# What Would YOU Support?



## Ceph (Mar 28, 2007)

I imagine I am probably going to either : 1. Get chewed out; 2. open up a can-a worms or 3. have to dodge alot of flyinf objects for raising this question -- but I am curious as to what the members on this board think. It's not so much a debate or a discussion...rather it's just a statement of opinion.

Here's the question (and please read the background after the question to put it in context)...it has to do with the AKC standard more than anything else.

If you were given the choice to support either of these options...which would you support : 

1. Have the AKC standard altered to allow for White to to allow to be shown as a GSD.
2. Support whites not being allowed to be registered as GSDs.... <span style="color: #CC0000">thus supporting the separation of the whites into a separate breed </span> 

Now the context -- as most of you probably know I love GSDs...but I am amoung those that hope to separate the Whites from the GSD -- as they have already done in Europe (the whites are recognizd by the FCI as the WSSD...and they are doing quite well...competing in sport, working, etc...).

Well -- every year after AWSA (American White Shepherd Club Nationals)...we have *The Discussion*....which is basically separation vs. acceptance. The separatists argue that the majority of GSD people would rather see the white become a registration DQ within the GSD breed, and the acceptists argue that the majority of the GSD people would be OK with the White becoming a full member of the breed and allowed to show along their colored brethren.

The hang up right now is the GSDCA -- if the GSDCA were to remove the white completley (as the SV did) then our white dogs would be free to enter the FSS as White Shepherds...as they would no longer be German Shepherds. On the other hand they wont remove the DQ either (I hope they dont...because that will create an incredible gap between our dogs and the European WSSDs). They're just sitting on it so that they dont have to make a decision (on one hand they loose a ton of registered GSDs....thus dropping their rank in the AKC popularity contest...on the other they piss off the SV).

I understand this might be a gigantic waste of time for most people...but for those that are interested in answering, could you give me a bried explanation of why? I'm mostly just interested in the reasoning...and I will try very, very hard not to argue my point (hard for me...because I like changing peoples opinions [aka discussing])

Thank you so much, and I very much look forward to hearing what you have to say.

~Cate


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

Personally, I don't much care either way, but would probably be more in support of the WGSD achieving a separate breed status as has happened in Europe.

The downside is this would limit the gene pool for WGSD breeding (but it seems many WGSD breeders are already doing that, while some do still outcross to colored dogs). I don't know enough about the size of the WGSD gene pool to know if that would really be a concern.

My main reason being in favor of the WGSD as a separate breed is I think most of the AWSA breeders are already doing a better job than I see from most AKC breeders.. more practical, moderate structure and performance titles in addition to conformation titles. Whatever would maintain that quality is what I'd be in favor of. I'd fear AKC acceptance would make things easy, and many WGSD breeders would become complacent and no longer work so hard to prove their dogs are worthy, and thus AKC acceptance would be bad for the WGSD and what has already been accomplished, just as it has proven to be disadvantageous to most every breed that has achieved AKC acceptance. I'd think chances of this being minimized if WGSDs were considered separate, and thus always had to somewhat distinguish themselves from regular GSDs, as opposed to being assimilated into the current GSDCA GSD. And WGSD breeders could maintain control of their own standard, rather than having to conform to the GSDCA standard.


----------



## DianaM (Jan 5, 2006)

Both. Either recognize the white (and the other colors too as this is a WORKING breed and not a "oooh how pretty" breed) or force the separation. I do really prefer the separation.

As for limiting the gene pool, couldn't the FSS of the white shepherd allow for intake of BBS and standard German shepherds for a period of time before actually closing the stud book? I really don't see why not but then again I don't have any new breeds under my belt.



> Quote:I think most of the AWSA breeders are already doing a better job than I see from most AKC breeders.. more practical, moderate structure and performance titles in addition to conformation titles.


Exactly! Perhaps they should stay their own registry like the JRTCA so they can ensure better controls over conformation, health, and temperament. 



> Quoten one hand they loose a ton of registered GSDs....thus dropping their rank in the AKC popularity contest.


GOOD. The GSD is too popular as it is.


----------



## Andaka (Jun 29, 2003)

The problem with separating out the white GSD's into their own breed is that there are a lot of colored GSD's that carry the white gene, either through the deliberate outcrossing of WGSD's to colored ones by reputable WGSD breeders or by the multitude of BYB's that specialize in "rare" colors. So you won't be able to breed the white color out of the GSD's that are left in the registry.

The problem with giving them their own "variety" at AKC dog shows is that the specialty clubs would have to offer duplicate classes for colored and white GSD's. Plus AKC doesn't want to go that route.

The problem with keeping them as GSD's and just allowing them to show against the colored ones at shows is that they are not recognized as acceptable GSD's anywhere around the world. it is a disqualification in all GSD standards, not just here in the USA.


----------



## DianaM (Jan 5, 2006)

> Quotelus AKC doesn't want to go that route.


What's so bad about that? We have ASCOB, Black, and Parti cockers, white and colored bull terriers, dachshundville, if they have it with other breeds, there's no excuse NOT to have it with GSD. Or just let them be their own breed.

As for whites cropping up in litters, that is a bit of a detail issue but I think whites should be able to be registered as "white shepherd" or whatnot and the regulars be GSDs. I think that would even help further the separation as whites will begin to be drawn out of the GSD population. It would take time of course, but it can happen. They pretty handily managed to separate the English and American cockers after all.


----------



## Scarlett (Oct 13, 2001)

I personally oppose the creation of a breed based on a colour fault or disqualification within an accepted breed standard. That said, allowing for a variety within a breed, whereby the only difference would be the colour of the dog might be an acceptable alternative, but I don't know that the white fanciers want to go that route.


----------



## tracyc (Feb 23, 2005)

My opinion is that if there are enough White Shepherd fanciers to establish a separate breed, and jump through whatever hoops are required by the AKC to recognize that new breed--then go for it! 

There are a quite a few rare or minor breeds that aren't recognized by the AKC (yet)--I have a Leonberger, which is such a breed. Some Leonberger folks are working towards AKC recognition...just as many don't even want it, because with AKC recognition comes popularity, and all the bad issues that potentially come with that. There's something to be said for having a tightly-held breeding pool. 

I would not support the expansion of the GSD standard to include white dogs.


----------



## DianaM (Jan 5, 2006)

> Quote:I personally oppose the creation of a breed based on a colour fault or disqualification within an accepted breed standard.


As was stated above, they are working to retain a VERY moderate structure and working ability plus they are busting tail to improve health in their breed, so that right there is a lot more than just color.


----------



## DancingCavy (Feb 19, 2001)

Personally, I think they'd be better off as a variety. Like the Smooth and Rough collies. Judged by the same standard. So we'd have the GSD and the WGSD. JMHO. Though I've heard AKC doesn't separate by variety anymore. Will make it hard to add the Laekenois to the herding group if that's the case as it's basically the same as the other Belgian shepherds that are already recognized. . .


----------



## geokon_2000 (Jan 25, 2005)

Doesn't matter to me either way. If the AWSA breeders are doing a better job than AKC breeders, then who needs the AKC. The Dutch shepherd breed is doing exceptional without them, why can't the whites?


----------



## Ceph (Mar 28, 2007)

I honestly care about the AKC for one major (and roundabout) reason -- the FCI. Currently I could have two fully paperd WSSDs (I have one) and breed them together, and their pups cant be registered because the breed isnt recognized by the AKC, and the FCI doesnt register litters outside of FCI nations. Thats a major issue for me.

Though -- it would be awsome if I could show my FCI papered bitch in AKC herding...since it's the only nearish tending style....but I can't...because she isnt a GSD according to her papers because the WSD isnt recognized.

I would like the AKC to recognize the WSD so this whole importation thing becomes a little easier. I would love to share lines with Europe...but currently it is very hard....if not imossible....they can come....sort of....and they can go....sort of....but it is a whole lot of hooptyhoop.

For those that believe in a variety -- where do you think the FCI recognized WSDs would fit in (the AKC doesnt recognize them as GSDs and doesnt recognize the breed).

~Cate


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

Since the WGSD has been split in Europe, it would make the most sense to split it from the GSD here. How do they handle the issue of white pups born to colored parents in Europe? Are they now not registerable or recognized at all?


----------



## Ceph (Mar 28, 2007)

I think some countries do recognize them...and there are a couple of wGSD clubs spattered accross Europe....but for the most part they are neither recognized nor registered with FCI Papers....havent been in the SV since the 30's....that much I know for sure.

~Cate


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

For international/FCI matters, the WGSD could still be AKC recognized. Question is whether it's as a different variety of GSD, or as a separate breed. I'd vote for separate breed, partly because that is what is done in Europe so the precedent is there, and partly because that way the WGSD folks can maintain control of their breed and it's standard rather than having to conform to the existing GSDCA standard which, IMO, hasn't done much of anything good for the GSD in the US.

White pups born to colored parents is a good question though. But I'm sure something could be worked out. Maybe somewaht follow the lead of some of the color "breeds" in the horse world and offer double registration. For example, a palomino AQH, Morgan, ASB can all be registered as palomino (color "breed") as well as to their actual breed. Allow WGSDs born to colored parents to be registered as GSDs as they are now, but still prohibited from showing as GSDs, AND also registerable as the new WGSD breed, where they can show.


----------



## SunCzarina (Nov 24, 2000)

I see confusion either way.

I'm more likely to support them as a separate breed. However, it would only enhance that strange old wives tale I hear often - even from owners of whites - that whites are meaner or more mentally unbalanced than standard colored GSDs. I don't like hearing it, having known many whites I don't see where they're different temperament wise. Having them be a separate breed will enhance this delusion.

Inclusion into the standard as a variation would cause confusion with euro dogs who are considered a separate breed. Could you import a berger de suise and breed it with a white GSD then register them with AKC? 

Confusion. Agreed something needs to be done to recognize the whites - they're gorgeous.


----------



## thor wgsd (Jun 18, 2008)

It makes sense to follow the lead of Europe though doesn't it? 

Here in Argentina (and I think most of south america) they are a seperate breed (Pastor Suizo / Swiss shepherd) - though only a few years old and they are constantly bringing dogs from europe to get a bigger gene pool. I am not sure how that would work if it wasn't a separate breed.


----------



## Ceph (Mar 28, 2007)

I am sort of curious why separation would enhance the bad temperment tale? If anything I think it would diminish it....if we could show as a separate breed in sports, conformation, and work....be more legitimized so to speak -- then it is likelier that they would see more good temperment...not bad. Over all the WSDs in the US have a pretty good temperment -- the ones that give us the bad rap are the BYBers that dont really give a care for that....but they're typically selling rare white GSDs....not WSDs.

I believe only RvB registered dogs with full three generation pedigrees can.

The problem is that RvB doesnt recognize the pedigrees of some of the other countries whites...so you'll end up with a dog with two or three GGPs that dont have numbers on their pedigree -- therefore non registerable.

But every other countries whites? No.

As far as the question of what to do with whites from ******** -- a stock system would probably work really well...it would be up to the parent club...but with something like that correct GSDs and whites from colored parents could be brought in and registered and over time be assimilated into the breed.

~Cate


----------



## amjrchamberlain (Mar 8, 2005)

I'm not sure which way I would go on this. I believe that a WGSD is just that - a GSD with an alternative color. I would be more likely to support accepting the white color OR adding the WGSD as a variety of GSD, instead of giving it a separate breed status. In my mind, it is the same as long stock coat vs stock coat. While one may be more undesireable than the other, the dogs are not separate breeds because of the coat length (or color). 

On the other hand, I would support separating the WGSD from the GSD if it could be an OPTION and not forced. Doesn't the UKC accept both the WSD and the WGSD? I would (possibly) support something similar in AKC, if the owner of the dog could choose to register and compete as a separate breed (the WSD) or as a WGSD. 

I think that for breeding purposes, the WGSD needs to be able to access colored GSDs. 

Good conversation and it's nice to see people disagreeing nicely.







Best Wishes!


----------



## wolfstraum (May 2, 2003)

I am a strong believer in following the standard of the "mother club" of the breed - the SV and therefore the FCI. Argue as you will - logic vs tradition - the Standard is in place, and I believe it should be followed.

I have always *liked* the white GSDs (old Disney show? Shadow) but I don't believe that they should be "accepted" unless the SV takes that stand. So, IMO, the FCI alternative breed split makes more sense. Lets face it, even if the AKC "accepts" them - with the American intepretation of the GSDCA standard - fanciers of WGSDs will be trying to pound teh same square pegs into round holes in the showring as the European line fanciers.


Lee


----------



## Heather (Mar 4, 2001)

Nice, civil discussion!







I support separation. 

AWSA and WSCC have standards which are similar to the standard for the BBS, and most of the members are breeding toward that standard, with the hopes of attaining separation someday. The road to separation requires different approaches in the US and Canada, but the big roadblock in the US is the GSDCA (not the AKC, as some think).

I believe the historical reasons for DQ were based on faulty "science" (ignorance, really) but there's no turning that ship around now. Separate. The gene pool IS big enough; it's bigger than a LOT of breeds, so let the whites separate and go on their merry way. 

Sink or swim, I say... and I know these babies can swim!


----------



## Vertigo75 (Jul 11, 2006)

My feelings are if the GSDCA ever allowed whites to be shown in conformation, they could never win since their body types, IMHO, are much less angulated and less refined than the typical American show lines GSD of today. It would be like showing a working lines GSD in an AKC conformation event (just for the record, I now own a working lines GSD).

I used to be a member of AWSA when I owned a WGSD and would love to see a new breed developed. It is so true what a previous poster mentioned about AWSA members striving to maintain their WGSDs as true working dogs. Many of them excel in obedience, herding and agility, and there are many reputable breeders in AWSA who strive to have their breeding stock bear those titles. They also have worked very hard on their genetics project and I commend them for that. I wish them the best in their endeavor to form a separate, distinct breed.


----------

