# Is This Ethical?



## Melina (Feb 20, 2010)

I'm making this thread to ask a legitimate question as I honestly don't know much about breeding...

I understand things like Liver and Blue are recessive coloring genes, but do they pose a potential health threat to a dog in some way, shape, or manner? I've heard of people with GSD's of this color who have lived a happy, full life, but have also heard that any responsible breeder will not intentionally breed for these colors.

I came across this website while in pursuit of information for another thread:

Specialty Shepherds -German Shepherd Kennels- Southeast Ohio

They have Liver and Blue dogs that they're breeding for litters, is that right? Are these dogs going to end up with a multitude of health problems? I'm sorry if these questions sound ignorant, I'm asking to learn, so bear with me and enlighten me, please!


----------



## sagelfn (Aug 13, 2009)

The only risk I can see of health problems is that a breeder of Blues and Livers or any faulty colors is most likely not doing health checks. 

Reputable breeders do not breed faulty colors because they are against the breed standard. The dog isn't bad, just not breedworthy


----------



## AgileGSD (Jan 17, 2006)

While most dilute colored dogs do live long, normal lives the lack of pigment does affect how the immune system functions. For example, dilute colors are more likely to have vaccine reactions.


----------



## Dainerra (Nov 14, 2003)

there is also the chance that the breeder is severely limiting the gene pool. Since these colors are recessive, the only way to insure the pups are liver/blue is to breed liver/blue parents. This can lead to an increase in health problems, esp as "novelty" breeders don't usually do health testing anyway.


----------



## LaRen616 (Mar 4, 2010)

Well they OFA their dogs and it looks as though she asks potential puppy buyers what drive they are looking for and what kind of personality they are looking for so it sounds like she chooses the right puppy for a family. It looks as though she gets them health tested too. 

They look healthy to me, and very pretty.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

I can't speak for GSD's but the blue gene in dobermans comes with a host of health problems that I don't really understand. I don't believe the livers do though. They are beautiful dogs.

I wouldn't say that breeders of these colors don't do health checks. White is not a color that is accepted as the standard either but people do breed whites and the reputable breeders do health checks.

I will say that the main problem with breeding these colors, along with what Dainerra said regarding the gene pool, is that they are not standard. If a breeder is not breeding to better the breed, then what is the point? Breeding non-standard colors that are not accepted as breed standards is not doing anything to better the breed.


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

The colors are only a "problem" when you impose the Breed Standard. To associate poor health with a coat color is full of flaws. I know of no correlation between coat color and health. To eliminate blues, tans,white, etc. from the German shepherd gene pool is contributing to the genetic bottleneck we have today. These are naturally occurring recessive colors that have been part of the breed since its inception.

The albino gene may be a different story ...


----------



## LaRen616 (Mar 4, 2010)

I truly do not have a problem with people breeding for a different color, unless doing so causes major health concerns. However, I do have a problem with people breeding "oversized" dogs. 

Even though this lady breeds for a color that is not accepted she does want to keep the breed working ability and the breed personality the same. I also like that she gets their hips and elbows OFA'd. She is also looking for the perfect home for each puppy she places and is willing to take the puppy back if a problem arises. She also gives potential puppy buyers a heads up about the breed before getting one.

_"They have been bred for high prey drive and high activity level. If the German Shepherd dogs do not have an outlet for their drive, they will get themselves into trouble (chasing cars, bikes, barking, chewing, aggression, digging and other unwanted behavior). A German Shepherd needs obedience training, proper socialization with both people and other animals, daily exercise and play and they must be part of your family. These are working dogs that need a job, even if they are to be a family dog. Boredom and loneliness can lead to behavior problems. The German Shepherd's personality and activity levels vary from dog to dog. Breeding, training, socializing and the care they receive are a large part of what determines each dog's personality."_


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

I can't see a single thing about this breeder, other than the colors aren't standard, that would say she is a bad breeder. She follows the same standard for buyers that we always scream breeders should have. It doesn't look like she shows/trials but it appears her contract give her first right of refusal and she checks the potential buyers out as best she can.


----------



## Lilie (Feb 3, 2010)

I find it interesting that nobody mentioned that she is breeding LH GSDs as well. From what I understand, that is not in the breed standard either.


----------



## Melina (Feb 20, 2010)

Thanks for all the information guys. I think the dogs are gorgeous, especially the Red Sable with the Black Mask, I just didn't know if this breeder was perpetuating some sort of health defect I was unaware of by doing this. As I said, I know that these are recessive genes responsible for color and have heard of many dogs with these genes living a healthy life, but didn't know to what extent. I was reading about the health checks that this breeder does do, and that's great, I had just heard the phrase so many times, "no responsible breeder will breed for those colors", and didn't know if it was due to health reasons or simply the fact that they're undesirable colors for the show ring.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Melina said:


> "no responsible breeder will breed for those colors", and didn't know if it was due to health reasons or simply the fact that they're undesirable colors for the show ring.


I think people say that because these colors are pretty rare when they show up randomly, so a breeder that advertises them and consistently produces them is breeding FOR them, at the expense of what else? Health? Temperament? Proper structure? Those are what breeders should be selecting for. That's not to say a breeder is bad if a blue or liver or long coat shows up in a litter, but it's not reputable to simply breed FOR a color like that when health and temperament are far more important.


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

Whether it's ethical or not really depends on how one views the standard. 

Some would consider it unethical to breed anything that is considered a fault under the standard. 

Others take more of a "screw the standard" approach and feel free to ignore it if it suits their purposes. 

Others fall in the middle and wouldn't seek out such dogs to breed, but if they came upon a dog who offered exactly what they wanted in other more important areas might be willing to make an exception and ignore something like color (or coat type, or size or whatever else) in order to get the traits they wanted that were offered by that dog (and presumably they couldn't obtain elsewhere in a to-the-standard package).

Unlike dilute colors in other breeds, there are no direct correlations between blue and liver dilute (or solid white masking) and health problems in the GSD. So that is not so much a concern.

Really the biggest concern with people intentionally breeding FOR such colors (or long coats or huge size or any other single trait) is that it can severely limit the gene pool they use and skew breeding decisions away from more important things like health and temperament and overall strucuture because they become overwhelmingly focused on that one particular aspect and restrict themselves to the small gene pool that offers it. 

So while it is certainly incorrect to say livers or blues have more health or temperament problems due to their color (in other words there is no genetic correlation), it may in many cases turn out that way due to the breeder's narrow focus on that color, leaving those more important things to fall by the wayside.


----------



## Fast (Oct 13, 2004)

Melina said:


> Thanks for all the information guys. I think the dogs are gorgeous, especially the Red Sable with the Black Mask,



Maybe this is a breed and breeder you should look into.

Sprite Working Belgian Tervuren


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

There are so many traits important to the German Shepherd. I get a German Shepherd because of these character traits. Utmost care should be taken by the breeder to maintain German Shepherd qualities and it isn't easy. 

If someone is breeding for color, I would be dubious about their ability to have enough dogs to choose from in breeding pairs. This might compromise taking care for breeding the important traits. I would not breed for color or purchase from someone who does it to the exclusion of other things. How easy is it to do balanced breeding when restricted to the more rare colors?

As mentioned, restricting the gene pool by prohibiting some colors and coat characteristics can cause the loss of some diversity. Breeding only for color can do the same.

Ethics... that is all in a person's definition.


----------



## Melly (Mar 21, 2010)

Well I know in Dachs and Dobes blues and fawns can have coat issues, some not all. The liver (chocolate) you do not normally see any health or coat problems in. The chocolate and Dilute dachshunds I had were healthy and never had any problems with vaccines. Same with my Liver GSD. Im sure there are some that will just like any dogs. Anyway I would be more worried about the limited gene pool as someone else stated. I would really check pedigrees and see what they are doing. I also find it odd that they refuse to sell to breeders which to me means they know their dogs are not of breeding quality but its ok for them to do it, it irritates me when people have the Im better than you so I can do it and you cant thing going on lol. I do like that she does have them OFA and seems to care about where they end up.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

As I read it, the standard says that white dogs and dogs with noses that are not predominantly black are disqualified. 

Blues and livers have grey or brown noses. So in my opinion they are breeding dogs to gain market share, that section of the market that wants rare or unique color schemes. So I find it unethical.

Think about it. Where are they getting their dogs. Show litters might have a blue or liver. They should be selling these dogs on a limited registration. If not, then they are not reputable show breeders. 

Ok, so it is just color. But the dogs CANNOT be show in conformation because of their disqualification. So there is no way to have an impartial judge check them, so they are basically creating their own standard, using dogs from less than good breeders, and breeding primarily for aesthetic qualities, specifically color which should be our last consideration as it does not affect how the dog moves, or works or what have you.

The only deviation to this for me is white shepherds. I don't go for them myself, but if someone really likes the white shepherd for whatever reason, and is getting one from a breeder who shows and breeds under UKC, then I think it is ok.

As for coats. Well, that is a fault in the AKC standard but not a disqualifying fault. I have heard from several people that many coats have the best overall structure. That someone breeds coats for me would be up to the individual breeder.


----------



## sagelfn (Aug 13, 2009)

Selzer I agree. 

Most breeders I see that at least do penn hip/OFA on their dogs of faulty colors (liver/blue) will also say they breed dogs with excellent temperments. Yet they have no listed titles on their dogs to prove temperment. I don't consider breeding Blues or Livers the same as breeding the White GSD. There are breeders out there working and showing their whites. The white was once allowed to right? Obviously show is not allowed for a blue or liver but they could at least work them in some venue.

The goal of this persons breeding program sounds good, but what are they doing to prove their dogs meet this goal?


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

WGSD show a LOT in UKC. In fact some shows I attend there are MORE WGSD than "regular" GSDs, so they can be shown and judged, and often it is quite competitive. I saw a WGSD go Best In Show at the UKC Premier a few years ago.

I'm not defending them since I don't care for them myself, but at least they can be shown and are not DQ'd.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

The UKC Premier last year was held in my hometown and the Whites dominated as far as breed representation like Lies said. But many were over the standard for height, and they didn't get dinged for it either. I was there to watch the sportwork and many people with whites wandered down there in the back 40 to see what the SDA was about...too bad they didn't get more involved in that venue. Lurecoursing was waay back there too, and too bad, if people saw how much fun it is, I'm sure it would gain popularity!


----------



## Jessiewessie99 (Mar 6, 2009)

Beautiful dogs, but if I were looking for a breeder, I would not go to this person.


----------



## AgileGSD (Jan 17, 2006)

Doc said:


> The colors are only a "problem" when you impose the Breed Standard. To associate poor health with a coat color is full of flaws. I know of no correlation between coat color and health.



"Twenty years ago, this author began studying families of dogs with an apparent increased frequency of immune mediated hematological disease (i. e., AIHA, ITP, or both). 1,2 
Among the more commonly recognized predisposed breeds were the Akita, American cocker spaniel, German shepherd dog, golden retriever, Irish setter, Great Dane, Kerry blue terrier, and all dachshund and poodle varieties; but predisposition was found especially in the standard poodle, longhaired dachshund, Old English sheepdog, Scottish terrier, Shetland sheepdog, shih tzu, vizsla, and Weimaraner, as well as breeds of white or predominantly white coat color or with coat color dilution (e. g., blue and fawn Doberman pinschers, the merle collie, Australian shepherd, Shetland sheepdog, and harlequin Great Dane)." Dogs Predisposed to Vaccine Reactions


----------



## sagelfn (Aug 13, 2009)

AgileGSD said:


> "Twenty years ago, this author began studying families of dogs with an apparent increased frequency of immune mediated hematological disease (i. e., AIHA, ITP, or both). 1,2
> Among the more commonly recognized predisposed breeds were the Akita, American cocker spaniel, German shepherd dog, golden retriever, Irish setter, Great Dane, Kerry blue terrier, and all dachshund and poodle varieties; but predisposition was found especially in the standard poodle, longhaired dachshund, Old English sheepdog, Scottish terrier, Shetland sheepdog, shih tzu, vizsla, and Weimaraner, as well as breeds of white or predominantly white coat color or with coat color dilution (e. g., blue and fawn Doberman pinschers, the merle collie, Australian shepherd, Shetland sheepdog, and harlequin Great Dane)." Dogs Predisposed to Vaccine Reactions


Doc only said that because he breeds some faulty colors


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

onyx'girl said:


> The UKC Premier last year was held in my hometown and the Whites dominated as far as breed representation like Lies said. But many were over the standard for height, and they didn't get dinged for it either. I was there to watch the sportwork and many people with whites wandered down there in the back 40 to see what the SDA was about...too bad they didn't get more involved in that venue. Lurecoursing was waay back there too, and too bad, if people saw how much fun it is, I'm sure it would gain popularity!


The dogs in the AKC ring are generally oversized too and don't get dinged for it either. 

I talked to a guy who was a professional handler for decades. He has one of my pups. He told me that he would take a properly sized Irish Setter in the ring, and people would look at him funny because it would be so much smaller than their dogs. 

The standard is there. I wish we would follow it.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

As far as I know the merle collie, and the white collie, are not predisposed to any health problems. At one time it was said that the white collie was but that is not true. All collie's are at risk for Collie Eye but I believe that is hereditary.


----------



## chocolat (May 23, 2010)

selzer said:


> Ok, so it is just color. But the dogs CANNOT be show in conformation because of their disqualification. So there is no way to have an impartial judge check them, so they are basically creating their own standard, using dogs from less than good breeders, and breeding primarily for aesthetic qualities, specifically color which should be our last consideration as it does not affect how the dog moves, or works or what have you.
> 
> The only deviation to this for me is white shepherds. I don't go for them myself, but if someone really likes the white shepherd for whatever reason, and is getting one from a breeder who shows and breeds under UKC, then I think it is ok.
> .


 
Bit of faulty logic here,(since I dont know the history of the breed well enough) were whites always showable or did people start out having to fight their way up and into a club and into a standard and show ring?

I thought whites had to form their own club etc to gain recognition and shwing etc..

that is no different than developing a color like this person blue/choc etc . you start out with what you can and you keep breeding to improve. She can breed other colors in and then breed back (line breed) to start gaining more variety of genetic background that has the recessive gene.
She is watching the health end and hopefully has some eye towards structure and temperament. If enough people likes the colors she breeds then someday maybe they will have a club and be able to show etc


----------



## arycrest (Feb 28, 2006)

chocolat said:


> Bit of faulty logic here,(since I dont know the history of the breed well enough) were whites always showable or did people start out having to fight their way up and into a club and into a standard and show ring?
> 
> I thought whites had to form their own club etc to gain recognition and shwing etc..
> 
> ...


The white coated GSD was allowed to show in AKC sanctioned conformation shows until the GSDCA put the DQ in their standard in the early 60's (the CKC DQ was much later, sometime in the 90's). It was after the AKC DQ that the WGSD breeders formed a club and started holding their own coformation shows.

I checked the UKC breed standard and the blues and livers are DQ'ed in a round-about way. Just like the AKC standard, the UKC breed standard calls blue and liver a serious fault BUT it DQ's a "nose not predominantly black". 

Maybe there are some rare breed clubs where the blues and livers are allowed to be shown without the serious color fault or nose color DQ?


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

> Doc only said that because he breeds some faulty colors


That's a strong statement you've made. EXACTLY *how* do you know this? Or are you assuming, ie just making it up, to take a slam at Doc? There are excellent breeders who don't select for DQ/faulty colors but also don't avoid them in dogs with solid structure, great temperament, health & longevity.

Frankly, the powers that be did the breed no favors when they imposed arbitrary restrictions on what was historically a premier working & companion breed. Such restrictions served the fancies of sport & show factions, but not the dogs themselves.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

Its the same as eye color. I don't know how many times I have heard a breeder say they didn't like a dog "because" he had light eyes. Eye color is cosmetic and breeders that place that great an emphasis on eye color are cosmetic too, IMO. The great breeder Alfred Hahn of Busecker Schloss kennel, said he always found a higher working aptitude in the dogs with lighter eyes generally. HMMMM????Higher working aptitude in a working breed, as seen by one of the most successful breeders of alltime. The dark eye definitely "looks" better, but conscientous breeders must have other traits as higher priority than "prettiness", JMO.


----------



## AgileGSD (Jan 17, 2006)

cliffson1 said:


> Its the same as eye color. I don't know how many times I have heard a breeder say they didn't like a dog "because" he had light eyes. Eye color is cosmetic and breeders that place that great an emphasis on eye color are cosmetic too, IMO. The great breeder Alfred Hahn of Busecker Schloss kennel, said he always found a higher working aptitude in the dogs with lighter eyes generally. HMMMM????Higher working aptitude in a working breed, as seen by one of the most successful breeders of alltime. The dark eye definitely "looks" better, but conscientous breeders must have other traits as higher priority than "prettiness", JMO.


 Could just be the dogs with higher working apitude tended to be coming from lines that tended to produce light eyes. 

Eye color is cosmetic and I don't think it should determine if a dog is breeding quality or not. Lack of pigment is not simply cosmetic though. That isn't to say that no one should ever breed dogs with improper pigment but IMO it is a more serious fault than light eyes.


----------



## Castlemaid (Jun 29, 2006)

RubyTuesday said:


> That's a strong statement you've made. EXACTLY *how* do you know this? Or are you assuming, ie just making it up, to take a slam at Doc?


No, not made up. Some of us do know about his kennel, and his website, and his studs. He has a Blue Stud that carries the white masking gene, but to the Stud's credit, he produces fabulous pups!


----------



## Castlemaid (Jun 29, 2006)

RubyTuesday said:


> There are excellent breeders who don't select for DQ/faulty colors but also don't avoid them in dogs with solid structure, great temperament, health & longevity.


My own definition of "an excellent" breeder is one is somewhat different. 
The Standard DEFINES the look and the character of the GSD. I would say that a breeder that purposely breeds outside the standard to meet general public demand is not, in my opinion, an "excellent" breeder.


----------



## Jessiewessie99 (Mar 6, 2009)

I never knew Doc was a breeder, and never saw his/her website. So I can't say anything about the breeding practices.

To me an excellent breeder health tests their dogs, titles them, takes care of them, has a set goal for their breeding practices(a real good) and breeds good quality dogs.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

AgileGSD,
I agree with you all the way.....all breedings "should" have compensations in mind to strengthen or improve certain areas. That's why it is so important to have breeding stock that is incorruptible in character. This way if I have a female that is light in pigment, I can look to strengthen that pigment in her pups and my choices are much greater because if the dog I like is not as strong in character as I like the female will compensate from going backwards in temperament. If this same female is light in pigment and somewhat weak in temperament, if I bred her,(and trust me I wouldn't), I would have to address the temperament first and then still try to improve the pigment. This greatly decreases the pool of dogs I can use, all other things being equal.


----------



## holland (Jan 11, 2009)

Gee I'd love to see the Blue stud with the white masking genes that produce the excellent pups...do they come out kinda like a grey color...or he is blue like a little sad...just curious


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

Let us please lay off Doc and his breeding ideology. 

Thank you,

Admin

*****


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

Doc has a lot of knowledge of the breed and history of the breed. I value his input a lot. For some, they would not recognize this, but as one poster said his results are good dogs....nuff said!


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

sagelfn said:


> Doc only said that because he breeds some faulty colors


I do not breed for fauilty colors, I have never produced a blue or a liver. I do have whites at times in a litter. Before you make false statements, get your facts straight.


----------



## Jessiewessie99 (Mar 6, 2009)

So white can pop up in any litter? Even if you aren't breeding for it?


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

Castlemaid said:


> No, not made up. Some of us do know about his kennel, and his website, and his studs. He has a Blue Stud that carries the white masking gene, but to the Stud's credit, he produces fabulous pups!


And since you know so much about my dogs and kennel, I guess you also know that my "blue and tan" stud line goes back to the only UKC Champion that was blue. So instead of breeding for a particular color, I breed for health, temperament, and structure; and I look for those traits in German shepherds of all colors - something many breeders don't consider as priority. A properly structure German shepherd can be something other than black and tan.

I've tried to stay out of most of the posts here lately. I will refrain from posting a direct response to the person that stated I breed for off colors. Obviously they know what they are talking about.

I guess it is amazing to some in here that I can actually produce good-looking dogs.


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

Jessiewessie99 said:


> So white can pop up in any litter? Even if you aren't breeding for it?


It has something to do with genetics ...


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

holland said:


> Gee I'd love to see the Blue stud with the white masking genes that produce the excellent pups...do they come out kinda like a grey color...or he is blue like a little sad...just curious


I have never produced a blue from him. He can throw solid blacks, white, black and tan bi color, and black and tan saddles depending who he is bred with.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Just curious Doc...

Do you breed your blue and tan to stack the deck that he doesn't throw a blue that is considered a fault? I'm not a breeder, never want to be. I don't find that unethical to use a 'fault' color in your breeding stock if you aren't breeding for color, you breed to ensure you don't have that color and your dogs are all healthy and sound. 

Do other breeders?

If so, then is it unethical to breed a dog that could carry a gene for hip dysplasia and DM?

The original post was about breeder who bred specifically for a color that is considered a fault. Do you find that unethical?


----------



## Jessiewessie99 (Mar 6, 2009)

Doc said:


> It has something to do with genetics ...


A bit better explanation would be nice.


----------



## sagelfn (Aug 13, 2009)

Doc said:


> I do not breed for fauilty colors, I have never produced a blue or a liver. I do have whites at times in a litter. Before you make false statements, get your facts straight.


Doc, 

I didn't mean to offend you. I said that you breed some faulty colored dogs not that you breed for them. You know more about the breed and conformation than me and a good chunk of the members here. I respect your knowledge but we are going to disagree on the importance of the standard.


----------



## NarysDad (Apr 29, 2010)

I think that most of us breeders including Doc, Cliff, Chris breed for the total dog and not for color. So if Doc has such a dog than there are reasons that most here don't know or understand why he breeds this male. I think Doc knows what this male has produced and if there was something that didn't sit right he would have him, If this male produces a white once in a while there sure are worse things that can be produced


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

sagelfn said:


> Doc,
> 
> I didn't mean to offend you. I said that you breed some faulty colored dogs not that you breed for them. You know more about the breed and conformation than me and a good chunk of the members here. I respect your knowledge but we are going to disagree on the importance of the standard.


The only "faulty colored" dog I produce is white and it is only faulty in certain organizations - they are welcomed in others. 

The Standard - look where it has taken us to today. My concerns are well known in this and other forums. The Standard is a blueprint - my issues are the various interpretations by judges and those who breed solely to win shows. 

Jax, you asked some great questions. I will post the Readers Digest version when my brain engages. :crazy:


----------



## arycrest (Feb 28, 2006)

Jessiewessie99 said:


> A bit better explanation would be nice.


I'm not Doc, but I think I can answer your question. In order for a WGSD puppy to be produced, both the sire and dam must carry the white masking gene.


----------



## NarysDad (Apr 29, 2010)

arycrest said:


> I'm not Doc, but I think I can answer your question. In order for a WGSD puppy to be produced, both the sire and dam must carry the white masking gene.


This is not always true, Maybe when it comes to genetic issues. All it takes is a male or female to have this in their lines to be able to produce it once in a while, now if you have both Sire and Dam that have this then it will happen more


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

It is always true. For a white pup to be produced both parents must carry the white masking gene. White masking is a simple recessive, like blue eyes in people. Thus it can be carried but not expressed. If a dog carries two copies, the dog will be white. If a dog carries one copy, that dog will not express it (thus will not be white) but it can be passed on to pups. And if the pup inherits a copy from each parent giving the pup 2 copies, the pup will be white.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

So if a blue stud is used, do the puppies (regardless of what color they are) carrying the genetics to produce blue offspring?


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

Yes. Dilute (blue and liver) are simple recessives as well. If the dog expresses the gene than the dog has 2 copies of the gene, which means every offspring will inherit 1 copy from the blue dog. If that dog is never bred to mates who also carry blue, no offspring will be blue, but all will carry a copy of the gene and thus could produce blues themselves if they were mated to a dog who also carried blue.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

How far down the line do the genes carry? If the puppies are bred to sables, they would not produce Dilute. But do their puppies still carry the Dilute gene? Or is it then bred out of them at that generation?


----------



## NarysDad (Apr 29, 2010)

Sorry I thought that it could always show up even when one of the parents carry it, I have heard of someone producing a blue pup and know that it isn't in the one parents lines so this is why I stated this


----------



## Overhill (Jul 5, 2010)

*Trying to understand*

I am the owner of a beautiful Liver male. I think it is unfair that he will never be allow to do a conformation,(but I accept that those are the rules) just because his nose is the wrong color. I am also not sure whether he should be bred. 4 generations ago, his lines where clean German and imports. Conformation Champion etc...
Is it worth me considering, as if I do I want to take him back to pure German stock, only breed with German blood lines.

Please advise. Also please don't bite my head off for considering this, as I'm only trying to educate myself. I would also like to mention that I would never breed him if he has any medical negatives. I'd like to think I'm a responsible owner.


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

Jax08 said:


> How far down the line do the genes carry?


Potentially forever. That is the way recessives work. They can be passed down from generation to generation ad infinum. One would never know they existed in a line UNLESS two dogs carrying the same recessive happened to be bred together, and those genes happened to combine in a pup to produce a pup who expressed the gene. The last dog in the family tree to *express* the gene may have been 1 generation, 10 generations, 100 generations before. But every dog in decent in between carried it, just didn't express it.



Jax08 said:


> If the puppies are bred to sables, they would not produce Dilute. But do their puppies still carry the Dilute gene? Or is it then bred out of them at that generation?


How would they not produce a dilute bred to sables? There are sable dilutes. A liver sable was recently posted on the board.

Color (sable, black/tan, bi-color, black) is inherited separately from dilution. The genes that cause dilution of black pigment are different alleles located on different parts of the genetic code.

Every blue or liver (or white for that matter) inherits 2 regular color genes from it's parents. So it is sable, or black/tan, or bi, or black depending on what those color genes are.

Whether it is a dilute sable, black/tan, bi, or black is determined by whether it inherits the recessive genes for diluting black pigment to blue or liver.


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

NarysDad said:


> Sorry I thought that it could always show up even when one of the parents carry it, I have heard of someone producing a blue pup and know that it isn't in the one parents lines so this is why I stated this


With recessives both parents MUST carry it for it to show up in a pup. So it is in the parent's lines, it's just been hidden as can happen with recessives. Either those ancestors were never bred to a mate who also carried it, or they were but the two recessives never combined to produce it. But if it crops up now it certainly is in the lines. The gene didn't just pop up out of nowhere, it's been there all along.


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

All I know is that Horand's mom was white ... and the blue and liver recessive came from somewhere so those colors are part of the genetic make of the breed. 

Is culling them out because they are the wrong color according to the standard an acceptable practice? What if their health, temperament, and structure is outstanding? It's a challenge and a breeder has to wrestle with the options.


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

Since most German shepherds trace back to Horand - what if Horand carried the blue and liver and white from his dam? Does that change the question?


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Chris Wild said:


> How would they not produce a dilute bred to sables? There are sable dilutes. A liver sable was recently posted on the board.


I don't know. That's why I asked. I'm not a breeder and never want to be but I would like to understand the genetics behind breeding. I guess my question wasn't very well phrased. What I meant was "If a blue is bred to a sable that does NOT have the dilute gene...."

It just seems to me, in my uneducated opinion, that if other faults (such as a gene for HD) are bred because the overall health, structure, temperment, etc are what the breeder wants and what the breed standards call for then breeding a dilute color while stacking the deck to not produce that color would not be unethical.

If the brindle gene was completely bred out, why can't the dilute gene be bred out? Isn't the brindle gene recessive also?

I remember a thread about breeding a dog with a gene for HD and the consensus seemed to be that if all those dogs were left out of breeding programs simply because the dog carries the gene that it would be detrimental to the breed.

So is breeding a dog with a dilute gene any different? And if so, why?


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

Talking about something that is polygenic and multifactorial, like HD, and something that is a simple recessive like dilutes is apples and oranges. Certainly HD is a much bigger deal than a dilute color. However the genetics involved make it a completely different situation.

Brindle was dominant. Dominant even to sable. It is easy to eliminate dominant genes from a gene pool because with dominant genes every dog who carries even one copy of that gene will express that gene. So it's a no brainer to identify dogs who carry the gene. Want to eliminate sable? Don't breed any dogs who are sable and you will completely eliminate the genetics for sable.

With recessives dogs can carry it and not express it. You can't look at a dog, or even study its pedigree, and know for certain if a dog carries that gene or not. The only way to identify it would be through DNA testing, if a test exists even exists for that trait. Since carriers cannot be identified, they cannot be eliminated for breeding, and the gene gets passed on.


----------



## NarysDad (Apr 29, 2010)

Chris Wild said:


> The only way to identify it would be through DNA testing, if a test exists even exists for that trait. Since carriers cannot be identified, they cannot be eliminated for breeding, and the gene gets passed on.


Until there are tests for this there will be a lot of trial and error, due to everyone being so tight lipped about the faults that come from their breedings, afraid of the bad news that would travel. Until breeders start to share issues this breed will continue to go the direction it is.


----------



## Jessiewessie99 (Mar 6, 2009)

So basically, if a dog has the white masking gene or the blue gene in them they will more than likely produce offspring that are white or blue? 

Is this the same for Panda Shepherds?


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

Jessiewessie99 said:


> So basically, if a dog has the white masking gene or the blue gene in them they will more than likely produce offspring that are white or blue?
> 
> Is this the same for Panda Shepherds?


This is from Chris ...
"With recessives both parents MUST carry it for it to show up in a pup".

Comprende usted?


----------



## Castlemaid (Jun 29, 2006)

Jessiewessie99 said:


> So basically, if a dog has the white masking gene or the blue gene in them they will more than likely produce offspring that are white or blue?
> 
> Is this the same for Panda Shepherds?


No, not "more than likely". They can only produce whites or blues (or livers) IF the mate also carries the white or blue (or liver) AND the genes happen to match up (i.e. both the white, or blue gene from EACH parent happens to match up in the offspring). 

The chance of one recessive gene that is hidden and not expressed in one parent, matching up with the corresponding recessive gene that is not expressed in the other parent, is about 25%. 

But if the mate does not carry either the blue (or liver) or white gene, than the chance of the carrier producing dilute or white pups is zero. 

Panda genetics are a bit different I think - not sure how that works.


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

Jax08 said:


> Just curious Doc...
> 
> Do you breed your blue and tan to stack the deck that he doesn't throw a blue that is considered a fault? I'm not a breeder, never want to be. I don't find that unethical to use a 'fault' color in your breeding stock if you aren't breeding for color, you breed to ensure you don't have that color and your dogs are all healthy and sound.
> 
> ...


I breed to produce German shepherd dogs that are healthy, acceptable temperament, and structurally sound. I do not breed for a particular color - what I get is what I get. I have a pretty good idea of to expect in my litters based on genetics, pedigrees, bloodlines and experience.

I can not answer what other breeders do.

HD is an elusive disorder to chase. INO all dogs have the ability to produce poor hips as is seen when two "Excellent" German shepherds are bred and offspring exhibit poor hips. It isn't a good comparison to color genetics. It is assumed that HD is polygentic, but I wonder if it isn't a pups ability to assimilate vital nutrients and minerals that triggers HD - but that is another issue/debate.

Dm is another - I think some gains have been made in identifying carriers of DM but I do not think the verdict is in on transmittle to pups or accuracy of the test - I may be wrong.

I really don't know what constitute an unethical breeding practice other than crossing one breed with another and calling it "pure bred" But I think that is seen in the foundation of this breed and many other breeds. Is something unethical because it doesn't conform to the Standard? If so, then almost every breeder is unethical because no one has ever produced "the perfect" German shepherd - they have all fallen short of the Standard. How do you define unethical when it comes to breeding German shepherds?

I've produced some litters that are within the standard, I've had litters from the same cross where some were larger than the standard. Most are black and tan but I have had solid blacks and solid whites from the same cross. Chris has the number (numbers are hard to remember when you get older) about the the possible genetic combinations when two dags breed. I can't predict exactly what will result, but I can have a pretty good idea.

What I find as an unethical practice is when a breeder crosses two dogs without first knowing the history, genetics, and bloodlines used in a cross.


----------



## sagelfn (Aug 13, 2009)

questions about the brindle GSD

What was in the mix to cause that coloring? Could it be recreated? Is there a reason it was bred out?


----------



## Jessiewessie99 (Mar 6, 2009)

sagelfn said:


> questions about the brindle GSD
> 
> What was in the mix to cause that coloring? Could it be recreated? Is there a reason it was bred out?


I was another dog forum and someone had a Brindle GSD, well it looked like it. It could have been photosopped. It had the GSD markings and looked like a GSD, but with the brindle coloring. I will see if I can find that thread and see what others think.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

It was probably a Dutchie that you saw on another forum...
an article on the Brindle:
http://blogs.dogtime.com/aringsburg.../brindle-german-shepherd-dog-the-lost-pattern


----------



## Jessiewessie99 (Mar 6, 2009)

onyx'girl said:


> It was probably a Dutchie that you saw on another forum...
> an article on the Brindle:
> Brindle German Shepherd Dog - The Lost Pattern - Aringsburg's German Shepherd Dogs | Dog Time - Dog Blog Network


It was a different forum. I can't find it anymore. Te dog had a saddle marking but brindle coloring. It was weird, must of have been a photo shopped picture.


----------



## Andaka (Jun 29, 2003)

http://www.germanshepherds.com/forum/breeding-general/113782-brindle-gsd.html#post1539083

Here is the thread from this forum on Brindle GSD's.


----------



## Melina (Feb 20, 2010)

Doc said:


> Is something unethical because it doesn't conform to the Standard?


Sorry, I just wanted to clarify...


I was under the impression that dilute colors such as Liver and Blues had certain health problems. As I said, I had heard of them living full lives, but somewhere I got it into my head that they had some issues, not sure where. What I meant by "Ethical" in the title of this thread was, is it proper to breed a specific color knowing full well it may end up with these health problems? Apparently I was under the wrong impression in regards to Livers and Blues, however. My question in regards to ethics had absolutely nothing to do with fault for show quality or standard. I find Livers, Blues, Pandas, Whites all of those colors, to be absolutely beautiful, and find it quite silly that they're unable to participate in the show ring...


----------



## Jessiewessie99 (Mar 6, 2009)

Melina said:


> Sorry, I just wanted to clarify...
> 
> 
> I was under the impression that dilute colors such as Liver and Blues had certain health problems. As I said, I had heard of them living full lives, but somewhere I got it into my head that they had some issues, not sure where. What I meant by "Ethical" in the title of this thread was, is it proper to breed a specific color knowing full well it may end up with these health problems? Apparently I was under the wrong impression in regards to Livers and Blues, however. My question in regards to ethics had absolutely nothing to do with fault for show quality or standard. *I find Livers, Blues, Pandas, Whites all of those colors, to be absolutely beautiful, and find it quite silly that they're unable to participate in the show ring...*


I agree. I also find them beautiful and its a shame they aren't allowed in the show ring.


----------



## arycrest (Feb 28, 2006)

Melina said:


> ...
> I was under the impression that dilute colors such as Liver and Blues had certain health problems. As I said, I had heard of them living full lives, but somewhere I got it into my head that they had some issues, not sure where. What I meant by "Ethical" in the title of this thread was, is it proper to breed a specific color knowing full well it may end up with these health problems? Apparently I was under the wrong impression in regards to Livers and Blues, however. My question in regards to ethics had absolutely nothing to do with fault for show quality or standard. I find Livers, Blues, Pandas, Whites all of those colors, to be absolutely beautiful, and find it quite silly that they're unable to participate in the show ring...


In early Malcomb Willis GSD genetic history books, he claimed that the liver colored GSD carried a fatal gene. His later books corrected this fallacy stating that the error was based on flawed data.


----------



## sagelfn (Aug 13, 2009)

I like all colors. Just because you can't show them doesn't mean you can't prove them in other ways. That is one thing I consider unethical; Breeding unproven dogs.

ETA
thanks for the links Daphne and Jane


----------



## APBTLove (Feb 23, 2009)

I don't have much to add, but I know the the Black Dilute (or blue) color in bully breeds can come with skin problems... Guess it's the same in shepherds.


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

APBTLove said:


> I don't have much to add, but I know the the Black Dilute (or blue) color in bully breeds can come with skin problems... Guess it's the same in shepherds.


No skin issues with my blue and tan.


----------



## Jessiewessie99 (Mar 6, 2009)

APBTLove said:


> I don't have much to add, but I know the the Black Dilute (or blue) color in bully breeds can come with skin problems... Guess it's the same in shepherds.


"White" or Albino Dobermans, Blue Dobermans and Fawn Dobermans are known to have skin or other health issues. I don't think its the same for every breed.


----------



## Overhill (Jul 5, 2010)

My Liver male is in perfect condition, so my vet tells me anyway. I love him to bits regardless.
The vet and my trainer keep commenting on his coat, saying it is beautiful. I think so too! (Not biased at all)


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

The standard calls for rich coloring. I think to preserve the color and patterns in the breed, not showing dilutes makes sense. I am sure these dogs are beautiful and have just as much personality as their black and red brothers, but to maintain the breed, we are desirous of rich colors, blacks, black and tan or brown or red or whatever you want to call it, sables, bi-colors, and solid colors. There are enough permissible colors.

I would not breed a dog with a disqualifying fault. At the same time, color is the last thing we should be concerned with, so I would be less concerned with someone breeding a blue or liver dog, than someone breeding 120 pound dogs, and dogs with aggression issues.

Again, it really depends on why they are breeding the off color. If they are breeding a pretty blue to make more pretty blues that they will market as a rare color, than this is in my opinion, unethical.


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

selzer said:


> The standard calls for rich coloring. I think to preserve the color and patterns in the breed, not showing dilutes makes sense. I am sure these dogs are beautiful and have just as much personality as their black and red brothers, but to maintain the breed, we are desirous of rich colors, blacks, black and tan or brown or red or whatever you want to call it, sables, bi-colors, and solid colors. There are enough permissible colors.
> 
> I would not breed a dog with a disqualifying fault. At the same time, color is the last thing we should be concerned with, so I would be less concerned with someone breeding a blue or liver dog, than someone breeding 120 pound dogs, and dogs with aggression issues.
> 
> Again, it really depends on why they are breeding the off color. If they are breeding a pretty blue to make more pretty blues that they will market as a rare color, than this is in my opinion, unethical.


What makes breeding blues unethical if they are healthy, well tempered, and structurally correct? It is unethical because ... ???? But it is ethical to breed Champion dogs with know health issues, temperament flaws and roached backs?

I am not trying to knit pick, I just need to understand what makes something unethical. It sounds as if any breeding that involves dogs that are not within the standard is unethical? If so, then I contend all breeders are unethical because there are no "perfect" German shepherds. As my teacher would say "_Physical compensation is the foundation rock upon which all enduring worth is built"._


----------



## Overhill (Jul 5, 2010)

I have noticed that even in the show world there are black and tans, bred from "exceptional" lines, that in my humble opinion have been developed beyond what is acceptable. Their hind quarters are so low that the dogs "look" as if they struggle just to walk? Isn't it just as unethical to breed to that standard, and then show them to the rest of the world as what a shepherd should look like? I definitely prefer the working look to that. Again just my opinion.


----------



## LaRen616 (Mar 4, 2010)

Ok I could be wrong but weren't breeds like the Irish Setter bred for a specific color and then they started breeding red and white ones and named them Red and White Setters and now they are their own seperate breed?

Then there is the English Cocker Spaniel and the American Cocker Spaniel and the only difference between the two of them is about an 1 inch and a half and they are considered different breeds.

What about the Beagle? There is a 13 inch and a 15 inch, recognized as 2 different breeds. 

Maybe some day they will recognize blue, white and liver GSD's as differnet breeds.

All I can say is that I am glad that most breeds come in different colors. If GSD's only came in black/tan then I would have never had a GSD.


----------



## Overhill (Jul 5, 2010)

Variety is the spice of life!!!


----------



## sitstay (Jan 20, 2003)

LaRen616 said:


> Ok I could be wrong but weren't breeds like the Irish Setter bred for a specific color and then they started breeding red and white ones and named them Red and White Setters and now they are their own seperate breed?
> 
> Then there is the English Cocker Spaniel and the American Cocker Spaniel and the only difference between the two of them is about an 1 inch and a half and they are considered different breeds.
> 
> ...


I believe that the Irish Setter's foundation stock were actually red and white? So the Red and White Setter pre-dates the Irish Setter. I think I recently read somewhere that they are trying to preserve the original Red and White Setter now.

The Beagles are separated into variety based on size, and are not considered two separate breeds.

I was always told that Americans are the only ones to call the English Cocker Spaniel the "English" Cocker Spaniel. Everywhere else in the world the breed we call "English" is known simply as a Cocker Spaniel. I think that is because the Cocker standard here has "drifted" to some degree from the standards in other countries, so they call our type the American Cocker Spaniel. And then within the breed known as the American Cocker there are different varieties based strictly on color.

I wonder if some day the AKC will recognize different color varieties in the GSD, and allow the "off" colors to compete in the conformation ring. They have certainly gone that route with other breeds.
Sheilah


----------



## Andaka (Jun 29, 2003)

AKC has stated to the GSDCA that they are not interested in more "varieties". If the white GSD's are to be seperated, it would have to be as a new breed.


----------



## LaRen616 (Mar 4, 2010)

sit said:


> I believe that the Irish Setter's foundation stock were actually red and white? So the Red and White Setter pre-dates the Irish Setter. I think I recently read somewhere that they are trying to preserve the original Red and White Setter now.
> 
> *The Beagles are separated into variety based on size, and are not considered two separate breeds.*
> 
> ...


If they are not considered 2 different breeds then why do they both get to participate in Dog Shows? One of each gets to go into the hound category and is eligable for best in group.


----------



## Melina (Feb 20, 2010)

Doc said:


> What makes breeding blues unethical if they are healthy, well tempered, and structurally correct? It is unethical because ... ???? But it is ethical to breed Champion dogs with know health issues, temperament flaws and roached backs?


That, to me, is unethical. To breed a dog with known health issues who is not going to live the quality of life that it should, is unethical, to me. Again, I was under the impression that dilutes had health problems, that's why I was asking if it was ethical to specifically breed for that color, knowing they would have health issues. If you breed a dog knowing it's going to have a roached back, HD, and a multitude of health problems, even if it's your standard B&T, to me, that's just not right. My information was just incorrect about Livers and Blues, so I'm glad I made this thread, it shed some light on the subject for me...


----------



## NarysDad (Apr 29, 2010)

I guess that when you all breed dogs you can then understand what is ethical and what isn't. Otherwise it is only a opinion. I have seen many things that I would call unethical, but these breeders I am referring to keep on doing it and taking just that chance that it won't happen again.

Everyone forgets that breeding a dog is not a complete science and issues pop up and it is what we do when it happens that will say whether it is unethical or not to repeat the same mistake again and again

But until you all walk in the shoes of a breeder you will never know


----------



## Andaka (Jun 29, 2003)

> If they are not considered 2 different breeds then why do they both get to participate in Dog Shows? One of each gets to go into the hound category and is eligable for best in group.


They are considered different varieties of the same breed -- that means you can breed a 13" beagle to a 15" beagle. They are registered as beagles and just shown in which ever height category they fall into. Same with the different colors of American Cockers and coat types of Collies.


----------



## Xeph (Jun 19, 2005)

> hen there is the English Cocker Spaniel and the American Cocker Spaniel and the only difference between the two of them is about an 1 inch and a half and they are considered different breeds.


There's a LOT more difference between an American Cocker Spaniel and an English Cocker Spaniel than their height!


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Doc said:


> What makes breeding blues unethical if they are healthy, well tempered, and structurally correct? It is unethical because ... ???? But it is ethical to breed Champion dogs with know health issues, temperament flaws and roached backs?
> 
> I am not trying to knit pick, I just need to understand what makes something unethical. It sounds as if any breeding that involves dogs that are not within the standard is unethical? If so, then I contend all breeders are unethical because there are no "perfect" German shepherds. As my teacher would say "_Physical compensation is the foundation rock upon which all enduring worth is built"._




Again, it really depends on why they are breeding the off color. If they are breeding a pretty blue to make more pretty blues that they will market as a rare color, than this is in my opinion, unethical.

Doc, if you do not like my opinion, that is fine, it is my opinion. 

I think that for those people that dislike a particular type of shepherd, whether it be the extreme angles in specialty American lines, or roached backs in the German lines, there will be many people who will say, how can that dog win? He is too big, he is too angled, he has a roach, he is cow hocked, he can't walk properly, he has poor bitework, etc etc. And yet someone was selected to judge those dogs and chose that one as the best one. I think instead of yowling and complaining and putting the top dogs down, you should become a judge and make a difference. Or stick to your own line of dogs that better mirrors what you think the breed ought to be. 

I cannot breed a blue dog because with my club affiliation I agree not to breed a disqualifying fault. It would therefore be unethical for me to do so. 

i do not think blues should be marketed as a rare color. They are a disqualified color by having a nose not predominately black. Breeders who are breeding to produce dogs that are trying to maintain the GSD to whichever standard will ignore dogs that are disqualified by that standard.


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

selzer said:


> Again, it really depends on why they are breeding the off color. If they are breeding a pretty blue to make more pretty blues that they will market as a rare color, than this is in my opinion, unethical.
> 
> Doc, if you do not like my opinion, that is fine, it is my opinion.
> 
> ...


I am not yowling, complaining or putting the top dogs down unless they fall into what I consider unethical. Politics, a lack of respect for the history of this breed, greed, and money has ruined this breed - period. Breeders that are judges have carried their own interpretation of the Standard into the ring and awarded dogs that are not representative of the breed.

I'd place a ribbon on a faulty colored dog in a heartbeat if it conformed closer to the Standard in temperament, structure and had a glowing health record before I would tag some black and tan nerve bag, cow hocked, roached back, butt dragging, flying trot, zipper looking critter. If you're entitled to your opinion, I am certainly entitled to mine.

As a judge, I would probably be dismissed before the show was over and never invited to judge again. Come to think about it, I think that happened in someone's previous life ...


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I think that having judges that are also breeders of the breed they are judging, IS a problem. Judge A checks out his class and sees Judge B in his class with a dog. Judge B's dog is not spectacular. There may be a dog or two better in the class. But Judge A may be showing under judge B in the near future so he puts the dog up. 

But what IS the answer to that? 

Should dogs be judged by a panel of judges -- not sure that would help. 

Aren't current breeder probably the most knowledgeable about the breed, would we want to go to retired breeders to elect judges? 

Should judges be required to use a handler and be inconspicuous at ringside? 

We fall into the system we have because it is the only system in current use. I do not have any good suggestions for changing it. But two wrongs do not make a right. We have very few things that are actually disqualifying faults in the standard. Just because someone else is breeding weak nerved dogs and someone else is breeding white dogs, and someone else is breeding dogs that are producing HD, ED, DM, ME, etc, does not mean we should go out and breed dogs that are 32 inches and 130 pounds. It does not mean we should throw the standard in the toilet, because some people seem to be doing that.


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

selzer said:


> I think that having judges that are also breeders of the breed they are judging, IS a problem. Judge A checks out his class and sees Judge B in his class with a dog. Judge B's dog is not spectacular. There may be a dog or two better in the class. But Judge A may be showing under judge B in the near future so he puts the dog up.
> 
> But what IS the answer to that?
> 
> ...


It tis a problem for sure. And it will only get worse in the coming years. My bloodlines won shows in the 60s. Today, why bother. My dogs do not look like today's winners. And for general information, I do not breed German shepherd dogs that are 32 inches and 130 pounds. They have all been vet weighed. My dogs may be over the Standard but they are a far cry from 32 inches and 130 pounds. A few inches here, 5,10 or more pounds there .....


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I was just making a point. 

I really liked the dogs back then, Covy Tucker Hill's Manhattan -- just beautiful in my opinion. A couple of others, Finnigan, Almost all my GSD books were written in the seventies.


----------



## sagelfn (Aug 13, 2009)

Doc said:


> ...Politics, a *lack of respect for the history of this breed*, greed, and money has ruined this breed - period. ...


Curious as to what you mean by what I bolded. Does that mean not breeding to try and produce what the dog used to be or something else?


----------



## JakodaCD OA (May 14, 2000)

Personally, I'd rather have a butt ugly purple dawg with good health and excellent temperament vs a gorgeous dog with lousy health/weak nerves.

And I do agree, with Doc's quote, "politics, lack of respect for the history of this breed, greed and money has ruined this breed"..

There are still alot of nice dogs out there but in general , i agree with the his statement.


----------



## Jessiewessie99 (Mar 6, 2009)

I have a Black & Tan female GSD that I am proud to own! I agree with selzer on most points.

I plan on showing my future dogs for fun and would like a healthy dog that within the standard.

To me: Anyone who breeds outside the standard, and does not have healthy dogs is unethical. Reputable breeders should be breeding healthy dogs withing the standard. But thats IMO.


----------



## Ashley_M (Feb 19, 2003)

LaRen616 said:


> Ok I could be wrong but weren't breeds like the Irish Setter bred for a specific color and then they started breeding red and white ones and named them Red and White Setters and now they are their own seperate breed?


Nope. They were red and white to begin with. Irish Red & White Setter Association


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

Jessiewessie99 said:


> I have a Black & Tan female GSD that I am proud to own! I agree with selzer on most points.
> 
> I plan on showing my future dogs for fun and would like a healthy dog that within the standard.
> 
> To me: Anyone who breeds outside the standard, and does not have healthy dogs is unethical. Reputable breeders should be breeding healthy dogs withing the standard. But thats IMO.


The Standard consist of more than height, weight, and color. Are you saying that any breeder that doesn't meet the Standard in all areas is an unethical breeder? If so, we are all in trouble. Part of the art and science is to breed try to find the right genetic match that will produce a dog to Standard. And that has never been done.


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

sagelfn said:


> Curious as to what you mean by what I bolded. Does that mean not breeding to try and produce what the dog used to be or something else?


I think many current breeders do not have a grasp of the history of this breed - i.e. the different dogs that were used to produce the German shepherd and all of the outcrosses used in the early development of the breed. Schwabian , Wurttember, and Thurgian lines; all contributed something - even the white recessive gene (and where did those blue and liver colors come from?). German shepherds were suppose to be the ultimate utility dog - able to work all day, protect, mind its master, baby set children, know when something was not right. All of these traits should be inate in all German shepherd dogs. We no longer test for those traits as a true discipline. Most "tests" of today have turned into a sport.

A dog may have a flying trot or outstanding side gait, but can it protect, herd, or work all day? Then get up in the morning and do it all over again. Or a dog may be extremely good at performing in protection and knocking down a helper but can it walk into a show ring and take first place?

OK, I've said enough.


----------



## Jessiewessie99 (Mar 6, 2009)

Doc said:


> The Standard consist of more than height, weight, and color. Are you saying that any breeder that doesn't meet the Standard in all areas is an unethical breeder? If so, we are all in trouble. Part of the art and science is to breed try to find the right genetic match that will produce a dog to Standard. And that has never been done.


I meant to come back and add edit it. I also think ethical breeders are people who breed withing the standard(or try), health test, prove their dogs are breed worthy, title their dogs whether its working or showing or both, interacts with breed clubs, and is involved with the breed

Anyone who just breeds because they have 2 dogs, Have 2 purebreds who are AKC registered and nothing else. Don't health test, follow the standard(or try to) don't title their dogs whether its showing or working, don't prove their dogs are worthy of being bred, breeds for money, breeds for all the wrong reasons, or just don't care are unethical breeders.


----------



## sagelfn (Aug 13, 2009)

Doc said:


> I think many current breeders do not have a grasp of the history of this breed - i.e. the different dogs that were used to produce the German shepherd and all of the outcrosses used in the early development of the breed. Schwabian , Wurttember, and Thurgian lines; all contributed something - even the white recessive gene (and where did those blue and liver colors come from?). German shepherds were suppose to be the ultimate utility dog - able to work all day, protect, mind its master, baby set children, know when something was not right. All of these traits should be inate in all German shepherd dogs. We no longer test for those traits as a true discipline. Most "tests" of today have turned into a sport.
> 
> A dog may have a flying trot or outstanding side gait, but can it protect, herd, or work all day? Then get up in the morning and do it all over again. Or a dog may be extremely good at performing in protection and knocking down a helper but can it walk into a show ring and take first place?
> 
> OK, I've said enough.


I agree. Not slamming all show dogs just the "frog dog" those types of dog should never win. I'm not sure what the differences would be in an all breed show vs a GSD breed show but I wish they would look at the total dog. I guess this goes back to the argument of who should be a judge.

I've heard the arguments that SchH is not the test it used to be, but I don't think that means you should throw it out and not prove your dog. There are other things to title in.


----------



## Zoeys mom (Jan 23, 2010)

I just happen to love the blue's and liver's standard or not. In dobes the blue's almost always have skin conditions, but then again for dobes skin conditions aren't rare. Other than the aesthetics of livers or blues in shepherds if they are healthy, have a good temperment, can work, and otherwise have the inner drive expected of the GSD I don't see selling them as unethical. It's a recessive gene and bound to pop up whether intended or not. Now if this breeder is inbreeding (not line breeding) to produce these colors it is unethical to me because that compromises health and personality which in the end is the most important thing in a dog- not color. A solid temperment and good health IMO is far more important than the color, weight, and size requirements put on breeds today to set standards


----------



## NarysDad (Apr 29, 2010)

Jessiewessie99 said:


> I meant to come back and add edit it. I also think ethical breeders are people who breed withing the standard(or try), health test, prove their dogs are breed worthy, title their dogs whether its working or showing or both, interacts with breed clubs, and is involved with the breed
> 
> Anyone who just breeds because they have 2 dogs, Have 2 purebreds who are AKC registered and nothing else. Don't health test, follow the standard(or try to) don't title their dogs whether its showing or working, don't prove their dogs are worthy of being bred, breeds for money, breeds for all the wrong reasons, or just don't care are unethical breeders.


Jessie, do you title your dog? do you know whether it is breed worthy and how to tell whether it is. I don't care for some of the clubs out there so I don't join them, does that make me an unethical breeder? Just because a dog passes all its health tests doesn't make it breed worthy. Just cause it has OFA excellent hips doesn't make it worthy either. Or even if it is titled still doesn't tell you that he/she is worthy. There are a lot more factors to determine whether a dog should be bred other than what you wrote.

For instance, A dog passes all its tests and shows to be an excellent canidate for breeding. Then you look into the dogs pedigree. All 10 generations show good signs of good breeding, then you start to look at the vertical pedigree ( littermates of the dogs in the pedigree) there you find dogs that have bad hips or had other issues and have passed them onto there offspring. Then you have to know that these trates can and will show up in your pups from the dog you thought was an excellent breeder.

There are a lot more things to think about just standards and titles.


----------



## NarysDad (Apr 29, 2010)

And to add a bit more, you find that the dog in question has a great pedigree, but find the same dog that was line bred on in many generations back thru the pedigree and there are many dogs out there with this in their pedigree's. I think that this is one of the reasons that you see so many health issues in the breed, why? cause some dogs are good to line breed on once and others are just a disaster waiting to happen.The problem I see is that when there is great dogs that are out there everyone has to breed to them cause of what they are, not what they can pass on. Most hope that when breeding to these such dogs they have no issues and then it comes back to titles again. I would rather breed an untitled dog knowing it's bloodline history than to go to a highly titled dog that a breeder or trainer has that won't share any of its flaws or things of such.

If this make me unethical, so be it. There are many worse that do worse and say they are trying to better the breed, but are found to only be coating their pockets green


----------



## sagelfn (Aug 13, 2009)

NarysDad said:


> I would rather breed an untitled dog knowing it's bloodline history than to go to a highly titled dog that a breeder or trainer has that won't share any of its flaws or things of such.


Why not title that dog though?


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

I would buy a pup from a breeder who works their own to titles(in whatever venue) than one that doesn't at all. If they held back a pup or two from breedings to train, that would be a plus. Repeat breedings another plus.

I wouldn't want to purchase from a breeder who sends their dogs off for titles either. 
They can be called "ethical" but not where I'd spend my money to support their program. And I'd be hesitant to purchase from a first time breeder if the pup I was buying was to be used for competition. I'd like to see what was previously produced and how the development is progressing from the kennel of interest.


----------



## robinhuerta (Apr 21, 2007)

Doc
I'd like to start by saying...I do agree with "some" of your opinions & posts.
I do agree that this breed is not today what it was when it began.
I agree that there is much more to the breed than a flying trot, side gait and the "sports". I also agree that health and temperament should be the #1 priority in breeding.

BUT...some dogs do have "Form with Function"....and some breeders do try VERY hard to make it their goal to breed as such.
Schutzhund is not the "be all" in this breed, it is just 1 (of several different) specific prerequisite(s) set by the SV...and some breeders compete in the SV style shows & sports...therefore are required to attain the titles...etc..etc.
As for dogs that can show true protection skills (in real life) and still be able to compete in the show rings? ....yes...there are some.
My question will always be...."How can one gauge the quality of any dog....if the dog itself has not been tested in anything?
How do we "teach" as breeders....what this breed was created to do....if we don't try to lead by example??
Herding, Police work, Schutzhund, Service Dogs, Military...etc..etc....these are all "tests" and achievements of some form. I think the GSD should be suitable for any of them.
I think there are actually some very good breeders in this breed. Not all breeders follow the same path as others, nor have the same ideas or goals. This is perfectly *ok.*
The problem arises when breeders become "blind", and refuse to see past whats in their own programs.
I have never had a problem with breeders who do not participate in titling their dogs...and I don't think that they should have a problem with breeders that do.
"As for the title of this thread"
Being "Ethical" means alot more (to me) than just "the dogs"....
This is just my opinion....


----------



## holland (Jan 11, 2009)

Every breeder has to have a first breeding...so if I liked the dogs I would buy from a first time breeder no problem


----------



## Jessiewessie99 (Mar 6, 2009)

NarysDad said:


> Jessie, do you title your dog? do you know whether it is breed worthy and how to tell whether it is. I don't care for some of the clubs out there so I don't join them, does that make me an unethical breeder? Just because a dog passes all its health tests doesn't make it breed worthy. Just cause it has OFA excellent hips doesn't make it worthy either. Or even if it is titled still doesn't tell you that he/she is worthy. There are a lot more factors to determine whether a dog should be bred other than what you wrote.
> 
> For instance, A dog passes all its tests and shows to be an excellent canidate for breeding. Then you look into the dogs pedigree. All 10 generations show good signs of good breeding, then you start to look at the vertical pedigree ( littermates of the dogs in the pedigree) there you find dogs that have bad hips or had other issues and have passed them onto there offspring. Then you have to know that these trates can and will show up in your pups from the dog you thought was an excellent breeder.
> 
> There are a lot more things to think about just standards and titles.


I don't title my dog. I know there is alot more to breeding and more to think about when it comes to it. I have never bought from a breeder, I am not a breeder and nor to I plan to be one. But when it comes to buying from one I will be very picky. I want the breeders to be breeding healthy dogs and shows that the dog is breeding material in any way they can. They should have something set in mind(a breeding goal) what are they trying to accomplish in their breedings? what are they striving for? I don't want a breeder who breeds dogs that are poorly bred and unhealthy dogs.


----------



## Jessiewessie99 (Mar 6, 2009)

onyx'girl said:


> I would buy a pup from a breeder who works their own to titles(in whatever venue) than one that doesn't at all. If they held back a pup or two from breedings to train, that would be a plus. Repeat breedings another plus.
> 
> I wouldn't want to purchase from a breeder who sends their dogs off for titles either.
> They can be called "ethical" but not where I'd spend my money to support their program. And I'd be hesitant to purchase from a first time breeder if the pup I was buying was to be used for competition. I'd like to see what was previously produced and how the development is progressing from the kennel of interest.


I agree 100%. There is a reason for titles. It is alot better if the breeder titles their dogs. I want to make sure I am getting my money's worth and be responsible with it.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

I think people should spend more time understanding what it is they really want in a dog than being nit-picky about breeders. If you really know what you want and start looking at breeders you don't have to worry so much about whether they fit some generic mold to a T. I know what I am looking for this time around and have possibly found someone who doesn't have a fancy website or offer a lengthy warranty but can provide exactly what I want as far as temperament, looks, pedigree, titles, balance of drives, registration status, health history, etc.


----------



## holland (Jan 11, 2009)

Yes these thread become really annoying becasue people just say the same thing...like I want a dog from a small hobby breeder who doesn't bred for money-not sure how anyone knows if a breeder is breeding for money or not or why it matters if they are breeding good dogs


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Yeah, if they are producing quality then it really doesn't matter to me. The larger scale breeders generally have so many complaints against them and dogs that clearly display health and temperament issues it's apparent that they breed to many to have good quality control, but we're a litter every 2 weeks. When I am looking I don't really have to put a number on how many is too many, because generally those that I feel breed too many are already off my list because they simply aren't producing the type and quality of dog I want regardless of what exact number of litters they breed, if that makes sense. Again, I'm simply looking for what I want...


----------



## robinhuerta (Apr 21, 2007)

Lies & Holland....good points.
I have bought a couple of puppies from a breeder who does NOT title her dogs.....but it made no difference to me, because I wanted what she bred....and they will (hopefully) be a benefit to our own program in the future.
As for "large scale" breeders....yes...*some* DO have many skeletons in their closet(s).....it becomes more of what they can get away with..rather than what they should be doing.
Respectfully,
Robin


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

robinhuerta said:


> Doc
> I'd like to start by saying...I do agree with "some" of your opinions & posts.
> I do agree that this breed is not today what it was when it began.
> I agree that there is much more to the breed than a flying trot, side gait and the "sports". I also agree that health and temperament should be the #1 priority in breeding.
> ...


I don't have a problem with breeders that participate in shows UNLESS their breeding program changes to match what is currently taking all the ribbons. And i have a huge problem when a breeder becomes a judge and hands out ribbons to his own bloodlines - a conflict of interest perhaps? Heck, judges hardly never touch a dog in today's shows. Years ago they touched a dog all over and even ran their finger over the teeth, tugged on the skin, felt bone structure, etc. Now all some do is look at their "buddy" an nod.


----------



## robinhuerta (Apr 21, 2007)

Doc.....no argument nor disagreement from me....we fight the same politics.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

I believe AQHA rules are that a judge can not judge a horse that they have sold in the last year. Doesn't AKC have any similar regulations governing their judges? Is it truly such an Old Boys Club?


----------



## robinhuerta (Apr 21, 2007)

Jax08...not sure about AKC?...but I know that the WDA is working on a "Ethics Rule" for Judges and exhibitors alike...
I am not at leisure to comment in depth....


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Good! There has to be an ethics code! AQHA will throw the person out and they won't be able to participate..at all on any level...for a specified period of time.

If AKC does not have an ethics code then I think the breeders need to start screaming for one.


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

Let's just hope the powers that be doesn't stack the deck on the Ethics Board. If so, that will be certain doomsday for the breed! They should blind-fold potential judges and see if they can identify the best structure; an exhaustive written test should be used to test ones knowledge of the breed, including the history of German shepherds, and all areas covered in the standard. And not everyone should be able to pass this test. And a judge should not have any ties to a dog that is he/she has to judge. The judge should remove himself from the judging. All the wink, wink", glad handing, back patting, and money exchanging behind the barn must stop.


----------



## robinhuerta (Apr 21, 2007)

Doc...that "ties" thing....IS one of the issues..many of us are trying to eliminate.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Doc said:


> Heck, judges hardly never touch a dog in today's shows. Years ago they touched a dog all over and even ran their finger over the teeth, tugged on the skin, felt bone structure, etc. Now all some do is look at their "buddy" an nod.


This bothers me too. Some of the AKC and UKC judges honestly seem scared of GSDs so they have me show the bite as they are leaning away from the dog, looking at teeth from 6 feet away. Also at one show I was never even asked to stack my dog! We came in and started stacking but the judge signaled for us to go around, then as she was doing down and backs and individual laps, she would wave the next dog up for the down and back before even looking at it stacked. She never came over and ran her hands on the dog like usual.


----------



## Vandal (Dec 22, 2000)

I received this e-mail yesterday. Fits in the thread perhaps. Let them know what you think.

The link below will take you to the survey.


The American Kennel Club Board and Staff are currently considering ways to
attract and retain participants in the conformation sport. The objective is
to consider changes which will result in a better experience for Clubs,
exhibitors, and the general public. The goals are to improve entries, level
of participation, and, in turn, the financial performance of our show giving
Clubs. The information you provide will be summarized and be presented to
the Board of Directors in August. 

As active members of the dog fancy you understand the challenges the
conformation sport is facing and we are sure you have ideas on how to
improve our sport. What we seek are ideas.ideas on how to improve the
conformation show, thoughts on how to attract new people into the sport, and
ways to attract the general public to shows so they can learn what purebred
dogs are and why purposely bred dogs are important.

We have divided this request into 3 parts.shows, new exhibitors, and the
general public. We are asking you to provide you ideas.as brief and
concise as possible in these three areas. You do not have to complete all
three sections.just the area(s) where you have a point of view. While
contact information is not required it would be helpful in case follow up is
needed to better understand an idea. All input will reported anonymously
and it is recognized, due to the short timeframe, that your views are not
necessarily those of your Club.

http://www.zoomerang.com/Survey/WEB22AWMCSHGMT


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

robinhuerta said:


> Doc...that "ties" thing....IS one of the issues..many of us are trying to eliminate.


Well praise jayzus! I told you I wanted Carlos .... the dog, not your hubby! roflmao


----------



## gagsd (Apr 24, 2003)

Vandal said:


> I received this e-mail yesterday. Fits in the thread perhaps. Let them know what you think.





Vandal said:


> The link below will take you to the survey.
> 
> The American Kennel Club Board and Staff are currently considering ways to
> attract and retain participants in the conformation sport. The objective is
> ...


----------



## lnsmdove (Oct 12, 2009)

Jax08 said:


> Good! There has to be an ethics code! AQHA will throw the person out and they won't be able to participate..at all on any level...for a specified period of time.
> 
> If AKC does not have an ethics code then I think the breeders need to start screaming for one.


 
say what? Ever heard of Impressive and HYPP? There are still people breeding HYPP pos. QHs, and I've never heard of anyone being thrown out. Would love to hear specifics, if this is so.

Susan D


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I have heard of judges being suspended, but that was in performance sports, not conformation.

As for what is a proper measure of temperament. All those VA dogs have Schutzhund titles and that is STILL not enough to satisfy this crowd. All those dogs have to pass their AD, and that is STILL not enough. I do not think you COULD satisfy many of the people on this site on what a proper GSD should be. 

So how do you transfer that into the show ring. Disqualifying is any dog that attempts to bite the judge. Beyond that there is temperament, but stressing too heavily the proper temperament in the show ring, opens it even further for individual tastes. In the AKC if the temperament was the winningest think in the ring, than GSDs will become black and tan golden retrievers, In the AKC, if workability becomes the winningest thing in the ring, then they will add a couple of jumps and a mini obedience course, and the dog that does that will be the top dog. 

I think that it comes down to the buyers. If you want a dog to be a champion in schutzhund, go to someone who breeds champion schutzhund dogs. If you want a dog to be a police dog, search and rescue dog, or herding dog, or seeing eye/ service dog, then go to a breeder who has dogs out there working in the field. If you want a dog that mirrors the German standard go with the German show lines. if you want an all around dog that mirrors the American standard, go to people who breed show dogs and go the extra mile to get them titled in something besides show.

The vast majority of owners can take a dog from show breeders of any country and do performance sports, and train it for any number of things. Will it be the top schutzhund dog of the year? Probably not. Could it title in schutzhund, probably. It will certainly train the owner and help the owner to know what they want to look for in their next dog. 

Breeding dogs with health issues or disqualifying faults, breeding specifically for color, or oversize, or long coats, well, it is not the mark of someone who wants to contribute to the breed as a whole.

As for history, did not the founder of the breed set up the standard and include color as an indicator of what should be bred for and what should be bred out?


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

lnsmdove said:


> say what? Ever heard of Impressive and HYPP? There are still people breeding HYPP pos. QHs, and I've never heard of anyone being thrown out. Would love to hear specifics, if this is so.
> 
> Susan D


What does Impressive have to do with what I said? I wasn't saying anything about breeding quarterhorses. I was talking about the judges not being able to judge a horse they just sold. 

Sorry if I'm just to dense to make the correlation between the two. Unless horses only get HYPP when they are sold.


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

As for history, did not the founder of the breed set up the standard and include color as an indicator of what should be bred for and what should be bred out?

The Standard today is not the original Standard. Whites were DQd because they were believed to be inferior (a weaker dog, less healthy). The test of the breed today is not the original test. We are so far from what the founder wanted it isn't even a fair comparison - IMHO.


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

selzer said:


> The vast majority of owners can take a dog from show breeders of any country and do performance sports, and train it for any number of things. Will it be the top schutzhund dog of the year? Probably not. Could it title in schutzhund, probably. It will certainly train the owner and help the owner to know what they want to look for in their next dog.


I don't believe this is truly the case. Even if the "vast majority of owners" were very good trainers, I do not think the vast majority of dogs really could be trained to do performance sports. Certainly not one that involves protection, but even beyond that many simply do NOT have the temperament for even a basic obedience ring.

Interesting at the last Rally trial we did, after the trial was finished the judge came up to us and asked "Who ARE you guys??" He had judged 3 of our dogs and a young adult owned by another person from one of our litters, and then interacted with our two pups outside the ring during lunch break. He then started on a diatribe about how rare it was to see GSDs in the performance rings any more, much less nice ones. That in the 30 years he'd been involved in obedience, conformation and judging, things had changed so much. GSDs used to be one of the dominant breeds in the obedience ring, and a good portion of the dogs in the obedience ring would also be seen in the conformation ring. The dogs did well in both. Now GSDs are far less common in the obedience ring, and the ones who are there aren't the same dogs showing in conformation. The conformation people for the most part aren't interested in it like they used to be, but that isn't the whole reason. Many of the dogs from the conformation ring couldn't hack it in the obedience ring so no one tries. And of those who do go into the obedience ring, many are clearly stressed by the whole experience and don't perform nearly as well as they should, or as the breed as a whole used to.

This isn't the first time I've heard this from long time participants in AKC type venues, or from trainers and judges. They have also seen the deterioration of the breed in recent years. Really, I think it's obvious to anyone with open eyes. I somewhat doubt if the vast majority of GSDs really could do even basic obedience titles anymore, and that is really, really sad.


----------



## holland (Jan 11, 2009)

Every German shepherd that I have owned has been capable of getting a basic obedience title. One came from a shelter and she did very well


----------



## sagelfn (Aug 13, 2009)

My "genius" co workers are talking about dog breeds they like. One just said she wants a blk/silver (silver like a weimeraner) GSD with floppy ears. Please tell me there will never be a breeder to fit that bill.


----------



## Jessiewessie99 (Mar 6, 2009)

sagelfn said:


> My "genius" co workers are talking about dog breeds they like. One just said she wants a blk/silver (silver like a weimeraner) GSD with floppy ears. Please tell me there will never be a breeder to fit that bill.


omg...i hope not!!


----------



## Norfpo (Aug 27, 2010)

I don't know if its been pointed out or not but the breeder only sells with limited registration so they have to be fixed


----------



## sagelfn (Aug 13, 2009)

Norfpo said:


> I don't know if its been pointed out or not but the breeder only sells with limited registration so they have to be fixed


no it just means that if one of the pups has puppies they can't be registered and that they can't show


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Norfpo said:


> I don't know if its been pointed out or not but the breeder only sells with limited registration *so they have to be fixed*


Limited registration DOES NOT MEAN the dog has to be fixed. In fact, all that it means is that the dog cannot be shown in conformation, and the pups cannot be registered through the AKC. 

However, there are other registries that will provide registrations to pups out of AKC parantage regardless to the limited status -- I have heard this but am not sure as to how correct it is.

And, people can hawk the puppy as rare in color, and show the AKC paperwork for the sire and dam to prove lineage, and provide them with a pedigree from any number of pedigree services, and they will be able to sell the pups. People care less about AKC than they do something they believe is unique. We see this with all these designer dog breeds.

And, selling on a limited registration is NOT always a sign of a responsible breeder. With all other things being equal, pups are ordinary colors, and not bred for extremes, oversize or what have you, the limited registration can only be used as a way to ensure their puppies are not adding the the AKC gene pool, and as the dogs are ordinary albeit well-bred GSDs, there would be no lure for the owners to breed unregistered dogs through less reputable registries.

And if they are breeding for what they consider "rare" color, than to sell them on full registrations would knock down on their business. Kind of like Rin Tin Tin people want to have a monopoly on dogs out of Rin Tin Tin, they sell all dogs either on limited or already spayed/neutered.


----------



## tierra nuestra (Sep 8, 2010)

Chris Wild said:


> I don't believe this is truly the case. Even if the "vast majority of owners" were very good trainers, I do not think the vast majority of dogs really could be trained to do performance sports. Certainly not one that involves protection, but even beyond that many simply do NOT have the temperament for even a basic obedience ring.
> 
> Interesting at the last Rally trial we did, after the trial was finished the judge came up to us and asked "Who ARE you guys??" He had judged 3 of our dogs and a young adult owned by another person from one of our litters, and then interacted with our two pups outside the ring during lunch break. He then started on a diatribe about how rare it was to see GSDs in the performance rings any more, much less nice ones. That in the 30 years he'd been involved in obedience, conformation and judging, things had changed so much. GSDs used to be one of the dominant breeds in the obedience ring, and a good portion of the dogs in the obedience ring would also be seen in the conformation ring. The dogs did well in both. Now GSDs are far less common in the obedience ring, and the ones who are there aren't the same dogs showing in conformation. The conformation people for the most part aren't interested in it like they used to be, but that isn't the whole reason. Many of the dogs from the conformation ring couldn't hack it in the obedience ring so no one tries. And of those who do go into the obedience ring, many are clearly stressed by the whole experience and don't perform nearly as well as they should, or as the breed as a whole used to.
> 
> This isn't the first time I've heard this from long time participants in AKC type venues, or from trainers and judges. They have also seen the deterioration of the breed in recent years. Really, I think it's obvious to anyone with open eyes. I somewhat doubt if the vast majority of GSDs really could do even basic obedience titles anymore, and that is really, really sad.


 cheers to you for being able to see the obvious!this is what true breeders who care for the breed need to see and hopefully try to undue the damage they have done with their fads in extreme apperances(hocks and roached backs)its shocking if you put a gsd picture of 30 years ago to one today side by side.the whole idea of responsible breeding is to enhance the best traits and slowly take away the bad.not just with dogs but applies to all animals,.I actually raise sheep and use my dogs with them for their original intended purpose.how many breeders use their dogs with livestock?it would be "interesting" to see "some" of these breeders who literally gave me the inflated ego thing about their dogs with all their great lineage and superior wins in the ring do this simple thing.I am still struggling over certain issues with my dogs in this area.I am trying though.and will continue trying to get back a functional multi tasking gsd with a beautiful temperment as well as health and looks.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

Chris Wild said:


> I don't believe this is truly the case. Even if the "vast majority of owners" were very good trainers, I do not think the vast majority of dogs really could be trained to do performance sports. Certainly not one that involves protection, but even beyond that many simply do NOT have the temperament for even a basic obedience ring.
> 
> Interesting at the last Rally trial we did, after the trial was finished the judge came up to us and asked "Who ARE you guys??" He had judged 3 of our dogs and a young adult owned by another person from one of our litters, and then interacted with our two pups outside the ring during lunch break. He then started on a diatribe about how rare it was to see GSDs in the performance rings any more, much less nice ones. That in the 30 years he'd been involved in obedience, conformation and judging, things had changed so much. GSDs used to be one of the dominant breeds in the obedience ring, and a good portion of the dogs in the obedience ring would also be seen in the conformation ring. The dogs did well in both. Now GSDs are far less common in the obedience ring, and the ones who are there aren't the same dogs showing in conformation. The conformation people for the most part aren't interested in it like they used to be, but that isn't the whole reason. Many of the dogs from the conformation ring couldn't hack it in the obedience ring so no one tries. And of those who do go into the obedience ring, many are clearly stressed by the whole experience and don't perform nearly as well as they should, or as the breed as a whole used to.
> 
> This isn't the first time I've heard this from long time participants in AKC type venues, or from trainers and judges. They have also seen the deterioration of the breed in recent years. Really, I think it's obvious to anyone with open eyes. I somewhat doubt if the vast majority of GSDs really could do even basic obedience titles anymore, and that is really, really sad.


 Chris, You must have talked to a Judge in the AKC ring that has been influenced wrongly by "me".LOL You should have asked him for his statistics to validate what he said ....really LOL. Hey, the situation is what it is.


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

I don't see many GSDs in AKC obedience. Many of the conformation oriented people are not so interested in the performance ring. I find that strange in such a breed. Of course, there are some who are active in various training venues.

I do think many dogs could do basic obedience competition. I had an Am lines dog I adopted out of kennel living at 18 months old. He was very extreme and not the strongest soldier in the army. Even he was able to learn and perform basic obedience. There was a fellow in the schutzhund club who was very proud of his working line rott he had imported. He worked on her obedience and was vocal about her prowess. Yes, my extreme ol' boy beat her every time in the obed ring. Okay, I did get a kick out of that. 

I have met a number of American conformation dogs that could get obedience titles. Nerves decent and certainly enough brains and drive to do this basic competition stuff. Sure many are weaker than desirable or even acceptable..not denying that. But, I have at times been pleasantly surprised.


----------

