# What are your thoughts on this new rule?



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)




----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

I'm against the breed survey portion. The WUSV is not a breed test. It's a working competition. I'm unsure of the hip/elbow requirements. Many dogs with mild HD can work and compete at high levels without pain. But I do understand the point of it, which is to make sure dogs in pain are not being doped up and trialed.

IMO, subjective requirements such as conformation ratings and OFA should not be part of a competition. And conformation/reading xrays IS subjective. One judge might rate a dog an SG and another a G. Or one xray reviewer may rate a dog mild while the next one might pass the dog as fair. The breed survey will take out dogs with missing teeth, which has nothing to do with working ability. 

At least the requirements to compete as it is now, while still has subjective components (after all humans are involved so it's never completely non biased), is based on performance.

Where do the requirement ends? And at whose insistence are they requirements being put in place? Is it to pacify AR's?


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

I was actually surprised it wasn't already a rule. Mixed feelings. Not sure why they are all of a sudden deciding it needs to be done. Hard to know why the SV/WUSV makes decisions. Most people (extremely high percentage) competing at this level are not going to compete with a dog with bad hips/elbows that cause soundness issues. Why risk having the dog break down after putting in all of that training? There are enough other issues to worry about like backs, injuries, etc. 

The Kör requirement probably won't fly since not all WUSV countries have a survey system. They may be able to require it for their own (SV) people, but I think they will have a fight to implement it for all countries.


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

And we will never pacify the AR's until they eliminate all dogs from all competitions and all areas of our lives. Hopefully this won't be the excuse they try to use yet again.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

lhczth said:


> *And we will never pacify the AR's until they eliminate all dogs from all competitions and all areas of our lives.* Hopefully this won't be the excuse they try to use yet again.


Exactly


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

As an outsider reading that and not knowing much about the sport I took it as something that would go hand and hand with breeding. Well that was my first thought. Lots of breeders title their dogs as part of the breeding program so it would make sense as a safeguard the hips and elbows have to pass too. I never thought about injuries and stuff. If the hips and elbows don't pass the dog can't be titled and most likely won't be bred.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Lisa - this requirement is only at the WUSV level. Not all dogs at all levels. 

And good breeders don't breed dogs with HD/ED anyways. Bad breeders are not going to care about SV requirements at all. 95% of the people in this sport are not breeders and are doing it for enjoyment.


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

What I found interesting, is that this goes with some of our recent discussions. To me, the question is why. Why is this now so important? Is it because people are breeding to these dogs more and more? Is it because people aren't pairing dogs just points? They seem to be pushing for all dogs at WUSV to be breed surveyed as well. Again why is it all of a sudden an issue? 

For the most part I agree that it's a sport. So who cares if it has bad hips/elbows as long as it scores high enough to be at that level. But I think the issue is deeper than that.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

I think you have to consider that breeding practices in other counties are quite different than in the United States and in Germany. Some of the other European nations with strong working dog histories are also pretty good with their breeding practices but there is still a lot of questionable stuff happening. The WUSV includes a lot of smaller counties with much shorter histories of working dogs and also different cultural norms when it comes to breeding dogs. Some of these countries don't have the same population of GSD to chose from when it comes to breeding that the countries with longer histories do. This is a world rule, it's not just a United States rule. As much as some of us disagree with breeding practices in the United States in regards to Schutzhund/IPO/WUSV...this country is light years ahead of many others that are also competing in the WUSV.

Think of this on a world scale, and it makes a ton more sense.

We have members on here from India, Egypt, and other countries which do not have the same working dog/show dog infrastructure of the US, Germany, Czech Republic, ect. Those members tend to shed a lot of light on what the state of the GSD breed is in those types of places. In those places...a WUSV competitor will be bred to countless bitches, mostly because there's nothing that probably even comes close to that type of dog. In the United States...while we don't have to breed to WUSV dogs, we have 70+ USCA nationals competitors, 70+ working dog competitors, and countless other regional level stud dogs to chose from. As tight as people think breeding in the United States is...it's probably way worse in other countries.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

mycobraracr said:


> What I found interesting, is that this goes with some of our recent discussions. To me, the question is why. Why is this now so important? Is it because people are breeding to these dogs more and more? Is it because people aren't pairing dogs just points? They seem to be pushing for all dogs at WUSV to be breed surveyed as well. Again why is it all of a sudden an issue?
> 
> For the most part I agree that it's a sport. So who cares if it has bad hips/elbows as long as it scores high enough to be at that level. But I think the issue is deeper than that.



I wondered the same thing. What is the end game?

As Lisa pointed out, most competitors at that level have sound dogs. I think the OFA/a stamp req will affect very few people. I was just browsing last night so didn't read one current team member's post carefully but I think he said his dog has mild HD?

It's the breed survey I disagree with. The breed survey is the breeding requirement. Not the WUSV. That is a competition.


----------



## Smithie86 (Jan 9, 2001)

Most member countries were internally requiring this already.

This does not prevent a dog that might be clear hips/elbows, but bad back.


----------



## holland (Jan 11, 2009)

Its not a rule that is going to cause me to loose sleep...but if you can get to the WUSV-you porbably should be able to breed survey your dog...


----------



## holland (Jan 11, 2009)

Smithie86 said:


> Most member countries were internally requiring this already.
> 
> This does not prevent a dog that might be clear hips/elbows, but bad back.


No what would prevent that would be an owner that cares about their dog


----------



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

I'm curious how the breed survey aspect would affect things like undescended testicle or neuter that have no effect on the dog working.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

J and J M said:


> I'm curious how the breed survey aspect would affect things like undescended testicle or neuter that have no effect on the dog working.


Exactly. Or missing the wrong teeth so they can't pass the breed survey.


----------



## Smithie86 (Jan 9, 2001)

Holland,

I agree, but have seen people compete in the last few years with dogs with bad backs, dogs that have had back surgery.... just to be on a team.


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

When I look at things, I try and see the big picture. Too many are in the mindset of "This doesn't effect me so I don't care". The truth is, that it will effect most of us if we are in the breed long enough in some way or another. All these organizations, were put in place to preserve the work ability of the GSD were they not? From USCA's website; "Since 1975, the premier national organization dedicated to preserving the German Shepherd dog’s working heritage through Schutzhund training and breed surveys." So when as a collective whole they decide something like this needs to be done, the question is why? What trends are they seeing that could be detrimental to the overall breed of the GSD? If you truly care about the breed and it's future, then these are things we need to look at. Those of you who have been following this topic on other forums and boards, have read story after story of dogs being bred to just because they competed at the WUSV even though they had some issue or another. Obviously this is becoming the trend. Just look at any stud advertisement. It's less about dogs and more about how many points it scored at high level competitions. Look at some breeder web pages and you see the same thing. Do human ethics come into play here? Absolutely, but unfortunately too many think that "their one litter won't make an impact on the GSD as a breed" until half a million people who think the same way breed their dogs then those dogs end up in the gene pool. 

I'm really scatter brained right now. Does this make any sense to any of you?


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

mycobraracr said:


> When I look at things, I try and see the big picture. Too many are in the mindset of "This doesn't effect me so I don't care". The truth is, that it will effect most of us if we are in the breed long enough in some way or another. All these organizations, were put in place to preserve the work ability of the GSD were they not? From USCA's website; "Since 1975, the premier national organization dedicated to preserving the German Shepherd dog’s working heritage through Schutzhund training and breed surveys." So when as a collective whole they decide something like this needs to be done, the question is why? What trends are they seeing that could be detrimental to the overall breed of the GSD? If you truly care about the breed and it's future, then these are things we need to look at. Those of you who have been following this topic on other forums and boards, have read story after story of dogs being bred to just because they competed at the WUSV even though they had some issue or another. Obviously this is becoming the trend. Just look at any stud advertisement. It's less about dogs and more about how many points it scored at high level competitions. Look at some breeder web pages and you see the same thing. Do human ethics come into play here? Absolutely, but unfortunately too many think that "their one litter won't make an impact on the GSD as a breed" until half a million people who think the same way breed their dogs then those dogs end up in the gene pool.
> 
> I'm really scatter brained right now. Does this make any sense to any of you?


I'm not even involved in the sport and what your saying makes sense to me. They are seeing something going on and possibly trying to prevent it before it goes further. I still think it has to do with breeding dogs like you say with more points versus health. The health of GSDs is not the greatest and maybe getting back to better health as a breed is where it has to start. Of course the perfect GSD has great health, temperament and workability, but how many out there have all that? I understand that lots of people stay at the same level and it's done for enjoyment and I think putting this rule out there keeps those there and only the best of the best get to the next level. That means dogs will meet the standard, have the workability(titles/points), and have good hips/elbows(which is a big thing with GSDs). I think they are going to make it that the breed goes back to how it was suppose to be. I don't think they are taking anything away from those that do it for enjoyment, although I'm not sure if I was involved in the sport I would want to just stay there and not compete at a higher level, that would be the ultimate goal, no? I am just not so sure it will help the breed, because there are so many back yard breeders.


----------



## pam (Apr 6, 2009)

Isn't the purpose of a kor review to allow an unbiased expert evaluate the dog and make appropriate breeding recommendations based upon the dog before him/her and its pedigree? Very few "breeders" in this country possess the extensive knowledge of pedigrees required to make intelligent breeding decisions. And a few of those with that knowledge submit to the emotions that result in "kennel blindness". Perhaps this is a not so subtle poke at those who aspire to propagating the breed to do so responsibly and only after they have acquired sufficient knowledge and experience to do so. That would entail trialing several dogs to IPO 3 or equivalent titles in whatever venue to be able to evaluate a dog for breeding and puppies for placement. A mentor with extensive knowledge of pedigrees would be extremely valuable. A practical and sensible structure for breeding prerequisites may be a good thing at this point.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

It does make sense and I don't disagree. I just don't think it's going to make a difference in the U.S. One of the most popular studs in the U.S. right now has never been to the WUSV. I've seen 2 of his progeny and didn't like either one. Both thin nerved and screaming. I've heard the same thing from other people regarding the progeny. And this dog has the breed survey done. 

I know of dogs at national levels that are missing teeth. Owner has no intention of breeding but still proud to take a great dog to a national level.

In the end, it will all come down to personal responsibility as our purebred registration system is not dependent upon receiving a breed survey and titles. And it will come down to who advertises the best to get their stud out there.


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

And even in this country, are there really a lot of people breeding to top winning dogs that have bad hips and/or elbows? In Germany it can't happen. It could hurt smaller countries who don't have the same options. Guess then they will have to import more dogs instead of trying to develop their own programs. $$$$$

It could hurt the USA dogs more so with elbows since we have a pass/fail system and not a 3 tier passing system like Germany. Great way to get USA people to use the 'a' stamp program instead. $$$$

Just sort of rambling.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

I believe serious(WL) breeders look beyond the 'National level' IPO competitors when making breeding decisions. Most of the dogs that get to that point have professional trainers handling them, those trainers get some large chunks of change for hosting seminars in whatever down time they deem fit to the competition schedule. They work hard to get where they are, and the dogs deserve recognition. I read that one judge wanted this to begin in the year 2016 so that anyone training for the past 3 yrs to get to the Worlds would not have wasted that time if their dog wasn't going to pass the new health requirement.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

I think it is a stupid rule. A very democratic rule. In the long run I don't see it as beneficial.jmo


----------



## gsdluvr (Jun 26, 2012)

cliffson1 said:


> I think it is a stupid rule. A very democratic rule. In the long run I don't see it as beneficial.jmo


Tell me your thoughts on why you think this is stupid? Just curious.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

A lot of reasons. I think the gene pool of functional hips is better than certified hips,except in Germany where they got the hip thing right, imo. Historically, the police and military have used functional hips as barometer, which includes " mild HD". Germany also certifies mild HD. Dogs competing at WUSV are usually at the upper eschelon of drive and temperament( sometimes too much drive, but overall better dogs in these areas. Further limiting the availability of superior functional dogs is counter productive to me. Very,very few dogs with moderate or severe Hip/Elbow issues will be able to endure the arduous training it takes to become a WUSV dog in U.S. Furthermore, the WUSV is a competition, now if OFA had a nz catergory (mild but passing) then I would be okay with it. But on balance, the hips for the breed has remained fairly constant in past forty years, the temperament has not. ( and nothing in this proposal will improve hips no more than anything else has in past forty year on whole).You are not going to improve temperament by making hips requirements for performance dogs more stringent. But you will further restrict the genepool. And how about Pennhips ??? They give a better insight into laxity and stress on joints....what score is ineligible?
At the end of the day, I value functionality and knowledge of siblings and three generation of parents as much or more than the individual dog's hips. Eliminating superior working stock or disallowing excellent working stock from competing because of an arbitrary hip score that does not include lower levels of functional hips is counterproductive in my opinion. I know this isn't a popular position, but many well intentioned proposals have long term unintended consequences....I think this does.


----------



## gsdluvr (Jun 26, 2012)

cliffson1 said:


> A lot of reasons. I think the gene pool of functional hips is better than certified hips,except in Germany where they got the hip thing right, imo. Historically, the police and military have used functional hips as barometer, which includes " mild HD". Germany also certifies mild HD. Dogs competing at WUSV are usually at the upper eschelon of drive and temperament( sometimes too much drive, but overall better dogs in these areas. Further limiting the availability of superior functional dogs is counter productive to me. Very,very few dogs with moderate or severe Hip/Elbow issues will be able to endure the arduous training it takes to become a WUSV dog in U.S. Furthermore, the WUSV is a competition, now if OFA had a nz catergory (mild but passing) then I would be okay with it. But on balance, the hips for the breed has remained fairly constant in past forty years, the temperament has not. ( and nothing in this proposal will improve hips no more than anything else has in past forty year on whole).You are not going to improve temperament by making hips requirements for performance dogs more stringent. But you will further restrict the genepool. And how about Pennhips ??? They give a better insight into laxity and stress on joints....what score is ineligible?
> At the end of the day, I value functionality and knowledge of siblings and three generation of parents as much or more than the individual dog's hips. Eliminating superior working stock or disallowing excellent working stock from competing because of an arbitrary hip score that does not include lower levels of functional hips is counterproductive in my opinion. I know this isn't a popular position, but many well intentioned proposals have long term unintended consequences....I think this does.


I think you make a very good point. Mary Lou Retton( the gymnast) found out she had hip "dysplasia" herself. BUT, look what she accomplished??!! Granted, she now has double knee replacements. Hmmm... definitely food for thought.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Comparing a human gymnast to this situation isn't quite equal. These people have joint replacements because of all the pounding their young joints take and they don't typically see the toll until after their careers are over. Not because of a genetic component.


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

Very good post and insight Cliff.


----------



## Vandal (Dec 22, 2000)

The VP of UScA stated the reason for this rule was because people were medicating their dogs with pain meds and steroids in order to compete with unsound dogs. It is not being represented as a decision concerning breeding, it is more along the lines of dogs with bandages not being allowed to compete. If that reason is the truth, I fail to see how asking for hip and elbow x-rays is solving the problem, since there are other sources of pain besides H/E. Also, any way you look at it, steroids are a performance enhancer.

This is the problem I have with most of what goes on in IPO sports now. You either care about the integrity of the activity or you don't. If you do, you address things like this in a way that will be effective, like drug testing the dogs. 
However, for years now, not many people have cared about the integrity of any of it. Judges constantly lie at breed surveys, there are multitudes of dogs with titles who didn't actually earn them, and on and on it goes. Seems no one wants to lead, they just want to follow the SV and Europe right down the drain.


----------



## gsdluvr (Jun 26, 2012)

Jax08 said:


> Comparing a human gymnast to this situation isn't quite equal. These people have joint replacements because of all the pounding their young joints take and they don't typically see the toll until after their careers are over. Not because of a genetic component.


Maybe, but she herself said her hips were faulty, but the firmly developed muscles carried her through her intense training. I know some dogs like this.


----------

