy dogs there.


----------



## nitemares (Dec 15, 2005)

Germanshepherdlova said:


> I have one of those ugly GSD's,
> View attachment 11486
> he is afraid of thunder and is way bigger than the breed standard, ooops, according to you he isn't a GSD at all.
> 
> While I agree that breeding purposefully outside of the breed standard should not be done, I do think it's a bit much to refer to dogs that don't meet the breed standard as ugly.


I think he's adorable,:wub: what i meant by ugly is not ugly in appearance, but more ugly dog overall, bad nerves, aggressive, banana backed, tail ducked between their legs, snapping at everything while walking with their owner.

yes it looks like a GSD, but are they really???



Achielles UD said:


> So, when is a GSD, not a GSD? I say when the package has been opened and sifted through and then taped back up but missing key parts! (if you catch my meaning...)


YES!!


----------



## Whiteshepherds (Aug 21, 2010)

Jack's Dad said:


> How many breed standards versions are there?


These are the breed standards from the SV and the AKC if you want to compare the two. (SV standard was translated by Fred Lanting) 

http://www.vomhausgochi.com/Website/standard.htm 

http://www.akc.org/breeds/german_shepherd_dog/



> I've seen breeders advertise big GSD's. They tout the fact that there dogs are well over 100 lbs.,very gentle and are bred the way GSD's were meant to be. So who's standard is that to. Again this is not about any individual dog.


Gentle - I think a GSD should be gentle until he has a good reason not to be. The standard says the dog must be willing to fight, it doesn't say they walk around looking for a fight. How can the dog be good with kids if it doesn't have a gentle side? How can they be such a great family dogs if they don't have a gentle side? 
Maybe breeders use the word gentle because they're trying to distance themselves from the people that have turned the dog into a barking snarling top ten biter. I wouldn't by-pass looking at a breeders dogs because they used the word gentle. Meet them first, then judge.


----------



## Catu (Sep 6, 2007)

There is an old saying:

"This is the old axe of my grandfather. My father changed the head and I changed the handle."

From Ship of Theseus

_"For the relativist interpreter of Buddhism, replacement paradoxes such as Ship of Theseus are answered by stating that the Ship of Theseus remains so (within the conventions that assert it) until it ceases to function as the Ship of Theseus."

_So... does an 130 lbs giant with no GSD temperament nor working ability keeps being a GSD only because of pricked ears and black and than coloring?


----------



## nitemares (Dec 15, 2005)

I dont know if this is true or not but i read on wikipedia that Max von Stephanitz himself wrote 
"A pleasing appearance is desirable, but it can not put the dog's working ability into question ... German Shepherd breeding is working dog breeding, or it is not German Shepherd breeding"
Thought this fits the thread and answers the question. at least in my opinion


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

I have learned on this forum that all the lines positively represent the breed, just in different ways.


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

When did things begin to unravel. Was it more about breeding to specific traits, politics, money? 
I was interested in GSD's as a child but never really studied up on the history. When I was hunting for the GSD I have now I wasn't seeing the dogs that I remembered. Frankly after visiting some breeders and going to a show we were less than impressed. What I really didn't like was the nervousness. Some seemed downright squirrely without much focus. We thought about other breeds because of it.
At the time we had a older female GSD with about 1/4 BC in her. She was a very discerning, smart, very stable dog from an oops litter BYB. She was a better representative of the breed than many of the pure bred dogs we saw.
After much research we got the dog we wanted so I know they are still out there but what we had seen while researching and looking did not bode well for the breed. 
The standard/s are not just about looks but more importantly (at least to me) the temperament. What is ingrained in the dog. 
The $3000 dollar pup thread kinda made me laugh, not at the OP. Some of the nerve bag dogs that are out there you couldn't give me even if you gave me $3000 dollars to take it off your hands.


----------



## Lilie (Feb 3, 2010)

Jack's Dad said:


> So it's kind of like wanting a shorter, easier to handle thoroughbred. When it's legs are shorter and the horse is smaller it's easier to handle. However it can't race, do dressage, or jump but it's a nice little trail horse.


Then you'd buy a Quarter horse. You can learn a lot about what is happening to the GSD by researching what they've done in the equine world.


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

cliffson1 said:


> I have learned on this forum that all the lines positively represent the breed, just in different ways.


 I have learned that what you just said may be politically correct and unlikely to ruffle any feathers but I don't believe it's true. 

I don't have 10% of the knowledge and experience that you do but I can still see. I see more nervous reactive GSD's at least in the public arena than stable ones. I saw dogs running away in the schutzhund videos that were posted. I don't know very much about schutzhund but ther were dogs in those videos I don't want in my home even if they were gifts.


----------



## Andaka (Jun 29, 2003)

cliffson1 said:


> I have learned on this forum that all the lines positively represent the breed, just in different ways.


Not to put words in Cliff's mouth, but I believe that he is saying that there is some good dogs in all lines, not that all of th dogs in all of the lines are good.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

I am saying what Andaka is saying, I believe what Jack's Dad is saying, so everyone can SMILE!!!


----------



## Andaka (Jun 29, 2003)

:wub:Cliff


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

I'm speechless .... for once.


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

Cliff:

Of all the people that I've become familiar with on this forum I would have expected more from you. 
You have more knowledge than most on these topics but I guess you were offended somewhere. So now everything is going to just be. Lots of smilies about anything and everything.
Emoore just turned 30 today and at least she responded thoughtfully with some humor.
I guess I was a fool to think folks care about what is being turned out and called GSD's
Besides the GSD I have now I only have one more to own in this life.
So if the people breeding turn out jittery, nerve bags that are fearful and reactive or weigh 180lbs. So what. It will have no impact on me whatsoever.
I want to thank others who weighed in thoughtfully on the topic.


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

When is a GSD not a GSD? When it can no longer function for what it was developed; to be a utilitarian working dog. Without nerves, without drives, without mental and physical soundness, without athleticism, without the desire to work, along with the look, it can no longer be called a German Shepherd Dog.


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

lhczth said:


> When is a GSD not a GSD? When it can no longer function for what it was developed; to be a utilitarian working dog. Without nerves, without drives, without mental and physical soundness, without athleticism, without the desire to work, along with the look, it can no longer be called a German Shepherd Dog.


Thanks Lisa. I'm afraid there are too many like what you describe.

Not your dogs though. You have some awsome GSD's and really great pictures.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

So Andy, are you just grumping about it or are you doing something to make it better in your opinion?


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

selzer said:


> So Andy, are you just grumping about it or are you doing something to make it better in your opinion?


Just grumping about it Selzer. I'm not a breeder and I'm too **** old to do anything about it.

I certainly could be wrong but at the time it seemed like a more valuable topic than a lot of stuff that goes through the forum. What do I know though. My senility will probably kick in and I won't remember what anyone is talking about anyway.


----------



## Emoore (Oct 9, 2002)

selzer said:


> So Andy, are you just grumping about it or are you doing something to make it better in your opinion?


Is there any way to make it better besides breeding? Breeding scares the  outta me.


----------



## billsharp (May 3, 2011)

GSDlova, I also think your dog looks like what I think of as a "standard" GSD (based on what I see in the pic). He looks exactly like what I want a GSD to look like in the face, and is not ugly at all!


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Jack's Dad said:


> Just grumping about it Selzer. I'm not a breeder and I'm too **** old to do anything about it.
> 
> I certainly could be wrong but at the time it seemed like a more valuable topic than a lot of stuff that goes through the forum. What do I know though. My senility will probably kick in and I won't remember what anyone is talking about anyway.


Here is a thought, why not find something you LIKE about your dog or other dogs and start a thread about that. Nah, don't bother, positive threads get a couple of responses and fizzle out. Carry on.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Emoore said:


> Is there any way to make it better besides breeding? Breeding scares the  outta me.


I think supporting breeders who have the same goals as you have is a start.

Supporting or even becoming involved in the various venues where there is testing/trialing breeding stock.

Joining a breed club and a training club is something. 

Training your own dogs and making them ambassadors of the breed, showing people what they can do.

I dunno. I think there is more that can be done than parotting statements like, "The German Shepherd is a Working Dog" or complaining that the breed is not what it used to be.


----------



## Whiteshepherds (Aug 21, 2010)

Jack's Dad said:


> My senility will probably kick in and I won't remember what anyone is talking about anyway.


Old age, it's a blessing and a curse.  
It's a curse because you can't remember, and a blessing because you can't remember that you forgot.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Whiteshepherds said:


> Old age, it's a blessing and a curse.
> It's a curse because you can't remember, and a blessing because you can't remember that you forgot.


 
Ain't that the TRUTH!


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

selzer said:


> Here is a thought, why not find something you LIKE about your dog or other dogs and start a thread about that. Nah, don't bother, positive threads get a couple of responses and fizzle out. Carry on.


Well I Tried to shine a little positive light on the Michael Vick should be castrated before he burns in **** thread but you and others wouldn't have it.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Jack's Dad said:


> selzer said:
> 
> 
> > Here is a thought, why not find something you LIKE about your dog or other dogs and start a thread about that. Nah, don't bother, positive threads get a couple of responses and fizzle out. Carry on.[/QUOTE
> ...


----------



## Jessiewessie99 (Mar 6, 2009)

My great grandmother(She passed when she turned 101) had GSDs back in the day, and was not 100 something lbs and weren't nervebags either. So when people say they are breeding "old fashioned" GSDs that are big lazy couch potatos, I know they are blowing smoke up people's butts.

People have said Molly looks like what the original GSDs looked like. But I do not have enough knowledge or experience to say she does. She is pretty much what *I* think a GSD should be, but has some problems that make her the "not the whole package*.

I probably make no sense. btw.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

The German Shepherd IS aworking dog, and the breed ISN'T what it used to be.....and the people who understand that are trying to maintain what it used to be....thus they are doing a lot to try to counter balance the image that we are not allowed to talk about but so many people see these days.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

It seems that I can remember folks aying the same thing many years ago about the GSD - at the national GSDCA speciality show in the late 70's and early 80's there were many similar comments about "the breed not being what it used to be".


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

You're right Codmaster, It was just before that time I left the GSDCA because the breed was not what it used to be...lol. But I can say they have been pretty consistent ever since.


----------



## mysweetkaos (Sep 20, 2011)

I am new to this, so my opinion may not be welcome or necessary, but...... I believe what makes a GSD a GSD has more to do with temperment and personality. I have 105 lb (not overweight, just big) too tall bundle of love myself. What makes him a GSD is his intelligience, his drive, his gentle side, his loyalty and protectiveness of his family. I have never taken him anywhere where he was not complimented on his amazing personality....in almost 10 yrs he has been completely predictable in all of his reactions in and out of the home. He has trained with S/R, passed his CGC, & our neighbor who is coordinator for therapy dogs at the hospital has begged us to let him work in her program. He is nothing short of amazing to me:wub: So regardless of whether he is too big, too tall, or off color to us he is the picture of the perfect GSD. I hope we are so lucky to ever find another 1/2 as wonderful as he is (no offense to our rescue mastiff/GSD x) That being said I think all GSD have a certain regalness and beauty to them....but what makes them great is what's inside.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

I can remember one GSDCA National show when Julius Due judged the BOB and he dismissed/excused a number of the Ch for poor temperament (I was in the audience) and WOW - did he ever create a stir in the audience.

Accused of being unfair to the dogs - he came up from behand a couple and they actually spooked away from him and he waved them out of the ring!!!! I didn't blame him for excusing them - these were not puppies but experienced adult show dogs!

I ended up getting my next puppy frpom him! Great solid temperament!


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

cliffson1 said:


> The German Shepherd IS aworking dog, and the breed ISN'T what it used to be.....and the people who understand that are trying to maintain what it used to be....thus they are doing a lot to try to counter balance the image that we are not allowed to talk about but so many people see these days.


Maybe so, but I just hear a lot of hot air that sounds a whole lot like bashing. And when you do ask, so, what are you DOING about it? all I hear is a bunch of excuses. These threads are just a good excuse for certain people to pound on their chests and say look at me, my lines are REAL GSDs. The rest of you people have yucky dogs.

Perhaps the breed has changed for the worst, but so has the world changed. Gone are the days where dogs can accompany children to school and wait there until they get out and walk them home. Dogs do not have to spend 16 hours a day with the sheep and then guarding the farm at night. Or the need for that is greatly reduced. And if it is not used, the dogs will adapt to a different lifestyle. Even if the dog bites with good cause, you can get sued, and too many people do not want that kind of liability. And a dog can literally be ordered to be put down for being a dog. The world is a very different place than it was 30 or 40 years ago. 

One of the best assets our dogs possess it their adaptability. You can scoff and say they should get a GR, or not everyone should own a GSD. But circumstances change. Active people can become sick or injured, and they may have to re-home a dog that is not adaptable.


----------



## Catu (Sep 6, 2007)

I love this forum because it allows me to improve my English. Today I'll add to my dictionary:

Bashing: To say something others do not want to hear or goes against their own interests.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Catu said:


> I love this forum because it allows me to improve my English. Today I'll add to my dictionary:
> 
> Bashing: To say something others do not want to hear or goes against their own interests.


Kind of, only you have to go on and on and on and on and on until it is the song that never ends.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

I understand Selzer, I get tired of people justifying things that don't represent what they are supposed to be. And they go on and on and on and on about being bashed, when they were never bashed in the first place. If what I said was accurate, and even you said "maybe so" then I didn't bash the breed. As for you being tired of the truth,(the dogs are different today), I don't see that as something negative or bashing....most people want to be dealt with truthfully. Why should I apologize because I own dogs that meet the standard, promote dogs that meet the standard, and educate people about the standard. There was nothing negative said about any type of dog in my post....I just said that they aren't what they used to be. Where is the bashing coming from?????


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Cliffson, the op's point in this thread was that he was bored and wanted to get people to go after each other. He may not like what he sees but has said he is not going to do anything about it either. If you want to play into that game, you go. It sounds like you ARE doing something about it -- what you feel is wrong with the breed. Good for you.

I never asked you to apologize for anything. 

What you see as the truth, may not be generally accepted as truth. Even when things are generally accepted as the truth, does not necessarily mean that it is correct. At one point in history it was generally accepted that the world was flat.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

Selzer, two things.....1) where in my post was I bashing anything??????
2) The dogs ARE different in the past than today.....look at pics of the dogs in past and now and Stevie Wonder can see the difference. THAT is all I said. I still don't get it


----------



## PaddyD (Jul 22, 2010)

Catu said:


> I love this forum because it allows me to improve my English. Today I'll add to my dictionary:
> 
> Bashing: To say something others do not want to hear or goes against their own interests.


You wouldn't be bashing hyper-sensitive people would you?
:rofl::rofl::rofl:

We need a new acronym/abbreviation. Instead of IMHO, try IHYDMMEMOO: 
I hope you don't mind my expressing my own opinion.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Cliff, I never said that you were bashing. I am hearing the same thing over and over, but the point of the thread was to stir the pot -- admitted by the OP. I hear the same old tired lines, always by working line people, always complaining about the working-ability, and always discounting the showline dogs, both as ugly or deformed, and as not able to work -- both of which are not true. 

The dogs in the 70s do not look like the dogs in the 20's. In my opinion, the dogs look a whole lot better today than they did then. Can it be improved upon? Sure. But did they look better then? It is a matter of opinion. The whole show-dog thing is a matter of opinion.

But that does not get ya'all off the hook. Show line dogs can and do work. My friend who breeds GSLs has dogs out there doing police and search work. And she is not the only one. Do they work like a malinois? No. Should they? No. They are different breeds, and if police departments like the traits of the malinois over shepherds then they should buy malinois. I think that will go full circle too. I think there are people trying to mutilate the breed to make malinois in shepherd forms, and that is a terrible thing to do to the breed.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

I haven't said anything about a show dog recently...people have gotten me to reassess my beliefs and in the next six months I will travel to some shows and see how wrong I have been. I have no problem admitting I'm wrong or changing my view if the evidence is there to support the change. As for police...there are PLENTY of GS doing police work today. I will go to a police trial this weekend with over fifty entries. The heck with my or your opinion, I'll let you know what I see....fair enough. (In reference to GS present)
Getting upset at workingline people is not going to solve the problem about people dissing SL temperament. SL dogs consistently showing the public good temperament will change people's views in a heartbeat. Not judging...just sayin!!
Take care...


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

Selzer:

Where did I say that I was bored and just wanted to stir the pot?

Originally I had hoped for a civil, but serious discussion on the breed standard and it's purpose the way things are today.

You asked if I was just grumping or going to do something about it. 
For a start I thought it was a snippy question. I answered it honestly though saying that I'm not a breeder and too old to do anything about what goes on.

I'm sure whiteshepherds loves his/her dogs and germanshepherdlova loves her big dog. 

Last time I checked it was still o.k. for me to have the opinion that 100+ lb. bitches and 130+ lb. males don't fall within anyones standard. White is specifically not acceptable. But my biggest concern is goofy, nerve bag dogs that don't fit the temperament and can cause serious problems for the owner and the breed in general.

I would probably really like Whiteshepherds and GSDlova's dogs but if they are't to standard they aren't.

Like I said I'm getting one more GSD soon and that will be my last one. So I hardly think I will be out to change the GSD world.

You may not like my opinion and that's fine but I will still give it until I tire of the forum or get healthy and too busy again. 
There are lot's of opinions I don't like. There are lots of fluff topics that I don't care for but that's the nature of the beast. (internet forums)


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

cliffson1 said:


> I haven't said anything about a show dog recently...people have gotten me to reassess my beliefs and in the next six months I will travel to some shows and see how wrong I have been. I have no problem admitting I'm wrong or changing my view if the evidence is there to support the change. As for police...there are PLENTY of GS doing police work today. I will go to a police trial this weekend with over fifty entries. The heck with my or your opinion, I'll let you know what I see....fair enough. (In reference to GS present)
> Getting upset at workingline people is not going to solve the problem about people dissing SL temperament. *SL dogs consistently showing the public good temperament will change people's views in a heartbeat*. Not judging...just sayin!!
> Take care...


I don't know that this it true though. I see a LOT of showline dogs with excellent temperaments. But if one sees one dog that is flighty, that is what he is going to remember. He is not going to remember the thirty or forty dogs he passed that were fine, doing their thing, not having a problem. And he will rush home, and log in to tell us all how awful this or that type of shepherd is. 

Thousands of members can have working line dogs that are great with kids, great pets, good with people, good with dogs, have an off switch, but we will remember the hyper idiot, that spends half of its life or more crated, is destructive and cannot turn off. 

Probably the majority of police dogs out there are good, well trained dogs, but I am going to remember the one that charged me and Dubya probably forever. It really is not going to matter if I encounter ten good police dogs this year, I will still remember that one. 

The point is that our perceptions about groups on the whole are often more heavily weighted by the negative things we see, than the positive. Though it is possible that we tend to notice the negative more in groups we dislike and the positive more in groups we like -- that may be human nature. But it is nothing new that we accentuate the negative, "the evil men do lives after them, the good is oft interred with their bones."


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Jack's Dad said:


> Just grumping about it Selzer. I'm not a breeder and I'm too **** old to do anything about it.
> 
> I certainly could be wrong but at the time it seemed like a more valuable topic than a lot of stuff that goes through the forum.


Andy, I am sorry, I only gleaned the negative out of the response and took it wrong. 

But the idea that you need to be a breeder to do anything about it is ridiculous. I guess it just rubs me the wrong way when people want to dwell on what is wrong with a thing, but have no intentions of even trying to do anything about it.


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

Selzer I was too nice in my last post. The fact is I *never* said I was bored or trying to stir the pot. Since a lot of people read the last posts first I really don't appreciate it either. If you find that somewhere in this thread then point it out. 
My view is my view whether it carries any weight with you or not.
I just don't want people thinking I said things that I did not.


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

I also apologize my last post missed yours. 
I've also learned a lot from you and I really don't want to continue the back and forth with you. I disagree with you sometimes but you have a lot of valuable advice and I appreciate that.

Keep on keeping on Cliff. I guess people often just see what they want to see.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Again, Andy, I really am sorry for saying that. I thought I was paraphrasing. But the meaning I originally read was not correct. I took the post all wrong.


----------



## Kaity (Nov 18, 2009)

Does anybody here think that change could be good? My opinion is probably not welcome but anyways..

The breed, if so far off than what it "used" to be will NEVER be what it "used" to be, right? So what are we all exactly looking for to be changed other than less focus on the aesthetic of the breed - which is something that I think people who don't personally own GSD's associate with them.. as does every group of dog owners. I don't know if that made sense but if I had a "GSD" that didn't look like it but had all the right traits that we look for, would anybody who didn't own a GSD recognize it as a GSD? Could we still call it a GSD, if it didn't fit the standards of how they apparently should look? I think all dogs of any breed come in so many different shapes and sized, but with a breed like this it just seems more apparent if something in their looks is off. A lot of people think bigger is better, therefor opt for more bigger GSDs. I see it around here a lot.. in a non-safe area, there are a lot of GSDs from what I'm sure are BYBs and a ton of pitbulls too. I can't judge everybody on it because I don't know for 100% where they got their dogs and what their intentions are but I'm pretty sure they don't know a lot about the dogs. Yesterday I got some guy stopping before turning asking me if Vida was an Alsatian which I thought was kind off cool. Overall, who really doesn't LOVE a GSD? I can't go walking Vida without a question or compliment about her or somebody eager to tell me they also own a GSD. GSD owners take so much pride in their dogs, I love seeing that. 

For some reason, this thread has temporarily lowered my respect for the breed, because I realise that my dog isn't exactly what I expected her to be. And I can't help but wonder how far off her traits are in comparison to an old fashioned GSD.


----------



## Vandal (Dec 22, 2000)

> Perhaps the breed has changed for the worst, but so has the world changed. Gone are the days where dogs can accompany children to school and wait there until they get out and walk them home. Dogs do not have to spend 16 hours a day with the sheep and then guarding the farm at night. Or the need for that is greatly reduced. And if it is not used, the dogs will adapt to a different lifestyle. Even if the dog bites with good cause, you can get sued, and too many people do not want that kind of liability. And a dog can literally be ordered to be put down for being a dog. The world is a very different place than it was 30 or 40 years ago.


Maybe so, but the German Shepherd Standard has not changed. So, for me, ( in the context of the thread), this argument holds no weight.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

The standard is interpreted many ways. I read through the standard, and the temperament section does not say anything about biting a bite sleeve. 

When I watch schutzhund, and see the person come out from behind the blind with the baton and the dog immediately rushes forward and engages in biting the sleeve. I wonder what would happen if that distance is halved and a teenager walks around a corner with a ball bat on his shoulder coming home from practice. How many of those dogs are going to react? What if the kid turns the corner on a bicycle and appears to be rushing toward you? What if an impaired man rushes toward you for some reason? 

I think the standard says something like stands his ground, what they are doing is having the dog rush forward. 

I was talking to my BIL who was drunk and who my dog did not know. I met him while walking. And in the course of the conversation, the guy crashed his hands together over the dog's head. It was really an aggressive move. The dog backed up a step and looked up to assess the situation. He did not panic, he did not cringe or run away. He looked to see what the heck that was all about. He did not immediately launch himself at the disturbance. THAT is what I am looking for in a shepherd. A dog that is not noise sensitive, or dog reactive, or afraid of people. A dog that might try things other than attacking when it decides it should protect. A dog that gets in between a threat and its owner, will give a warning growl, and will only escalate if the threat continues to threaten, or if it is trained to on command.


----------



## Vandal (Dec 22, 2000)

*From the standard:*
*Character
*The German Shepherd should appear poised, calm, self confident, absolutely at ease, and (except when agitated) good natured, but also attentive and willing to serve. *He must have courage, fighting drive, and hardness* in order to serve as companion, watchdog, protection dog, service dog, and herding dog.




> When I watch schutzhund, and see the person come out from behind the blind with the baton and the dog immediately rushes forward and engages in biting the sleeve. I wonder what would happen if that distance is halved and a teenager walks around a corner with a ball bat on his shoulder coming home from practice. How many of those dogs are going to react? What if the kid turns the corner on a bicycle and appears to be rushing toward you? What if an impaired man rushes toward you for some reason?


In my life, I have seen plenty of things I did not fully understand and interpreted them wrong as a result. The problem is, people don't understand but choose to make assumptions of what "could" happen based on their lack of understanding.

If a teenage kid came around that blind the way that exercise is supposed to be conducted, he would be coming straight at you with the bat raised in a very threatening fashion. My dog sure better protect me in that case and if he didn't , he is not a GSD.

Now, allow me to wander into the show line side of things since you have been making comments about the different lines, I will indulge as well. What you are seeing in the Sieger Show bitework is so incorrect, it fits right into what you just complained about in the quote I provided. There is no clear attack from the helper, he runs sideways in a non threatening manner yet the dog goes in and bites anyway. The entire display is outrageously wrong.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

> But the idea that you need to be a breeder to do anything about it is ridiculous. I guess it just rubs me the wrong way when people want to dwell on what is wrong with a thing, but have no intentions of even trying to do anything about it.


The only thing we as non-breeders can do about it is support the breeder who is breeding the dogs that are real. 'Real' is the post above from Anne on Character from the *STANDARD*. 
But 'real' is up to individual_ interpretation_, which is why the breed is as it is today....too many breeders have tried to *improve* it due to their own opinions on what would make it better.


----------



## mthurston0001 (Jul 12, 2009)

Emoore said:


> Is there any way to make it better besides breeding? Breeding scares the  outta me.


 I think a big thing we can do, at least in regards of those who are decoys/helpers, is to truly do our best to test the dogs trailing. Within the confines of the rules that is. Whether or not the rules for that particular thing are truly beneficial to testing the breed is something else.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

From The Standard: German Shepherd Dog | American Kennel Club
"The breed has a distinct personality marked by direct and fearless, but not hostile, expression, self-confidence and a certain aloofness that does not lend itself to immediate and indiscriminate friendships. The dog must be approachable, quietly standing its ground and showing confidence and willingness to meet overtures without itself making them. It is poised, but when the occasion demands, eager and alert; both fit and willing to serve in its capacity as companion, watchdog, blind leader, herding dog, or guardian, whichever the circumstances may demand. The dog must not be timid, shrinking behind its master or handler; it should not be nervous, looking about or upward with anxious expression or showing nervous reactions, such as tucking of tail, to strange sounds or sights. Lack of confidence under any surroundings is not typical of good character. Any of the above deficiencies in character which indicate shyness must be penalized as very _serious faults_ and any dog exhibiting pronounced indications of these must be excused from the ring. It must be possible for the judge to observe the teeth and to determine that both testicles are descended. Any dog that attempts to bite the judge must be _disqualified._ The ideal dog is a working animal with an incorruptible character combined with body and gait suitable for the arduous work that constitutes its primary purpose."

I do not see the fighting drive mentioned, must be one of those minor differences between the SV standard and the AKC standard that someone mentioned.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

mthurston0001 said:


> I think a big thing we can do, at least in regards of those who are decoys/helpers, is to truly do our best to test the dogs trailing. Within the confines of the rules that is. Whether or not the rules for that particular thing are truly beneficial to testing the breed is something else.


There are a lot of things you can do. Get involved in local clubs, in training clubs. If schutzhund isn't what it was, get in there and try to raise the bar. Get out there with your dog and show them how it is done. Not easy, but if you try, you can probably do as much as any hobby breeder can by the number of dogs they produce is just a drop in the ocean.


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

selzer said:


> I do not see the fighting drive mentioned, must be one of those minor differences between the SV standard and the AKC standard that someone mentioned.


It is one of the major differences between the two and a rather important difference. One is correct. One is not.


----------



## sagelfn (Aug 13, 2009)

lhczth said:


> It is one of the major differences between the two and a rather important difference. One is correct. One is not.


:thumbup: If someone does not know which one look at the requirements for registering litters. One requires meeting the standard one does not.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Kaity said:


> Does anybody here think that change could be good? My opinion is probably not welcome but anyways..
> 
> The breed, if so far off than what it "used" to be will NEVER be what it "used" to be, right? So what are we all exactly looking for to be changed other than less focus on the aesthetic of the breed - which is something that I think people who don't personally own GSD's associate with them.. as does every group of dog owners. I don't know if that made sense but if I had a "GSD" that didn't look like it but had all the right traits that we look for, would anybody who didn't own a GSD recognize it as a GSD? Could we still call it a GSD, if it didn't fit the standards of how they apparently should look? I think all dogs of any breed come in so many different shapes and sized, but with a breed like this it just seems more apparent if something in their looks is off. A lot of people think bigger is better, therefor opt for more bigger GSDs. I see it around here a lot.. in a non-safe area, there are a lot of GSDs from what I'm sure are BYBs and a ton of pitbulls too. I can't judge everybody on it because I don't know for 100% where they got their dogs and what their intentions are but I'm pretty sure they don't know a lot about the dogs. Yesterday I got some guy stopping before turning asking me if Vida was an Alsatian which I thought was kind off cool. Overall, who really doesn't LOVE a GSD? I can't go walking Vida without a question or compliment about her or somebody eager to tell me they also own a GSD. GSD owners take so much pride in their dogs, I love seeing that.
> 
> For some reason, this thread has temporarily lowered my respect for the breed, because I realise that my dog isn't exactly what I expected her to be. And I can't help but wonder how far off her traits are in comparison to an old fashioned GSD.


Kaity,

I am curious as to what you think an "Old Fashioned" GSD is? The standard hasn't really changed that much in the last 30-40 years or so. Why did your respect for the entire breed change because your individual dog isn't what you expected her to be? What did you actually expect her to be?

BTW, a lot of people, including some who should really know better, think that they can "improve" on the GSD standard and so breed for characteristics both physical and mental that are actually at odds with the standard. Some want GSD's that are much bigger (or smaller) than the standard calls for, or perhaps a different color or maybe they want GSD's that are much sharper and suspicious; or maybe much more easy going and a friend to everyone. None of thse are to be recommended, which of course does not mean that a GSD with something like these characteristics against the standard can not be a wonderful, dearly loved companion!


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

lhczth said:


> It is one of the major differences between the two and a rather important difference. One is correct. One is not.


 
Different yes, but they are both correct for their respective organizations, it would appear. Opinions are certainly different among many folks.

Different dogs for different purposes are a good thing. I just wonder how a dog with great "Fight Drive" would do as a Seeing Eye dog?


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

I have dogs that are old fashioned in temperament...its not magic. Dogs with fight drive to engage a bad guy if necessary, and able to be 100% reliable around my grandchildren. Able to meet all of the different examples listed in the standard. Used to be done, still is done. But the reason is; I strive to have/produce what the standard calls for as opposed to what I like. I don't state this to compare my dogs to others,(frankly I'm not interested in comparing my dogs to other people's dogs...for what????), I state this to demonstrate that there are dogs and breeders that are producing dogs that meet ALL of the standard, and though all dogs might not reach that plateau, I still think a reputable breeder breeds for dogs that correlate to the whole standard and not just parts they like....its not about our likes (as breeders), but the integrity of the whole standard as written. This is just my opinion, doesn't make it right, just one side of the equation.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

IMOO, I don't consider standard temperament to be "Old Fashioned" anymore than I would consider correct structure to be "Old Fashioned" - just "Correct!"!

I.E. "Aloof but Approachable" and properly protective and very able to be discriminating in applying that protective capability.

Certainly agreed that any worthwhile breeder is going to strive for the "Total" GSD - correct and standard in both temperament and structure. The "All Around" dog!

And I would also add, based on a couple of GSD's that I have owned, VERY Kid approachable as well as able to put up with a lot of crap from both puppies and kids.


----------



## Jessiewessie99 (Mar 6, 2009)

When you guys say "old fashioned" what do you mean? I know most of you don't think of 100+lbs couch potatoes. Like when you say old fashioned, what comes to your mind?


----------



## nitemares (Dec 15, 2005)

For me old fashioned is the standard, it is very hard seeing GSDs that fit the standard both physically and mentally these days. They do exist like Cliff said but not as much as non standard GSDs


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

We agree again Codmaster.....I think Old fashioned is correct....and that's what I strive for, because that's what I was used to seeing back in the day. Good structure and temperament closely representing the standard thus able to perform the type of jobs that are in the standard....yepperoo....I call dogs like that Old Fashioned. Don't care what color, and I didn't speak of specific lines because there were no lines like today with these dogs. So if people find that offensive then THEY have issues, because I don't believe in lines as I have said in many occaisons....I believe in breeding the best two dogs available to me that will maintain that balance thus creating a dog who dogs it all.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

In other words I equate Old fashioned with dogs closely matching the standard in structure and temperament, thus able to perform all the things mentioned in the standard. This is my take on correct....I call it old fashioned, it has nothing to do with color, or lines, as I have repeatedly said that I don't believe in the set lines of today. I only believe in breeding the two best dogs structurally, temperamentally, and genetically, available to me to achieve the balance that Codmaster speaks of thus creating a fine utlity dog that is pretty also.
Doesn't everybody strive for that?????? Its not Cliff's standard....it is the German Shepherd standard:hammer:.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

Everyone sorry for the double post. Put them together and it reflects what I am trying to say....I'm not criticizing what anyone does today, I'm just advocating what I do and I think the results will reflect how close or far off I am in my quest and my methodology.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I think that people do strive for the total dog, the total dog in their perception of the what the standard says. I am not aiming this at you cliff. I was at a shepherd club meeting where people, breeders, judges were claiming that the American lines today are what was being imported in the seventies. And you can say that they are blind if you want. The point is, that these people ARE breeding and producing, showing and judging dogs today that they believe meet the standard in temperament and structure. 

So we can have hundreds of breeders who are producing dogs that look very different and act very different and every one of the are claiming that they are breeding to the standard.

And then you have those who claim old-fashioned, and are producing the 110-130 pound couch potatoes. 

A LOT of people WILL believe them that this is what GSDs used to be, because the dogs they remember from thirty years ago were very impressive to them. But there were not out there with measuring sticks and scales to determine how large the dog truly was. 

30 years ago, 35 years ago, the gas station on the corner -- no fence around it, had two GSDs King and Queenie. They were BIG, but looked a lot like my saddle back dogs. The male, King, attacked my brother and bit him on the leg when he was walking down the street, he was about 10. I don't think the dogs were that much better in temperament, though people were freer with them and where not paralyzed by the fear of being sued and losing their home owner's insurance if the dog knocked someone down. So I think dogs had better opportunities to interact with the world they were likely to encounter and there were fewer incidents because of it. But the GSDs that I encountered thirty years ago were extremely limited -- the few in our neighborhood. My folks have never been to a dog show or training class, so they were not the type of people to expose their kids to a variety of dogs, training techniques, trials, etc.

ETA: My mother had a GSD growing up, so that was probably 55 years ago give or take. The dog was also named King. It was fine with the babies, would hide behind the couch to get away from them after a while. But once the babies started wearing long pants, the boys, King hated them and would go after them. That is not good temperament. And that was over 50 years ago.


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

codmaster said:


> Different dogs for different purposes are a good thing. I just wonder how a dog with great "Fight Drive" would do as a Seeing Eye dog?


And what Anne posted from THE standard:



> *From the standard: Character
> *The German Shepherd should appear poised, calm, self confident, absolutely at ease, and (except when agitated) good natured, but also attentive and willing to serve. *He must have courage, fighting drive, and hardness* in order to serve as companion, watchdog, protection dog, service dog, and herding dog.


The Seeing Eye was developed with the GSD of old that HAD *courage, FIGHTING DRIVE and hardness*. Fidelco still uses GSD exclusively and the have incorporated the German dogs into their program many times over the years. Dogs known to produce *Courage, Fighting drive and hardness*. Guess it has worked pretty darn well for them. 

These three things are not just needed in dogs doing protection work. They serve dogs in all capacities of work including those of companion.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I am going to go one step farther. A LOT of people with bad opinions of GSDs or fear of GSDs stem from incidents that happened in their youth. 

When my Dad was seven, he was playing with a GSD, and a stick and throwing the stick etc. Well he put the stick behind his back and the top of the stick showed over his head. The dog went for it and closed around my dad's face. My dad says he stopped immediately but it still scared him big time. He never let me have a GSD when I was growing up because they made him nervous. He has one now and loves him, but that early impression of the dog created a negative opinion that took having a great dog to overcome. And _that_ dog sixty plus years ago did not even do anything so drastic, he was playing, and Dad understood that the dog was going for the stick and not him. 

GSDs may not be what they used to be. But maybe what we remember is also somewhat skewed.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

lhczth said:


> And what Anne posted from THE standard:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


A lot of leader dogs for the blind organizations are going with bird dogs instead of GSDs now. Those bird dogs do not have fighting drive or hardness. For some reason, they feel the bird dogs better fit with the needs of their clients.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

selzer said:


> I am going to go one step farther. A LOT of people with bad opinions of GSDs or fear of GSDs stem from incidents that happened in their youth.
> 
> When my Dad was seven, he was playing with a GSD, and a stick and throwing the stick etc. Well he put the stick behind his back and the top of the stick showed over his head. The dog went for it and closed around my dad's face. My dad says he stopped immediately but it still scared him big time. He never let me have a GSD when I was growing up because they made him nervous. He has one now and loves him, but that early impression of the dog created a negative opinion that took having a great dog to overcome. And _that_ dog sixty plus years ago did not even do anything so drastic, he was playing, and Dad understood that the dog was going for the stick and not him.
> 
> GSDs may not be what they used to be. But maybe what we remember is also somewhat skewed.


My neighbor had a dalmation, the dog attacked the 7 yr old that lived next door....all dogs regardless of breed can bite. 
I have a friend who grew up in Germany. He is in his 70's now and I haven't talked with him in several years. He called me the other day, so I asked him about his experiences in Germany with the GSD/if he had one, ever went to clubs, etc. 
He told me he was attacked by a GSD at about 7 and had a fear of them ever since, so never ever would go around them. I was disappointed, thought he may have had some great stories to share.


----------



## Whiteshepherds (Aug 21, 2010)

cliffson1 said:


> We agree again Codmaster.....I think Old fashioned is correct....and that's what I strive for, because that's what I was used to seeing back in the day. Good structure and temperament closely representing the standard thus able to perform the type of jobs that are in the standard....yepperoo....I call dogs like that Old Fashioned.


Not just for Cliffson, just using his post as a jumping off point. 

So what happens when they decide to change the standard and your dogs no longer fall within its parameters? Would you yield to the standard or would you continue to do what you've always done and tell the powers that be to go pound sand?

What's your breaking point? Translated, are you willing to follow the standard without question, regardless of how much it may change in time or how if affects your breeding program?


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Maybe we're looking at it all wrong. 

Maybe it's the people. People today are more neurotic, more high strung, more violent. And dogs raised by these people will be reflect some of that, maybe a lot of that.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

Selzer, I hear you....I was training and importing dogs in the seventies. So this isn't second hand....left the show world in the seventies BECAUSE the dogs were becoming shy, nervy, and incapable of work either police or seeing eye. We really don't have to guess why seeing eye organization have switched to other breeds...they will tell you. See given a choice of believing people that live something, and people who speculate on things and come to conclusions to will not rock their perception....then I trust people's opinions that are involved in the subject matter. I hope that makes sense to people. Its not directed at anyone in particular. I have talked to police dog instructors, I have talked to training coordinators of seeing eye programs, they are pretty uniform in their assessment of why they don't seek certain types of German Shepherds. I have also heard the opinions of people that don't do these things and THEIR reasons why certain types aren't used. Common sense dictates to me that practitioners of a craft have a better understanding than people speculating or repeating what they heard. Again, this is just my way of trying to get an accurate assessment.
As for perceptions, yes they can very easily be distorted, but that's why we have evidence to support or disprove perceptions. I, personally, try to have my perceptions be in line with the body of evidence as a whole. I find that allows my opinion to coincide with what is consistent....again that's just my approach. I hope it makes sense to some.


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

selzer said:


> Maybe we're looking at it all wrong.
> 
> Maybe it's the people. People today are more neurotic, more high strung, more violent. And dogs raised by these people will be reflect some of that, maybe a lot of that.


There is certainly some truth to this.

There is a thread running about a dog from the same breeder that I got mine from. She loooves the dog soooo much that it all most bit her boyfriends face and doesn't really listen to her. My dog is nothing like hers. he is calm, stable, great nerve and temperament. There is nothing wrong with the breeder.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

cliffson1 said:


> Selzer, I hear you....I was training and importing dogs in the seventies. So this isn't second hand....left the show world in the seventies BECAUSE the dogs were becoming shy, nervy, and incapable of work either police or seeing eye. We really don't have to guess why seeing eye organization have switched to other breeds...they will tell you. See given a choice of believing people that live something, and people who speculate on things and come to conclusions to will not rock their perception....then I trust people's opinions that are involved in the subject matter. I hope that makes sense to people. Its not directed at anyone in particular. I have talked to police dog instructors, I have talked to training coordinators of seeing eye programs, they are pretty uniform in their assessment of why they don't seek certain types of German Shepherds. I have also heard the opinions of people that don't do these things and THEIR reasons why certain types aren't used. Common sense dictates to me that practitioners of a craft have a better understanding than people speculating or repeating what they heard. Again, this is just my way of trying to get an accurate assessment.
> As for perceptions, yes they can very easily be distorted, but that's why we have evidence to support or disprove perceptions. I, personally, try to have my perceptions be in line with the body of evidence as a whole. I find that allows my opinion to coincide with what is consistent....again that's just my approach. I hope it makes sense to some.


So believe those who have lived it? And discount anyone who was not around, not breeding/showing/trialing at the time? OK. That suggests that the AKC judge who was living it in the seventies and says temperament is the number one thing, and yet will make allowances if it is thundering outside -- that is the person that should be listened to. Ok. 

The only problem is that I get a completely different story from a person who has been breeding, showing, producing dogs, champions, police dogs, etc, and has been doing this for over fifty years. So now I have to choose who makes sense.

Just because you say, I was there, I lived it does not mean we should believe that your perception is truth. Because there are three different stories, from three different people, all of them breeders, owners, handlers, trainers. All of them experienced. All of them doing this in the seventies.


----------



## Dainerra (Nov 14, 2003)

even one of the top GSD judges from the 80's says that American dogs are not bred for working ability, but for beauty. That THIS difference is what makes them "American Line" GSDs. He also strongly implies that beauty is the main function of the American Line dogs. And yes, he's an American judge and breeder. I could be misinterpreting his statements.

I don't have time to find the exact page #, but it it's in "The German Shepherd Dog" by Ernest H. Hart. I'll post the excerpt when I find it

ETA: pg 139, in the chapter "A Comparison: American-bred vs Import" ... "the American-bred is the more beautiful animal and the German-bred the sounder dog. This is as it should be, for the German dog has been bred from its conception to be a working dog, the utilitarian animal supreme, while the American-bred has been selected solely for its beauty. Each dog, the American-bred adn the German-bred, therefor fulfills the destiny for which it has been bred."

So it is natural that the "ideal" dog will vary since they seem to have too separate purposes. Note: the above quote, again, is from an American AKC Judge and breeder. So, I'm pretty sure that his intent isn't to bash and ridicule his own dogs. Just that (in my interpretation) the 2 types are chosen for fundamentally different reasons


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

@Dainera...basically that's what I've been saying for years and people get all uptight and try to make it bashing...everyone can see this has happened. Now if I said that it would be me bashing...but now its an American Judge in a reputable book and where are we going to go????? It is what it is.
@ Whiteshepherd, this has already happened...they changed the standard here in the states as some has pointed out in the protection area, but I breed GERMAN SHEPHERDS, so I go by the standard of the country of the breeds origin. And haven't changed over the years, and fortunately some people still find them appealing.
@ Selzer, Listen to whomever you want out of the three, I don't expect you to believe me...lol...and I am aware what some of the American judges think, because it reflects the condition(good and bad), of the breed today in that venue. Let's just agree that we have different perceptions on the breed...eh...fair enough:hug:.


----------



## Elena (Sep 24, 2011)

_ETA: pg 139, in the chapter "A Comparison: American-bred vs Import" ... "the American-bred is the more beautiful animal and the German-bred the sounder dog. This is as it should be, for the German dog has been bred from its conception to be a working dog, the utilitarian animal supreme, while the American-bred has been selected solely for its beauty. Each dog, the American-bred adn the German-bred, therefor fulfills the destiny for which it has been bred."
_


_My dog has the beauty and the brains!!!!
_


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

The Americans, in a generalization, made it very very clear that they were departing from the original dog in both look and character. I have an old book here where the American breeder and author is absolutely scathing in his criticism of von Stephanitz approaches to the breed. Yup, lets the founder have it. I have to say I found that kinda wild!

It is not bashing to grant that they were very vocal in their goals and also were successful in their intended deviation. It is not a secret or a bash! Now, temperaments and nerve strength did hit a nadir with many of them. Today you can find some with decent nerves and temperament. At least one can say they are stable, confident and able to live well in society. That is great for breeders who have done well enough at breeding to not produce spooks and neurotics. I have ASL dogs and German dogs. They are quite different from one another. It is genetic and it was by choice that American breeders arrived where they are. I don't think it is bashing to say the ASL breeders were successful in their intentions to change the original dog. It in fact would be quite strange if over some decades they had not succeeded with their intended changes to the breed.


----------



## Dainerra (Nov 14, 2003)

Elena said:


> _ETA: pg 139, in the chapter "A Comparison: American-bred vs Import" ... "the American-bred is the more beautiful animal and the German-bred the sounder dog. This is as it should be, for the German dog has been bred from its conception to be a working dog, the utilitarian animal supreme, while the American-bred has been selected solely for its beauty. Each dog, the American-bred adn the German-bred, therefor fulfills the destiny for which it has been bred."
> _
> 
> 
> ...


Mine too! Smart is sexy baby!!

@cliff exactly. I'm not sure when it went into this denial that American-bred dogs were different than the German-bred? Any history of the breed talks about the steps that American breeders went to to make an "American German Shepherd Dog"

Fran-Jo Kennel is credited by the author I mentioned with creating the first "purely American type" (I believe Lance of Fran-Jo is the dog in question)


----------



## Whiteshepherds (Aug 21, 2010)

cliffson1;[email protected] Whiteshepherd said:


> Appreciate the response but you didn't answer the question.
> 
> Would you continue to follow the SV standard if it changed and you found your dogs suddenly outside the standard? It's not a trick question.
> 
> If you can walk away from or never had an interest in the GSDCA or the AKC because you believe the breed is no longer being held to the standard as it was intended, (I'm guessing that's your reason?) would you also walk away from the SV if they went down the same road?


----------



## BR870 (May 15, 2011)

Whiteshepherds said:


> Appreciate the response but you didn't answer the question.
> 
> Would you continue to follow the SV standard if it changed and you found your dogs suddenly outside the standard? It's not a trick question.
> 
> If you can walk away from or never had an interest in the GSDCA or the AKC because you believe the breed is no longer being held to the standard as it was intended, (I'm guessing that's your reason?) would you also walk away from the SV if they went down the same road?


I'm not a breeder and not answering from Cliff, but for me if the German Showline is any indication of the norms within the SV than they already have gone down that road...


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

Dainerra said:


> So it is natural that the "ideal" dog will vary since they seem to have too separate purposes. Note: the above quote, again, is from an American AKC Judge and breeder. So, I'm pretty sure that his intent isn't to bash and ridicule his own dogs. Just that (in my interpretation) the 2 types are chosen for fundamentally different reasons


This is interesting because it takes us backward to the beginning of this thread.

What if some Beagle people decided they wanted a taller dog with tail down and ears pointed. A Beagle that barked instead of howled. Over time those thing could probably be accomplished. You could over time probably degrade the hunting instinct also. To me then you are shooting for a different breed and should try to register it at some point in time. The point being you would not have a Beagle even if both parent were registered. 

Max took several dogs and created a breed. 

To me GSD's should be GSD's in both physical and temperamental characteristics. 

I still don't understand breeding for one or two specific traits to the exclusion of concern for the whole of the animal.


Whiteshepherds.
I'll go out on a limb and guess that Cliff will always breed what he's breeding now because he believes in it strongly. If the standard/s were changed tommorrow I don't think Cliff and a lot of other people would go along with it.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

BR870....you couldn't have answered me for any better if I did it myself....lol And that's not to denigrate WGSL dogs, but I remain committed to breeding the type of dog intended in the book I have by Von Stephanitz. I have done it for 30 plus years here in America, so IF they changed in Germany (as many have), I would still breed for the same utility dog. Hope that answers your question.


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

And If people did this to the mighty hunting Beagle, but then sold their dogs as Beagles and benefited from the proud history of the hunting Beagle even though it was not their intention to produce same....


----------



## PaddyD (Jul 22, 2010)

A GSD is a GSD when it is within standard. All others are GSD wannabes.
What good is a standard when everyone is ignoring it.
Going for Size or butt-dragging roach-backs or whites.
Sure these non-standard dogs are beautiful and wonderful and lovable.
But what is the point of a standard if it just turns into a 'guideline'??!!


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

Don't hold back PaddyD.


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

There is more than one standard and certainly a variety of interpretations within those even.

Courage, fighting drive and hardness are called for in the FCI standard. Are they in the AKC or CKC standard?


----------



## Whiteshepherds (Aug 21, 2010)

Jack's Dad said:


> Don't hold back PaddyD.


:rofl:

PaddyD you're right, the standard is there for a reason and you should never support a breeder who doesn't adhere to the standard if it bothers you. Freedom of choice and all that...

So which standard and which methods of determining if a dog meets the standard do you think best exemplify the "real GSD" ?


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

PaddyD said:


> A GSD is a GSD when it is within standard. All others are GSD wannabes.
> What good is a standard when everyone is ignoring it.
> Going for Size or butt-dragging roach-backs or whites.
> Sure these non-standard dogs are beautiful and wonderful and lovable.
> But what is the point of a standard if it just turns into a 'guideline'??!!


Whiteshepherds makes a good point though. The breed originally had whites in it. They chose to stop registering the white ones at some point in Germany, and I heard two reasons, one they felt that white was somehow connected to deafness or some other ailment which I guess has been disproved, and the other was that the white dogs were too easy to spot and therefore not desired as military dogs. I am not sure either was the reason. 

Max, wasn't Max the one that said a good dog cannot be a bad color? 

PaddyD, there are a LOT of GSD wannabes by your definition. I wonder if your dog is a GSD or a wannabe.


----------



## Whiteshepherds (Aug 21, 2010)

Samba said:


> There is more than one standard and certainly a variety of interpretations within those even.
> 
> Courage, fighting drive and hardness are called for in the FCI standard. Are they in the AKC or CKC standard?


This is the AKC standard. (temperament portion)

*Temperament*
The breed has a distinct personality marked by direct and fearless, but not hostile, expression, self-confidence and a certain aloofness that does not lend itself to immediate and indiscriminate friendships. The dog must be approachable, quietly standing its ground and showing confidence and willingness to meet overtures without itself making them. It is poised, but when the occasion demands, eager and alert; both fit and willing to serve in its capacity as companion, watchdog, blind leader, herding dog, or guardian, whichever the circumstances may demand. The dog must not be timid, shrinking behind its master or handler; it should not be nervous, looking about or upward with anxious expression or showing nervous reactions, such as tucking of tail, to strange sounds or sights. Lack of confidence under any surroundings is not typical of good character. Any of the above deficiencies in character which indicate shyness must be penalized as very _serious faults_ and any dog exhibiting pronounced indications of these must be excused from the ring. It must be possible for the judge to observe the teeth and to determine that both testicles are descended. Any dog that attempts to bite the judge must be _disqualified._ The ideal dog is a working animal with an incorruptible character combined with body and gait suitable for the arduous work that constitutes its primary purpose.

Link to the standard from the Canadian Kennel Club: http://www.ckc.ca/en/Default.aspx?tabid=99&BreedCode=GSD


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

Hey WhiteGermanShepherd, I don't have a problem with the AKC standard actually....after 40 years I think I can realize fearless and self-confident when I see it. I don't have to have somebody "interpret" those traits. So when I see tail tucked, nervousness in new environments, worried look, sniffing the ground out of avoidance,etc...then it doesn't meet standard and should no more be bred than the dysplastic dog. Then really isn't hard at all....give me a dog with the AKC traits and I can train it into an utility dog.


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

General appearance 
The German Shepherd Dog is a medium-size, slightly stretched, strong, and well muscled, with the "bone" dry and firm in the over-all construction. Important measurements and proportions The withers height for males is 60 to 65 cm; that of bitches is 55 to 60 cm.* The length of torso exceeds the measure of the withers height by about 10 - 17 %. The German Shepherd Dog must be, in its essential image, well-balanced, firm in nerves, self-confident, absolutely calm and impartial, and (except in tempting situations) amiable. *He must possess courage, willingness to fight, and hardness, in order to be suitable as companion, watchdog, protector, service dog, and guardian. *

From The SV Standard.



What do you think Samba.


----------



## Whiteshepherds (Aug 21, 2010)

cliffson1 said:


> Hey WhiteGermanShepherd, I don't have a problem with the AKC standard actually.......give me a dog with the AKC traits and I can train it into an utility dog.


I only posted the standard because Samba asked what it said, that's it. 
I would hope you could train an AKC dog to get it's UD but really, you need to set your sights a little higher...go for the UDX. 

You've got my vote Cliff. It's clear that you'll support the standard only as long as it doesn't change the essence of what you believe the GSD should be. I think that's how it should be. I actually agree with most of what you write, it all seems pretty logical. 

I do have Max's book btw. I show it to my dogs when someone waves the standard in their face and explain to them that GSD's just like them were in the breed long before those saddlebacks and bi-colored dogs showed up. And then I let them chase the cats so they don't forget how to be herders.


----------



## NancyJ (Jun 15, 2003)

Samba said:


> I sort of wish I was a hunter these days. I've been learning about the curs and fiests and other dogs bred for utility. They are generally very healthy with super working traits. Unfortunately, there is not a German Shepherd Dog type among them. But, they do impress with vitality, genetic vigor, drive, trainability. I commend those who breed and maintain the highly functional dog wherever it is.
> 
> It is that thing in dog breeding preserved from the agrarian lifestyle we have lost in many places. In the US, it is still found in pockets of them thar hills where life is behind the times and close to the earth. No fancy dogs there.


Interesting comments; I think many dogs who are in this category are nowhere near purebred. Terriermen and hunters are known for mixing outside of a closed stud book. And that is not a negative comment but rather - it is true that they do this. It is also true that they are more likely to cull "defects"


----------



## PaddyD (Jul 22, 2010)

selzer said:


> Whiteshepherds makes a good point though. The breed originally had whites in it. They chose to stop registering the white ones at some point in Germany, and I heard two reasons, one they felt that white was somehow connected to deafness or some other ailment which I guess has been disproved, and the other was that the white dogs were too easy to spot and therefore not desired as military dogs. I am not sure either was the reason.
> 
> Max, wasn't Max the one that said a good dog cannot be a bad color?
> 
> PaddyD, there are a LOT of GSD wannabes by your definition. I wonder if your dog is a GSD or a wannabe.


My dog is a wannabe. She is not willing to fight nor hard enough.
It is a pretty comprehensive standard. I wonder what percent of GSDs are in it.


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

jocoyn said:


> Interesting comments; I think many dogs who are in this category are nowhere near purebred. Terriermen and hunters are known for mixing outside of a closed stud book. And that is not a negative comment but rather - it is true that they do this. It is also true that they are more likely to cull "defects"


Many have traceable pedigrees. There are those who do crosses as function is the goal. I imagine culling does occur among some.

Where did I read about the puppy test on game?..first across the line and last across culled.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

Let me explain about the AKC standard comment....I don't have a problem with it, it is a positive thing....If a German Shepherd is fearless, self confident (especially in new environments), Direct, showing Confidence when meeting new overtures, poised and eager and alert to meet challenges....then that dog has great nerves and is fit to serve as a SAR dog, Probably Herding dog, Seeing-eye dog, narcotic/bomb dog, and many other utitlity things. If people kept THAT part of the standard we would be good!!! But it the next part that is at issue. Notice how the American standard describes specific actions(in demonstrating traits) that are FAR, FAR, too often seen in the Show ring in the States, and will uneqivocally prevent the dog from being an utility dog. These behavoirs seen far too often are what have labeled the dog in this country, not people speaking out on this. Shoot, the people who wrote the standard knew this, that's why they worded things that way so breeders wouldn't breed these type dog with these traits and try to pawn them off as "their" interpretation. Still, some breeders have found a way around the standard and use other excuses, (dog was abused, my kid shouted out it when it was 8 wweks), (car came to close as puppy now he's scared of cars) and on and on and on and on. The creativity of the excuses to justify the prescence of this non standard temperament is incredible. Of course, it doesn't help that many people are breeding dogs for conformation and pet purposes only, so where the person who has trained their dog to say a CDX,UD level can quickly learn the genetic traits that are being continued to be bred and go away from them,(if they care for the breed more than their likes); by not seeing how these negative traits described in the standard prevent dogs from being able to be utility dogs, they are free to continue to breed such animals and give the unsuspecting public creative reasons why the puppy is shy and scared when you come see them.
This is what I am against, every one doesn't have to breed for police dogs, but they certainly should be breeding high level utility dogs no matter which standard they use. 
Then people try to paint people like me as bashers, I'm making judgements off the standard they profess to use to justify their dog!!Priceless!!
Bottom line is that outside people who comment on lines neither create or can fix what's wrong with a line....it takes the users of a respective line to spend more time condemning and educating people about hese aspects, than trying to justify them or cry we're being victimized.
Lastly, many of you know I breed for dogs capable of doing police work, YET I still use and only breed dogs that are capable of family, kids, and not hyperactive. With the knowledge I have about dogs/pedigrees, you don't think I couldn't breed for super aggressive, super hype dogs, if I wanted to???? I don't because it is my responsibility as a breeder to breed dogs that meet all of the standard and those traits would make me a hypocrite, just as much as breeding shy unsure dogs would make me a hypocrite.(that's hypocrite to the standards I am supposed to be following as a breeder).
That's how I view temperament in this breed!


----------



## nitemares (Dec 15, 2005)

Cliff, if I ever make a trip to the US I'll be visiting and won't leave without a puppy from you.


----------



## sitstay (Jan 20, 2003)

cliffson1 said:


> That's how I view temperament in this breed!


Excellent post. I learn something almost every time I read one of your posts, Cliffson. And it really hits home when I see something pertinent out in the real world, with real dogs.
Sheilah


----------



## Dainerra (Nov 14, 2003)

Cliff, I would love to learn even 1/8 of the stuff you know about the breed/bloodlines/history.

I want to be just like you when I grow up.


----------



## Jack's Dad (Jun 7, 2011)

Thanks Cliff. Very clear post. 
There will always be some who disagree if for no other reason than they like what they like.
I think your post here and the Iceberg breeders thread should be required reading for potential GSD owners.


----------



## Chicagocanine (Aug 7, 2008)

Actually I think that breeding more strictly to a standard can be detrimental to a breed. It can narrow the gene pool where it is already not that large. I also think that things like popular studs or dogs who win a lot of shows (conformation, Sch, whatever) or are otherwise famous and end up fathering a lot of litters can be detrimental to the breed. 
IMO many of the breeds we have today will soon be in big trouble if they don't start allowing some sort of controlled outcrossing. I know my opinion will probably not be popular with people involved in purebred dog world, but I am looking at it from more of a biology/genetics background.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Chicagocanine said:


> Actually I think that breeding more strictly to a standard can be detrimental to a breed. It can narrow the gene pool where it is already not that large. I also think that things like popular studs or dogs who win a lot of shows (conformation, Sch, whatever) or are otherwise famous and end up fathering a lot of litters can be detrimental to the breed.
> IMO many of the breeds we have today will soon be in big trouble if they don't start allowing some sort of controlled outcrossing. I know my opinion will probably not be popular with people involved in purebred dog world, but I am looking at it from more of a biology/genetics background.


 
You are kidding, right?

But if not and you are totally serious about outcrossing - what breed would you reccomend to improve the GSD breed? How about a Black Lab to improve their pigment?


----------

