# Book by Doc



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

Doc from this forum wrote a book called Reflections From the Dog House.

I haven't finished it completely but it is a good read.

Lots of general information and history. Also practical advice for owners.

He also manages to step on many toes,







but if one keeps an open mind there is a lot of common sense to his discussion of extremes.

There are a few people on this forum mentioned in the book but I won't say who.









Anyway I think some of you would get a lot out of it.

For the record I do not know Doc personally and there is no financial interest or connection between us.


----------



## JakodaCD OA (May 14, 2000)

I have it to, am definitely enjoying reading it, and recommend it ..


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

Fiction?


----------



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

It's all about the German Shepherd breed and covers most topics that routinely come up on this forum. Lots of breed history also.

There will be some on here who will consider it fiction.


----------



## robk (Jun 16, 2011)

Jane you are so funny.


----------



## LaRen616 (Mar 4, 2010)

I love Doc, he's a good guy with a lot of knowledge, he's funny too! 

Congrats to him, I will have to buy his book!


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Is it available to buy as an ebook

ETA I like him too))))

Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

It's a wonderful book. I just bought the recently available hc & will happily give my pb copy to a dog loving friend. Kay, who collaborated with Doc, is also a member here.


----------



## ksotto333 (Aug 3, 2011)

Thanks for sharing...looking forward to reading it..


----------



## Quinnsmom (Dec 27, 2008)

Where can I purchase either hardcover or paperback?


----------



## Andaka (Jun 29, 2003)

Barnes and Noble or Amazon have it.


----------



## Debbieg (Jun 7, 2009)

Jack's Dad said:


> Doc from this forum wrote a book called Reflections From the Dog House.
> 
> Doc wrote it with Kay Kenfield who was KHawk on this forum,
> Kay had sent me some if the chapters
> ...


----------



## Betty (Aug 11, 2002)

How cool!
Congratulations!


----------



## CarolinaRose (Jun 21, 2014)

I just had this book referred to me. Definitely looks interesting, I've already added it to my Amazon wish list and I'll hopefully be getting it soon.


----------



## counter (Feb 20, 2009)

I saw typos all over the back cover. I wish I could've helped proofread this before they printed it. I'm not perfect, but I seem to have an eye for that kind of stuff. Anything to do to assist the positive promotion of this breed I love! Can't wait to get the book eventually.


----------



## Daisy&Lucky's Mom (Apr 24, 2011)

I bought the book and love it. Made alot of sense. khawke has answered questions for me through pms and the book helped me understand more about genetic obedience, the swabian lines and just helped bring some common sense in looking at and applying the breed standard. Still going back and rereading. Reaaly liked the description of the Swabian lines.


----------



## Vandal (Dec 22, 2000)

As a general rule, I try to remain neutral about what other people's views on the breed are. If you like a certain kind of dog and have homes for them....it is not my place to tell you what to do in that regard. I have viewed some of Doc's posts as amusing and have always tried to be respectful, even if I don't agree with what he thinks a GSD should be. 
Since I was somehow listed as a source for what is in the book, while not knowing it was even being written, I will simply say this. After receiving my complementary edition of the book and thumbing through a few of the pages, my first impression left me more than a little disappointed. 

While I have made clear what I would like to see changed in SchH, the idea that SchH dogs are racing around a football field biting the first thing in sight and people who are participate are somehow prone to violence, pups out of titled parents are "bred to bite people" , etc. etc......( along with other outrageous claims), is absurd, inflammatory and simply beyond inaccurate.

For me, a book should be about informing people with accurate information, not getting even with people you disagree with on a forum while attempting to take an entire activity down with them. I have taken part in SchH for almost 40 years. SchH has preserved the breed to this point....make no mistake about that. Hopefully, people will realize adjustments are necessary for that to continue to be the case but simply making things up to tear down the effort of others in order to promote your version of the breed, is wrong on so many levels. Sorry, two thumbs down for this book.


----------



## DaniFani (Jan 24, 2013)

Vandal said:


> As a general rule, I try to remain neutral about what other people's views on the breed are. If you like a certain kind of dog and have homes for them....it is not my place to tell you what to do in that regard. I have viewed some of Doc's posts as amusing and have always tried to be respectful, even if I don't agree with what he thinks a GSD should be.
> Since I was somehow listed as a source for what is in the book, while not knowing it was even being written, I will simply say this. After receiving my complementary edition of the book and thumbing through a few of the pages, my first impression left me more than a little disappointed.
> 
> While I have made clear what I would like to see changed in SchH, the idea that SchH dogs are racing around a football field biting the first thing in sight and people who are participate are somehow prone to violence, pups out of titled parents are "bred to bite people" , etc. etc......( along with other outrageous claims), is absurd, inflammatory and simply beyond inaccurate.
> ...


Thanks for commenting, I was wondering the level of contribution that some of those listed had. I know I haven't been in the sport long...but I've visited clubs and met lots of dog people, and I've never had any of the terrible, abusive, experiences that Doc likes to talk about on here. I've actually had the opposite....lots of kindness, knowledge, experience, and most of all FUN! 

Some of my sport "dog friends" are becoming my very best friends. They were around in the 80's and 90's and are trying to keep the sport fun and real. I've never felt ridiculed, overlooked, or belittled...even the first 9 months with my byb, health and temperament mess dog. They were extremely helpful with me in achieving everything I could with that dog, and telling me to keep with him, that I would learn a lot from him...etc. These are trainers that have gone to the worlds, trained teams that have gone to the worlds, titled and worked a butt load of dogs, are currently training police dogs that are going onto the streets as well as pet obedience for the pet homes....they've all been wonderful and helpful. 

Also met quite a bit of the "crazy biting monsters" and they were mostly all nice dogs (and I mean this in mostly what I can evaluate...and that's the dogs off the field). Their handlers have strong bonds with them, quite a bit of them live in the home....They aren't just constantly looking for the closest decoy or sleeve to bite. 

On a different note...I'm "aging/maturing" in my dog world....and realizing that breeders are going to breed what they want to, and my "idealized justice" of going toe to toe with them on a forum (of all places) is futile. I'm just going to support the breeders and trainers I like, and leave it at that. I seek out those working dogs, successfully, and try and learn from them, and I support breeders working and producing dogs that successfully work and seem to fit into the utility that the breed was meant to be....anything else just isn't worth the effort.


----------



## wolfstraum (May 2, 2003)

not going to spend money buying this book.....sounds like it will do more damage to the reputation of the breed and justification to breeders who breed out of standard....Sad that the publisher does not research the credentials of their authors

Lee


----------



## counter (Feb 20, 2009)

Just ordered the book. Should arrive next week. I look forward to reading it. I also ordered the German Shepherd Dog in Word and Picture by Max von Stephanitz. I'll have to read them side by side. Ha!


----------



## my boy diesel (Mar 9, 2013)

*the credentials *
well if its on the _internet_ it must be true!! 
i guess everyone has their fan clubs
:shrug:


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

I'm looking forward to reading it!


----------



## Merciel (Apr 25, 2013)

wolfstraum said:


> Sad that the publisher does not research the credentials of their authors


Unless I'm very much mistaken, this book is self-published, meaning that there is no "publisher" in the sense you're likely thinking of. In other words, there's no process of editorial selection or review.


----------



## my boy diesel (Mar 9, 2013)

*Its one thing to spew nonsense on a forum and another to put it in print and charge people to read it.*
from what i have read in the current reviews that is this book in a nutshell
sounds kinda skewed to me :shrug:
but a friend offered to let me borrow theirs when they are done
so maybe i will post my own review after i have actually read it


----------



## LifeofRiley (Oct 20, 2011)

Well, as they say, there is no such thing as bad publicity. The mocking comments made by many on this thread have made me want to read this book all the more. Of course, I suspect, that most of the mockers have also not yet read the book in part, much less in its entirety. I will have a better perspective on that once I read the book, which I have now ordered… lol!


----------



## my boy diesel (Mar 9, 2013)

lifeof if you wanna read it go ahead i encourage it but i also realize he has his fans and that is likely to be the only real interested parties either way :shrug:


----------



## Whiteshepherds (Aug 21, 2010)

Looking forward to reading mine this weekend.


----------



## Nigel (Jul 10, 2012)

LifeofRiley said:


> Well, as they say, there is no such thing as bad publicity. The mocking comments made by many on this thread have made me want to read this book all the more. Of course, I suspect, that most of the mockers have also not yet read the book in part, much less in its entirety. I will have a better perspective on that once I read the book, which I have now ordered… lol!


Lol! Agreed, going to have to check it out and see why some people are getting worked up over it.


----------



## JakodaCD OA (May 14, 2000)

I'm going to say this once.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, however, I don't go around critiquing something I haven't even read. 

I'm sure everyone who writes a book gives has their opinion and belief's thrown into a book such as this..There are alot of books written about gsd's, that personally I think are hogwash, but I don't go around on the internet critiquing them without reading them first and well, keeping an open mind , take from it what I want, and discard the rest.

I have quite a collection of gsd related books, and I'll tell you, there is one big time gsd person who wrote a few books, I burned them when I found out that person, was knowingly breeding her dogs to dysplastic, nervy tempered dogs, I've never seen a 'bash' fest on her, (tho she is deceased)..

With that, there are alot of posts here that are not only OT but making sarcastic fun of a member here who wrote a book. 

With that, get over yourselves, go out and write your own book , if you don't like the book, don't buy it, if your not interested in it, again don't buy it. 

It's like all these breeder referrals I see where there is no first hand knowledge..

Bottom line, give your opinion, but do it in a respectul way, and I'm removing ALL posts that are OT..

BTW I do have the book, but admit I'm not to far into it, time restraints,,


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

*I have done some very heavy editing of this thread. If people have any questions about why certain posts were removed, please feel free to send me a PM. 

Thank you,

ADMIN Lisa*


----------



## my boy diesel (Mar 9, 2013)

actually on amazon you can read excerpts from the book and i have a question
maybe this belongs in its own thread but i read in the book on page 122

[ame]http://www.amazon.com/Reflections-Dog-House-Lewis-Phillips/dp/1936912961[/ame]

that 'schutzhund people in general' do not believe their dogs should be able to be handled even by a veterinarian

is this true?? that people who do schutzhund with their dogs do not believe their dogs should be handled by a judge as for examining teeth and testicles 
or even have a vet check the teeth?
do' schutzhund people in general' want their dogs to bite the vet? :help:
:wild:
it has always been my understanding that in order to do well in schutzhund a dog has to have above and beyond average nerves


----------



## Lilie (Feb 3, 2010)

Good question, MBD - I'd love to see a healthy discussion on that point!


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

My Schutzhund dogs are and routinely have been handled by vets. I've never had a dog bite or attempt to bite a vet and that includes having dead, infected tissue painfully trimmed away. I've also left my Schutzhund dogs at the vet all day to have OFA x-rays taken and they have always complimented me on their temperament, not freaking out in the kennel, and ease of handling them. These dogs have all been shown, some of them many times, so they are also used to male judges checking teeth and testicles and running hands over them to assess their angles and body condition.

IMO, my dogs (regardless of breed or training) should be able to be handled in ANY way by myself and also by any person I say so for any reason I say. Key word here being *I*. I still control who handles my dog and why, I would never be OK with a stranger tresspassing onto my property and manhandling my dog or care if my dog objected to this.


----------



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

I opened this thread so people would know that someone on here wrote a book that they "might" be interested in not for it to be picked apart piece by piece by people who haven't read it.

No one involved in IPO is going to like this book and I completely understand Vandals post. She was direct in reference to the book.

The book covers much more than IPO or show. It has a lot of history and covers a wide variety of other topics. If you think you won't like it don't buy it. 

I was out last evening but came home in time to see the now deleted posts. My estimation of a number of individuals hit a real low. 

This thread turned to crap because of small minded people and I for one wish it would be closed as it no longer serves a purpose.


----------



## glowingtoadfly (Feb 28, 2014)

Yeah, if people want to write derisive fairy tales about the history of the German Shepherd they should do so in Misinformation Thursday....


----------



## Merciel (Apr 25, 2013)

Jack's Dad said:


> This thread turned to crap because of small minded people and I for one wish it would be closed as it no longer serves a purpose.


I disagree. Assuming that people can restrain themselves and stay on topic (which I think should be much easier now that much of yesterday's chatter has been pruned away), I think there is much to be gained from an informed, measured, and candid discussion of the book.

I can certainly empathize with Doc in feeling a little touchy about certain criticisms (commiserating about 1-star reviews is a super popular pastime among authors -- _every_ author, no matter how big a name, occasionally gets a nerve hit by those 1-star cracks!), but the fact is, if you publish a book then you are putting it out there for the public to talk about, good or bad. That's what publication _means_: you are inviting people to read and talk about what you've said.


----------



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

The Amazon review was written by Lee and she did not read the book. Says something about Amazon's review policy.

You can't really review a book without reading it and discussing a phrase or sentence here or there is a waste of time.


----------



## Merciel (Apr 25, 2013)

I'm well aware of the various absurd reasons people put up 1-star reviews. I've gotten 1-star reviews because somebody's copy of a book got dinged in the mail; a couple of my friends have gotten 1-star reviews because their release dates were pushed back or people disliked a character or similarly weird reasons. It happens. It sucks, but it happens. That's part of being an author too. 

Anyway, there are a lot of people on the board who have read the book or who plan to read it, and I would like to keep a place open for them to talk about it when they have. Personally, I'm undecided as to whether I'll buy a copy, and so it would be helpful to me to know what people think and why.


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

Here is the deal. Some guy writes a book about a topic he has no qualifications or achievements in. He fills a portion of it with lies and half truths to push his agenda or biases then when he gets called on it people are going on about how the book is about more then that one specific topic? Why would it matter what the author wrote about in other sections of the book if he is happy to spread mis information in one subsection. What possible value could such a work hold and how could you trust what the person writes on other topics of he is willing to tweak and twist the truth regarding the topic in which he clearly has preconcieved biases? When you put something in print you better be able to answer the hard questions. 
Sorry to burst some bubbles  and rain on the parade.

Fyi: For those who didnt get it the fairytale was an analogy most parts of which were a play on opinions and statements the author has made in the past...


----------



## my boy diesel (Mar 9, 2013)

merciel you can read a fair amt of it on amazon if you click on the book itself it opens in a new window
which is where i got to page 122
sorry but after such a broad sweeping generalization and nose snubbing to schutzhund people 
many of whom are probably on this forum and who can state it is not true
the book has lost all credence for me :shrug:


----------



## glowingtoadfly (Feb 28, 2014)

Oh I think I comprehended the fairy tale quite well. I haven't read a lot of Doc's posts, nor do I, from the sound of it, share some of his views. However, silliness belongs in the silly thread. Maybe it's just that I work with young children and deal with much silliness and fantastical language on a daily basis and am used to channeling it into appropriate venues. I'm turning into a schoolmarm I think.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Right, this thread got lame real fast. If people don't care to read it *don't read it*. Who cares what Amazon reviews say? I once was looking for a 100' HDMI cable and read a horrible review from someone who said the cable he got was "too long" (mind you this is a product that is sold and priced based on a known, quantifiable LENGTH!). I haven't read the book so I can't comment (though it sounds like I won't like it) but I guess if anything, I'll give Doc props for writing almost 400 pages.


----------



## Daisy&Lucky's Mom (Apr 24, 2011)

Jack's Dad said:


> I opened this thread so people would know that someone on here wrote a book that they "might" be interested in not for it to be picked apart piece by piece by people who haven't read it.
> 
> No one involved in IPO is going to like this book and I completely understand Vandals post. She was direct in reference to the book.
> 
> ...


Jack's Dad thanks for starting this thread.

I read the book and I enjoyed it.Your right it really talks alot about the history of the breed. Im interested b/c I need a dog whocan do therapy work and possibly be a alert dog for me.Having read all the threads about genetic obedience this book helped me understand why the swabian lines bring it to the GSD. I also have lost a dog to cancer so the chapters on health were interesting and informative. I will give a review of the book ,I have reread it and I will state Im no expert.Personally my only contact has been w/khawke who has pmed me several times re questions about genetic obedience and talked about ways to start training my dogs to alert. So no fianancial stuff here either.

Folks Im a pet owner but I hope to have a dog whose work is helping me avoid being unconcious due to hypoglycemic reactions. I would need a bomb proof dog who can camp ,walk around juveniles in the court system ,travel etc. I want to know what to look for this time. This book talked about the stuff I need to know. 
It did not state breed only super size dogs it said that to hold the whole standard sometimes dogs smaller and larger then the standard are brought in to keep all the desired traits going.

As for the sports comments I understand why people would be upset. I haven't met many sports dogs . Maybe two ,both were very nice. 

As to the oversize one more comment which may reignite. Im fat ok and yes i know I need to lose weight but a small dog would probably be in trouble having me use him /her for support for me to get to my feet after an insulin reaction.Just a note from the world I live in.

I liked the book. I have Von Stephanwitz(msp) book and quite a few others . This one explained how the history of the breed as it came together. I liked it.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Liesje said:


> Right, this thread got lame real fast. If people don't care to read it *don't read it*. Who cares what Amazon reviews say? I once was looking for a 100' HDMI cable and read a horrible review from someone who said the cable he got was "too long" (mind you this is a product that is sold and priced based on a known, quantifiable LENGTH!). I haven't read the book so I can't comment (though it sounds like I won't like it) but I guess if anything, I'll give Doc props for writing almost 400 pages.



Lolol at amazon reviews. I used to read them and then I realized that no matter how amazing a product there will always be someone complaining. I still read them to get an idea of the problems that might come up but that's about it.


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

An excerpt from the book:



> For the bite sport dogs , the 'courage' test has evolved from the action of the dog to get between his handler and a 'bad guy' simulating an attack on that very same handler, to a dog that runs down a football field to make an UNprovoked (_emphasis actually in the book_) attack of his own on a stranger wandering around minding his own business. Good high bite thresholds have been ditched for low bite thresholds, pry drive suited to a herding dog has been exchanged for the kind of extreme prey drive which will support an unprovoked attack on someone no where near the dog's handler, and genetic obedience, which supports cooperation with a human towards a common goal has been thrown out the window because it doesn't support an unprovoked attack on a human.


 
This type of inflammatory drivel and out right lies are strewn throughout the book while the authors claim:



> Just as the 'old-fashioned' dogs tend to have a kinder, gentler nature....... the people who choose the 'old-fashioned dogs tend to be more open, mannerly 'just folks'. They are generally friendly, welcoming, and tend to accept a wide variety of opinions....... The can generally understand divergent points of view, even if they don't embrace them.


 
Like Anne/Vandal. I give the book :thumbsdown: :thumbsdown:


----------



## Guardyan (Aug 29, 2005)

Pry drive?


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

Typo on my part.


----------



## Guardyan (Aug 29, 2005)

Thanks - so what are the credentials of the author?


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

I wasn't defending the book (that I haven't read). There's nothing wrong with not liking a book. From the excerpts above I don't like it either. But the ganging up and mocking was disgusting.


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

lalachka, my post was not to you or about anything you wrote. I was critiquing the book based on the parts I have read so far. 

Guardyan, you can read about the authors on Amazon, I believe.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Lol and I wasn't replying to you. I was defending my earlier posts)))) I liked your post though in that you're not just dissing to be dissing. 

I can't watch someone get ganged up on. I have to say something even if they're wrong

Sorry and back to the book


----------



## Nigel (Jul 10, 2012)

lalachka said:


> I wasn't defending the book (that I haven't read). There's nothing wrong with not liking a book. From the excerpts above I don't like it either. But the ganging up and mocking was disgusting.


I would like to read what information led Doc to come to his conclusions on size, temperament, schutzhund etc... Then look into the information/sources myself before nay saying anything.


----------



## Whiteshepherds (Aug 21, 2010)

> For the bite sport dogs , the 'courage' test has evolved from the action of the dog to get between his handler and a 'bad guy' simulating an attack on that very same handler, to a dog that runs down a football field to make an UNprovoked (_emphasis actually in the book_) attack of his own on a stranger wandering around minding his own business.


If this is incorrect, what exactly is happening when the dog runs down the field and jumps at the sleeve and why does he do it? 
(no idea, that's why I'm asking)


----------



## GatorDog (Aug 17, 2011)

Whiteshepherds said:


> If this is incorrect, what exactly is happening when the dog runs down the field and jumps at the sleeve and why does he do it?
> (no idea, that's why I'm asking)


The helper is running down the field making threats when the dog is released.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

The dog is being provoked, the helper/decoy is yelling at the dog and the dog must be in control(sit) until released, then be courageous and run full on at the 'threat' and bite without bailing. It is a courage test. 
For many who do this sport, the test isn't done at a long distance often as it can be dangerous for both dog and helper, though it is done enough to show how the dog bites, which way the dog will go on impact. There are nuances in training on the dogs natural movement on a long bite(I mean courage test). Experienced helpers learn to read the dogs movement as it comes downfield to catch it safely.
Other times, it is trained over and over with a bungee to prove the dog will engage and power up. All depends on the dog.


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

Whiteshepherds said:


> If this is incorrect, what exactly is happening when the dog runs down the field and jumps at the sleeve and why does he do it?
> (no idea, that's why I'm asking)


The helper is running toward the dog and handler, yelling and threatening with a stick. The dog is released by the handler to intercept the attack. 

They are not running off biting poor lost souls who are just meandering about. Google videos of Schutzhund Courage Tests/Long Bites and see for yourself. It's pretty clear to see that the book's description, and therefore the insinuation made about the temperament of the dogs and their reasons for biting, is completely inaccurate and intentionally misleading.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Isn't it assumed that the field is someone's property or it's a place where no one is supposed to be and the dog is searching for an intruder?


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Not that it's assumed but the exercise is supposed to be showing that a dog can search someone's property, find the intruder, alert the handler, hold the intruder until the handler can get there and then bite on command or if he's trying to get away. 

That what I thought this was about. If that's the case then there's no innocent people minding their own business getting bitten

Still though, no excuse for yesterday's stuff)))))


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

lalachka said:


> Not that it's assumed but the exercise is supposed to be showing that a dog can search someone's property, find the intruder, alert the handler, hold the intruder until the handler can get there and then bite on command or if he's trying to get away.
> 
> That what I thought this was about. If that's the case then there's no innocent people minding their own business getting bitten


That is what it is about. It is based on police work, something which used to be very obvious to even the most casual observer back before they changed the rules to eliminate the handler ordering the helper to put his hands up and doing a pat-down search of the "bad guy".

But yes, the handler and dog aren't just out for a walk in the park, menacing innocent strangers. The dog has been cued by the handler and the environment that there is a bad guy somewhere for them to find and deal with. That is the dog's job at the moment, and he knows it.

The only time the dog bites is when the helper is directly threatening the dog and/or handler. When the helper is neutral, or ceases fighting, the dog must guard, and can bark, but no biting.

The only exception to that is the escape exercise, where upon finding the helper in his hiding spot the handler orders him out of the blind and sets the dog to guard the helper while the handler goes into the blind (again mimicking police work where the handler may need to check the bad guy's hiding spot for contraband, evidence, etc...) When the helper tries to run away while the handler is out of sight, the dog prevents his escape.

There are no "innocents" threatened or harmed in a SchH protection routine.


----------



## Merciel (Apr 25, 2013)

Guardyan said:


> Thanks - so what are the credentials of the author?


I think this is kind of a red herring.

You can write a good, accurate, and informative book about a topic you're not necessarily an expert in, provided that your research is solid and supported by citations to source authorities. In fact, for a broad-ranging book (like this one), you almost _have_ to do that, because nobody could possibly be a personal firsthand source for every topic covered in a book that stretches over a span of decades.

That's why pretty much every informative nonfiction book out there has a huge table of citations in the back. For example, John Bradshaw's Dog Sense, which I'm just using as an example because it's right next to my computer at the moment, has some 20 pages of notes at the back of the book that include citations to the research supporting all of the factual statements he makes, chapter by chapter.

So the more relevant question, IMO, would be: to the extent that any factual representations are made in this book, what are the sources? What research is cited? What primary and secondary authority?

(Obviously I don't know the answer, not having read it, but maybe someone who has can chime in.)


----------



## Guardyan (Aug 29, 2005)

> "You can write a good, accurate, and informative book about a topic you're not necessarily an expert in"


You could, but wouldn't an expert write a better one? 

I'm not trying to cause problems. I'm not familiar with the author or their views and was curious what their qualifications were.


----------



## Merciel (Apr 25, 2013)

Guardyan said:


> You could, but wouldn't an expert write a better one?
> 
> I'm not trying to cause problems. I'm not familiar with the author or their views and was curious what their qualifications were.


Sometimes yes, sometimes no. I'm sure we're all familiar with the phenomenon of the professor who is a brilliant scholar in his or her chosen field, but an absolutely terrible writer whose grasp of English is much akin to a lawnmower's grasp on a frog. Those books are frequently informative, but they're still terrible, because nobody can stand to read them.

And sometimes the process of researching and writing the book _makes_ the author an expert in their field, even if they had no special knowledge -- just a lot of passion -- about that subject before starting the project.

So really I think you have to evaluate the text separately from the author's background, to some extent. If some of the assertions seem questionable, what citations back them up? What's the skeleton of objective, verifiable fact or research that supports the rest of the squishier opinion bits?


----------



## my boy diesel (Mar 9, 2013)

*It's pretty clear to see that the book's description, and therefore the insinuation made about the temperament of the dogs and their reasons for biting, is completely inaccurate and intentionally misleading.*

one has to wonder what the authors motivations were to spread such misinformation?
i mean it isnt even thursday 

no really
it isnt enough just to promote ones own oversized unique color breeding program
does one really have to literally slander the entire working dog world??


----------



## Guardyan (Aug 29, 2005)

> And sometimes the process of researching and writing the book makes the author an expert in their field, even if they had no special knowledge -- just a lot of passion -- about that subject before starting the project.


You make some very interesting points. However, I'm not certain that someone can become a dog expert by reading and researching. For example, I can read various discussions about pack drive, but my understanding would be limited until I handled dogs with varying levels of pack drive and challenged them in some capacity.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Chris Wild said:


> That is what it is about. It is based on police work, something which used to be very obvious to even the most casual observer back before they changed the rules to eliminate the handler ordering the helper to put his hands up and doing a pat-down search of the "bad guy".
> 
> But yes, the handler and dog aren't just out for a walk in the park, menacing innocent strangers. The dog has been cued by the handler and the environment that there is a bad guy somewhere for them to find and deal with. That is the dog's job at the moment, and he knows it.
> 
> ...


Ok, I'm a very casual observer. My involvement in schh is watching 3 videos and not to the end lol. And it's def obvious, it's almost like a movie scene

I guess doc's thing is that gsds shouldn't be bite dogs. I'm actually interested to learn doc's idea of a shepherd. 

I think gsds wouldn't be nearly as popular if it wasn't for their protective and biting reputation. 
I don't know if that's a bad thing seeing how people say that its popularity is its downfall because everyone and their neighbor are breeding them.


----------



## glowingtoadfly (Feb 28, 2014)

my boy diesel said:


> *It's pretty clear to see that the book's description, and therefore the insinuation made about the temperament of the dogs and their reasons for biting, is completely inaccurate and intentionally misleading.*
> 
> one has to wonder what the authors motivations were to spread such misinformation?
> i mean it isnt even thursday
> ...


Lol


----------



## Merciel (Apr 25, 2013)

Guardyan said:


> However, I'm not certain that someone can become a dog expert by reading and researching. For example, I can read various discussions about pack drive, but my understanding would be limited until I handled dogs with varying levels of pack drive and challenged them in some capacity.


I agree. I think there _are_ some things that you need to do hands-on to fully appreciate.

That said, my understanding is that this is more of a breed history and personal memoir, rather than a training book. I only read a few pages of the excerpt that's on Amazon (meant to give it a more thorough look, but I had too much actual work to do this afternoon), so I only got to the part where the book was talking about the roles that dogs have played throughout history. _That_ stuff you can definitely get by research (indeed, what other way is there to know what the social role of companion dogs was in medieval society?), and that's exactly the sort of material that I would expect to see supported by citations to authorities in the back.

Now, if it turns out that the focus of the book is more on other things (which I don't know because, again, I have not read more than the first few pages), then yes, I agree, I would want to know more about the basis of the author's experience.

If that's the case, then I would assume the book talks about that, but maybe someone who's read it can discuss that aspect from a more informed standpoint. I can only speculate and talk about generalities, which is not very helpful.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

my boy diesel said:


> *It's pretty clear to see that the book's description, and therefore the insinuation made about the temperament of the dogs and their reasons for biting, is completely inaccurate and intentionally misleading.*
> 
> one has to wonder what the authors motivations were to spread such misinformation?
> i mean it isnt even thursday
> ...


What's his breeding program? Or can you post a link to where he talked about it? 
I'd like to learn more about his views but he's not replying.


----------



## glowingtoadfly (Feb 28, 2014)

I was laughing about the Misinformation Thursday reference. As someone who loves working lines, I am a bit perturbed, but do not feel insulted by the preferences of others for the Swabian lines. I think my dogs are more Thuringian, which I prefer. Are working lines considered more Thuringian?


----------



## Castlemaid (Jun 29, 2006)

There is a fine line between talking about one's views, and promoting a book in print - due to forum rules, Doc can't really promote his own book, or it would be advertising. 

People can discuss it though, and share their thoughts about it, as they could on any GSD book they so choose to talk about. 

The link to his website does not seem to work anymore? 

I believe his kennel name is East Coast Black Magic German Shepherds. 

There is a blog and a facebook page for the kennel if you are interested.


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

Due to rules and regulations of the forum, and the enforcement by moderators, I'm not sure what I can say or not say on this thread. I appreciate all of the questions and wish I could respond.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

So I came into this book with a very open mind because I really wanted to give doc the benefit of the doubt. It's pretty cool to publish a book, I'm never going to do it, so I wasn't about to start slamming someone that has accomplished something pretty significant in their life.

I have some very objective issues that I've noticed with this book.

1) It's not listed if this is fiction/nonfiction. It reads very much like a nonfiction book, but doc claimed on this thread that it was just one person's experience so that makes it sound fiction...but unfortunately there is A LOT of "how to" information in that book which is definitely nonfiction. I've basically decided that the idea behind the book is nonfiction and so the book is nonfiction. Which leads me to my second issue...

2) As a nonfiction book...there is a large amount of bias and subjective writing going on. A lot of opinion thrown in when it just isn't necessary. When you throw in opinion into a nonfiction book, you give the reader the idea that the opinion is fact...when it isn't. It's just the author's opinion. I wouldn't have an issue with that if it was a fiction book, author can write all about their opinions then, but this is a nonfiction book, where that amount of opinion isn't necessary and will tend to make an "uneducated" reader believe what they're reading is 100% fact when it isn't.

3) None of the secondary information is cited. There is a bibliography page at the end, but the actual works aren't cited throughout the book. Due to the dates that are written about, and knowing doc's approximate age, it's easy for me to figure out what is secondary and what is actual experience. Unfortunately, others do not have that ability. Some of the sources have also been cited incorrectly, and for no literal reason. Like I noticed the letter doc posted in the "moderate" thread, is listed under "interviews."

4) There are HUGELY inaccurate, sweeping generalizations made. Doc speaks of the bell curve in the book and how everything tends to fit the bell curve. But for some reason, doesn't give the "bite sport" dogs that benefit of the doubt. Basically, all bite sport bred dogs are lumped into the group of national/world level competitors and the type of dogs they prefer (which is also questionable). But I have a huge quarrel with the theory that all bite sport dogs are low threshhold and all the other misinformation about them.

5) There are a lot of informational issues I have with the book, but I don't really want to list them all as I realize many of them are basically differences of opinion. While reading, I could have probably taken a note every five pages and started a thread about it, but that seemed like it would be in bad taste as its very rare that someone has the opportunity to question, or even "call out" an author, but I don't think the forum is the proper place for something like that. Although one could argue that when someone puts out a piece of literary work, it's everyone's responsibility to question it...

I think this book, is a great detriment to anyone that is looking for a GSD. It's extremely biased and if this were a person's first information about the breed, it would definitely steer them in one way over the other instead of just listing out the information in an objective way and letting the reader/user decide what is more important to them. Hopefully, most people will see the bias, not take it as fact, and more than likely discredit the author in that process...but who knows?


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Thank you. I got the website. I don't agree with his views and I probably wouldn't like the book going by the stuff I read so far. I'd still like to read it if I can buy the ebook some day.


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

*OT posts will continue to be deleted. The next one posted will resort in a warning. There are a lot of forums on this board where breeding and training discussions can be started. It is also not fair to address Doc when he can not respond to this thread without getting himself into trouble. 

Please stick to discussions about the book itself. BTW, Doc is only one of the authors. 

ADMIN *


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

lhczth said:


> *OT posts will continue to be deleted. The next one posted will resort in a warning. There are a lot of forums on this board where breeding and training discussions can be started. It is also not fair to address Doc when he can not respond to this thread without getting himself into trouble.
> 
> Please stick to discussions about the book itself. BTW, Doc is only one of the authors.
> 
> ADMIN *


I didn't realize he couldn't reply. I def didn't mean to ask questions he couldn't reply to. 

I'd like to talk about this though. So what kind of a thread can I open? I don't always follow what's OT and what's not

ETA I want to talk about doc's views on breeding now that I saw his website. So what kinds of a thread would that be?


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

I would say that is a breeding thread if you are talking about breeding.


----------



## Merciel (Apr 25, 2013)

lalachka said:


> I don't always follow what's OT and what's not
> 
> ETA I want to talk about doc's views on breeding now that I saw his website. So what kinds of a thread would that be?


*cough* you don't say. 

I'd suggest heading over to the "Breeding more for the moderate" thread, that seems to be the closest one currently active.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

lhczth said:


> I would say that is a breeding thread if you are talking about breeding.


Doc's breeding))))) specifically

I will try to come up with something 

Merciel, there are many many, i'd say countless, ot posts left in threads where others were deleted. Yeah, not easy to follow. Besides, it's very subjective what's related to the topic and what's not.


----------



## JakodaCD OA (May 14, 2000)

my suggestion, lalachka, if you want to know about doc's breeding program and discuss it, PM him. 

Once you open a thread and the negatives start on a breeder, that is considered breeder bashing and it will get shut down


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

I wasn't going to bash but I changed my mind either way. I might pm


----------



## JakodaCD OA (May 14, 2000)

no I didn't think you were going to, but others will..PM him, Im sure he'll answer your questions


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

JakodaCD OA said:


> no I didn't think you were going to, but others will..PM him, Im sure he'll answer your questions


You're right)))) I will. I like forums better because I love to read other people's thoughts and I actually like it when threads go places. But yeah, this one would end badly.


----------



## Mary Beth (Apr 17, 2010)

Reflections from the Dog House by Doc & Kay - I highly recommend it for anyone who is interested in the oversize gsds. My Sting is oversize 30 inches tall 130 lbs. but he was a throwback - twice as big as his siblings, so I am very interested also. I get questions from people about Sting like just this morning while walking him on the capitol grounds. They ask me : he is so big, he is beautiful, he sits so calmly - where did you get him, and so on. Instead of saying "well, he was the biggest in the litter" - I now recommend Doc & Kay's book


----------



## Whiteshepherds (Aug 21, 2010)

martemchik said:


> There are HUGELY inaccurate, sweeping generalizations made....
> I think this book, is a great detriment to anyone that is looking for a GSD. It's extremely biased and if this were a person's first information about the breed, it would definitely steer them in one way over the other instead of just listing out the information in an objective way and letting the reader/user decide what is more important to them. Hopefully, most people will see the bias, not take it as fact, and more than likely discredit the author in that process...but who knows?


People have no problem making sweeping generalizations about the larger GSD's, the whites, the ASL's etc. in writing, on forums, and in books. People today still quote things that were written 50 years ago even though some of those opinions are no longer valid, the science is outdated etc. and some people walk away believing the information is factual. I haven't seen any great number of people up in arms because THAT information is biased and often incorrect..most certainly a case of lumping all dogs of one type into the same stereotype. 

Now you have someone who points out some of the flaws in the breed that involve the IPO dogs among other things and the book is biased, too much opinion, not enough fact, not enough citations and has too many sweeping generalizations......Pot, kettle, black?

I doubt that Doc is going to change the face of the breed because of this book and I doubt that was his intention. I'm taking it as his opinion based on his experiences as a dog owner and breeder, his knowledge about the history of the dogs and his desire to show another side of the breed that people seem to dismiss even though they've been here for a very long time.


----------



## Merciel (Apr 25, 2013)

Whiteshepherds said:


> People have no problem making sweeping generalizations about the larger GSD's, the whites, the ASL's etc. in writing, on forums, and in books. People today still quote things that were written 50 years ago even though some of those opinions are no longer valid, the science is outdated etc. and some people walk away believing the information is factual. I haven't seen any great number of people up in arms because THAT information is biased and often incorrect..most certainly a case of lumping all dogs of one type into the same stereotype.
> 
> Now you have someone who points out some of the flaws in the breed that involve the IPO dogs among other things and the book is biased, too much opinion, not enough fact, not enough citations and has too many sweeping generalizations......Pot, kettle, black?


I feel like I spend a lot of time in this thread jumping on people all "NO YOU'RE DOING CRITICISM WRONG" and so here's a pre-emptive apology about that, _buuuuttt_...

...just because somebody else did or said something wrong is not an excuse for continued error. Ideally, what we should be striving for is accuracy in understanding on _all_ topics. Just because somebody spewed a falsehood about X group does not justify throwing back retaliatory falsehoods about Y group; all that does is create a blizzard of ignorance, which I think is not an outcome anybody wants.

A good argument should be clear, accurate, built on verifiable fact, and limited, as much as possible, to extrapolations and opinions that can be justified by those facts.

If there are legitimate criticisms to be leveled at IPO dogs (and since even the IPO people on this board frequently say that there are, I am willing to take as true that there are legitimate criticisms to be made), then it should be possible to make those arguments in a way that fits the above criteria.

If the argument is unclear, overgeneralized, inaccurate, not based on fact, and/or prone to sweeping assertions that reach far beyond the provable facts, then it will convince no reasonable observer, and will very probably undercut its own credibility as a result of its flaws.

I take no position as to how well this book achieves those ends; right now I don't even know whether it's meant to be a persuasive opinion piece. But I do think that the standards by which we collectively consider it should be both fair and critical (in the sense of constructively building toward something better, not in the sense of cutting it down).


----------



## carmspack (Feb 2, 2011)

I am so sorry . I can not recommend this book.

I bought a copy and over 4 days have read it , more than once .
There is almost an undertone as if Doc doesn't even like GSD.
Is the end thought that the breed will be saved by back yard breeders ?
I surely do not think so , and to equate "the country people" with back yard breeders is flawed and damaging in the long run . 
Every back yard breeder will now have reinforcements , whether Doc intended this or not.
The "country people" that were being referenced where the working shepherds who carried on , unimpressed and unaffected by the scramble to create a breed . They bred to make their own work day go easier , from their own stock or a competing shepherds interesting , superior performing dog. They were not back yard breeders .

I think there was reference to Gord Garrett . 
"country people" would be his turn of phrase.
I had the pleasure of spending many hours talking to Gord when we attended the same shows. That goes back to mid 70's . 
Once again , a co-incidence because I was asking after him , because no one has seen him or heard from him in a long time. That was a week before the book arrived on my doorstep. 
At one time he wrote for the Breedlines in the Dogs in Canada magazine . 
Oversize dogs , with out of standard colour , without proper breed characteristics , by a group that does not proof the breeding program in work, by work, which does include sport , will not save the day .
Breeders don't despise pet owners.
GSD that do sport are not savage blood lusting dogs .

First section I hit , random chance was Held Ritterberg , a mainstay in my program as a good source of Bernd Lierberg -- koer description is "Held vom Ritterberg
11d
DDR 103314
20-11-1978
SchH.3, Kör 5546/44
Held vom Ritterberg was an outstanding producer of East German/Czech border patrol dogs such as Bero v.d. Friedersdorfer Flur, Kass v. Fürstendamm, Hassan v.d. Hasselwiesen. Line breeding on Held has proven to be very productive in producing hard, serious working Shepherds. 
Kör: Just middle-sized, medium-strong, masculine male with good harmony and lines, firm and tight in structure. Striking head with firm ears and dark eyes. Good firm top-line, with beautiful outline in front and rear and he demonstrates a free far-reaching gait with a powerful action. He should not fill out any more in the lowerchest. Similar in type to his parents. He has a relaxed and friendly temperament but hard when provoked with good sharpness, courage and hardness."

Relaxed and friendly temperament . Hard when provoked .
With good sharpness , courage and hardness.

This is ideal . Perfection. A brave dog , who is not a liability . Plus has good , functional size and conformation.

quote " Held was a dog balanced between the unfettered aggression of Hitler's attack dogs and the old main line of Stephanitz' dogs" page 345 .

Not good words about Don Rolandsteich , and his connections to Axel Deininghauserheide .

You have a lovely female that quote "I have a litter mate (female) of this dog. What a wonderful balanced dog that is exhibiting "it" ...
M'Kaiser von Benedict - German Shepherd Dog"

have a look at the pedigree . Rich vein of Held Ritterberg and rich vein of Don Rolandsteich.

You keep mentioning P T Barnum throughout the book -- the reflections , sorry to say are like those you would see in a fun house mirror - found in many circus shows.


----------



## Freestep (May 1, 2011)

It seems like I should read this book. But if it's based on untruths, hearsay, and logical fallacies, with misspellings and grammatical errors to boot, I think it would drive me crazy to read. 

If it's an editorial opinion piece, slanted writing is one thing. But if the author is trying to make the book seem like nonfiction reference, it's very poor form. This kind of thing is annoying to me even on the internet, but put it in in book form, and it's insulting to the intelligence of the reader. 

Plus, I'm aware that Doc breeds oversize, out-of-standard dogs, so I am already skeptical of his opinions and motives. Just from his posts, I've gotten the impression that he's not happy with working GSDs and doesn't like the written standard. He imagines a GSD and a standard that "should have been", and claims he has these rare and precious "old fashioned" bloodlines. I don't know why he doesn't just create another breed like the King or Shiloh Shepherds and be done with it, rather than attempting to rewrite the GSD.

And I remember questioning him on some things he's said here, and never getting a straight answer, so I imagine his book will just be more of the same runaround.


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

*People, please, stop talking about the authors in first person. That isn't fair since both are members of this board, but can't come into this thread. Talk about the book and comments made by the authors, or you disagree with the authors, etc, without making it personal. *

*Thank you,*

*ADMIN Lisa*


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

Because the authors sharing their view on this thread that would be taken as 'selling' the book? I don't understand that. Or would they have to pay the premium upgrade to vendor to be in line with the rules. Maybe this thread should just be deleted so the admin and mods don't have to work so hard to keep it in line with the rules and regulations of this board.


----------



## carmspack (Feb 2, 2011)

this is the description of Hektor Linksrhein renamed Horand Grafrath , the male which von Stephanitz chose as the dog upon which to found a breed . He did have a good eye for a dog -- there were reasons that Hektor/Horand was chosen. 
Here is that description ""Horand embodied for the enthusiasts of that time the fulfillment of their fondest dreams: he was large for that period -- from 24 - 24 1/2 " height of back, naturally correctly measured without magnifying glasses: and even from the point of view of present conditions, a very good medium size -- with powerful bones, beautiful lines, and a nobly formed head: clean and sinewy in build, the entire dog was one liver wire. His character corresponded to his exterior qualities; marvelous in his insinuating fidelity to his master; towards all others the complete indifference of a master-mind, with a boundless and irrepressible zest for living. Although untrained in his puppyhood, nevertheless obedient in the slightest nod when at his master's side; but when left to himself, the madest rascal, the wildest ruffian and an incorrigible provoker of strife. Never idle, always on the go: well-disposed to harmless people, but no cringer, mad on children and always -- in love . What could not have become of such a dog, if we had only had at that time military or police service training? He suffered from a suppressed , or better, a superfluity of unemployed energy; for he was in heaven when someone occupied with him, and he was then the most tractable of dogs.

Horand handed on these wonderful characteristics of the high-breed to his immediate descendants . They still survive to-day, and we shall see later on that nearly all field trial champions were of Horand strain and possessed his blood to a large degree"

end of quote . This taken directly from the von Stephanitz book, bottom page 136 , 137 and top of 138.

This is a vastly different portrayal than that printed in the discussed book . 
I believe this is important to set the tone . Quote from "Reflections" "so that 'working-line' dog means nothing more nor better than a dog whose 'work' is to run down a football field and bite a complete stranger threatening no one is a problem itself . Breeding a dog to readily and rapidly bite the first person the dog sees that isn't his own handler is not conducive to creating a dog that fits well into the world as it is today.

continued "Stephanitz could get away with a dog that chased his tenant farmers' stock because they were his tenant farmers and were dependant upon his good will - whether they liked it or not . His dogs could bite his servants and the tradesmen, delivery boys and people from the middle and lower echelons of society with impunity because those people could do nothing about it . They couldn't sue him and they had no recourse when his dog bit them. Stephanitz could get away with bragging that his dog knew by a man's clothing whether or not he could bite that man with impunity."

continue with direct quote "Today, Stephanitz would get sued and Horand, with all his delight in provoking strife and his joy in biting anyone not wealthy enough to afford expensive clothing would not live long enough to be the father of a breed -- he'd be put to sleep in short order"

end quote

Horand put to sleep in short order.

You compare the description I have given from von Stephanitz. No where , no way similar.


----------



## carmspack (Feb 2, 2011)

other point a GSD has to have a good grip . I believe grip and bite are different.
Anne "Vandal" speaks often, as do I, of dogs that grip, torque and push into . I have seen it with my own eyes. 
It is a trait I have been told by decoys and LE that my dogs tend to have .
It is a trait that Ellen Nicklesberg in her articles talks about.
It is a trait that is in the von Stephanitz book , where he says a dog must have an authoritative firm grip and exert his will upon the sheep. A dog with less will make the herd restless , and that in big numbers is a big problem.


----------



## gsdsar (May 21, 2002)

But in those two descriptions what us the truth? Does anyone know? I know plenty of kennel blind breeders who refuse to see the truth in their dogs. 

So while I am sure that Von Stephanitz took great joy in his dog, and thought his rapscallion ways were wonderful and charming, that does not mean the dog did not happily bite or intimidate people that were of no threat. 

But do we know the truth? Anyone? 

I have not read the book, and based on some quotes I have read, I won't. I don't like the tone. Just saying, that while he was the founder if the breed, he is biased as well. 

If we are going to get on one persons case for bias, then Stephanitz should not be who we use as a counter point. 

You can win a argument by saying " your mom is wrong that sky is orange, because my mom says it's purple" two opinions don't make fact. 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## arycrest (Feb 28, 2006)

Is this book going to be formated into an ebook for Kindle?


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

My book arrived today. Went to sit down and read it to find my husband had gotten to it first. Grrr. I am really looking forward to reading it!


----------



## glowingtoadfly (Feb 28, 2014)

I want Horand! He sounds like an amazing dog. He was a wolfdog, if what I hear is true.


----------



## Pioneer53 (May 5, 2006)

Came across the publishing house online.

For those who are interested in reading the book, for whatever reason, consider buying it directly from the publisher:
Reflections from the Dog House ? Parson's Porch & Company

They are a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization whose profits go to help folks in need.

No affiliation to the publisher or author. (_Not sure if this is different than posting a link to an online store for a training DVD, equipment, etc...?_)


----------



## Whiteshepherds (Aug 21, 2010)

The book says that the "old fashioned" dogs have the lowest incidence of bloat, SIBO, IBD, EPI and JRD. (because they have less in-breeding and avoid back-massing.)

I'm curious to know if like the WS/WGSD breeders, does this group of breeders have some kind of genetic database devoted to the old fashioned GSD?


----------



## my boy diesel (Mar 9, 2013)

nevermind**may be ot


----------



## carmspack (Feb 2, 2011)

there is no old-fashioned .
not as an organized group . 
Often the "old-fashioned" are over size , colour breeders, untested , byb's.

If you want to avoid those then support breeders who are careful , responsible, savy breeders that are not commercially motivated .


----------



## carmspack (Feb 2, 2011)

so that I haven't lead you down the path and left you behind in the woods , I went on a hunt to find a pedigree of a good looking dog with a good balanced pedigree.
I don't know the dog , nor the owners - nothing to be gained , just sharing a beautiful balanced pedigree .

This dog has representatives from all the pillars of the breed including a rich vein of old herding bloodlines.

Iron Will du Triangle Magique

this is how you get "old-fashioned"


----------



## carmspack (Feb 2, 2011)

gsdsar said "that does not mean the dog did not happily bite or intimidate people that were of no threat."

but that is exactly why I provided the full excerpt from von Stephanitz which continued to say that the dog, Horand, was "well-disposed to harmless people" . If you were harmless , so was the dog .
He was neutral , unless otherwise necessary.


----------



## Whiteshepherds (Aug 21, 2010)

I'm finding this book to be so much more than what some people are portraying it to be on this forum. Yes, quite a few jabs taken (a lot!) and some generalizations, always open to exceptions. I can see where people might be rolling their eyes at some of the statements. (or beating their heads against a wall) It gives the book character...I can picture sitting on a porch with the authors and listening to them talk about the breed. 

It's well written, (flows nicely), interesting. It offers a lot of food for thought IMHO if you read it with an open mind. This isn't the kind of book you'll find in the pet store next to the "How to Train Your Puppy" books. It has some meat. It covers a wide spectrum, the breed standard, history, temperament, drive etc. etc. 

Maybe being on this forum made the book more interesting for me... a curiosity about Doc's thoughts that he only shares from time to time..I don't really know but I am enjoying it. It's not a small book, almost 400 pages. My only complaint, the font they used could be a size bigger...or I need better glasses.


----------



## gsdsar (May 21, 2002)

But you missed my point. My point was that we can't fight an opinion with another opinion. My point was not a talk on Horand. I never met the dog. The description of him was given through the rose colored glasses of the man who made him the founder of the new breed he was creating. It's biased. Von Stephanitz was a wealthy white German Military officer in the early 1900. His idea of a "threat" was hopefully not yours or mine. And his idea of appropriate action from the dog based on his ideas of threat were clouded in his own experience and life. I can't expect him to be clear and honest, based on our values today, in how he perceived his dog. So I can't say that his opinion is more correct than Doc. I don't know where Doc got his information regarding Horand, he could have made it up. But what if was from first hand accounts of how the dog behaved to those NOT in Von Stephanitz circle? Are their experiences wrong?


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## carmspack (Feb 2, 2011)

von Stephanitz was not the first owner of the dog.
Horand belonged to a breeding shepherd , who actually had more success breeding Horand . Von Stephanitz admitted this and conceded he was not a breeder .

Hektor / Horand had a breeding history prior to any involvement by von Stephanitz.

There were no PUBLIC breeding records, but you can be sure that the competitive shepherds knew who their valuable females were bred to and why . The progeny carefully monitored by themselves and others , at and in work , to guide their decisions . 
The breeders of Wurtember were keen observers and rejoiced in their dogs which they could not live without . 
They bred to keep what they had , so not slipping backward , recognized what the dogs lacked , and what the North German breeders wished to have . They had already begun to cross the dogs of the north and the south , "fostering the consolidation of the good points on both sides and in the elimination of the faults" (page 135 von Stephanitz book).

Hektor with his joie de vivre , wolf grey colour , erect ears would have been right there.

Had the dog not been good , "So" Eiselen a well respected breeder with well known kennels , would not have bothered with him . He had better success with breeding him . 
Hektor/Horand was produced by premier herding breeder Sparwasser , and was brother to Luchs Sparwasser .
von Stephanitz, well traveled , well read, well connected to the "dog action" of the day , attended a major exhibition where herding dogs were brought from all regions to be put on display. He attended the show with Meyer his friend and co-founder of what would be become the Verein for the unified GSD.
von Stephanitz had already , along with the Phylax society , been breeding dogs, apparently had not found the "it", until this major show. 
Everyone , including the "fancy dog enthusiastics" recognized the dog and admired him both for his external and character ideals . The dog had mental and physical soundness.
von Stephanitz had to have him , bought him on the spot .
Meyer approved , and with excitement the breed had its dog number one for the stud books.

von Stephanitz was chosen as the President of the new club , organization. von Stephanitz would have had the qualities of being able to command , to organize, to be thorough , precise , and to rule with an iron hand . 

He would not have been fluffy or sentimental. He had already rejected dogs that he had bred . They did not have it. 
He would not have fooled himself, and he would not have jeopardized his pride with announcing and being in command of a program that was doomed to fail. He wanted, needed a dog representing the unification of existing herding dogs , to produce a dog for national pride and utitility , a dog that would go unchallenged for this utility , not specialized , but versatile.

Get a good library . Read .
A contemporary writer and judge of the time Horowitz has entries in his book and gives his accounts .

I can't provide the titles of more books since a major chunk of my prized library is on loan at the moment.

You cannot take a partial truth and then run like a fiend inserting an agenda , that is the stuff of the tabloids .

In no other account or description have I found Hektor/Horand to be a blue dog . Never. Always wolf-grey. (sable)


----------



## Betty (Aug 11, 2002)

gsdsar said:


> His idea of a "threat" was hopefully not yours or mine. And his idea of appropriate action from the dog based on his ideas of threat were clouded in his own experience and life. I can't expect him to be clear and honest, based on our values today, in how he perceived his dog. So I can't say that his opinion is more correct than Doc. I don't know where Doc got his information regarding Horand, he could have made it up. But what if was from first hand accounts of how the dog behaved to those NOT in Von Stephanitz circle? Are their experiences wrong?
> 
> 
> Sent from Petguide.com Free App


Excellent point, appropriate action could mean two totally different things between then and now..................

Look how the attitude to dog bites have changed just in my lifetime. When I was a kid it was not big deal normally, and the first question that was asked was what did you do the dog? Now a scratch can put the dog in danger.


----------



## CarolinaRose (Jun 21, 2014)

I just got my copy in the mail today. I'm looking forward to getting into it! 

Carmspack: How do you know what you know about dog's you've never met by looking at it's pedigree?! I would love to learn to to read a pedigree like that. I went and looked at the dog, but couldn't decipher anything beyond ancestors who earned various SchH titles =/


----------



## CarolinaRose (Jun 21, 2014)

Betty said:


> Look how the attitude to dog bites have changed just in my lifetime. When I was a kid it was not big deal normally, and the first question that was asked was what did you do the dog? Now a scratch can put the dog in danger.


This greatly concerns me. It seems as though unless a dog is a trained patrol dog/military dog, a dog has no right to defend either himself or his pack. I get the impression that any dog who bites to defend himself/his pack does in fact give his life because if the attacker doesn't kill him, the courts will take him away and destroy him for being dangerous. 

Slightly off topic, I know, but I had to comment on that . . .


----------

