# safe breeding age for male GSD?



## CranberryGSD

I'm asking because last year when looking for a puppy, the dad to one of the litters was 8 months old, and if I remeber right, it was his second litter. To me, that is wayyy too young, but is it really?

The mama was just retiring, about 8 years old.


----------



## konathegsd

I wouldn't like to see a male under 2 years so you can know the OFA score


----------



## cloudpump

CranberryGSD said:


> I'm asking because last year when looking for a puppy, the dad to one of the litters was 8 months old, and if I remeber right, it was his second litter. To me, that is wayyy too young, but is it really?
> 
> The mama was just retiring, about 8 years old.


Yes. The dog is not mature enough to know his temperament. And breeding a puppy is completely unethical. In my opinion


----------



## selzer

For AKC paperwork the dog has to be at least 9 months old on the date of mating. 

I don't see it as unethical. If no one is lying about it, they are not being unethical. Breeders will often do a trial litter with a young stud dog to ensure that he does produce, before putting more time and energy into him. If he does not produce, they can sell him as a pet and he will have a fine life and people will have a great pet -- win-win. 

In the wild, a dog of this age, if given the opportunity will perform the task. It doesn't hurt the dog. His mind and body is not affected by the perfectly natural act, itself. It is not like a female who has to not only bear and whelp the puppies, but she has to raise them as well. Breading a young bitch, you might run into an immature mother, who might not do as well of a job with her puppies as she may have done with a few more months on her.


----------



## voodoolamb

selzer said:


> For AKC paperwork the dog has to be at least 9 months old on the date of mating.
> 
> I don't see it as unethical. If no one is lying about it, they are not being unethical. Breeders will often do a trial litter with a young stud dog to ensure that he does produce, before putting more time and energy into him. If he does not produce, they can sell him as a pet and he will have a fine life and people will have a great pet -- win-win.


Any "breeder" using such an old school method to test a young stud's viability could never be considered an morally ethical breeder in my book. 

There is no excuse to breed an unproven dog in 2017. A young stud can be collected and his sperm count tested by any reproductive vet across the country. No need to make real, live puppies in order to see if the dog can produce BEFORE putting the time and energy into him to prove his merit to the breed. 

What happens if that young stud produces 9 puppies then in the course of working him, they find that he has major flaws? Great. 9 more puppies on this planet with crap genetics. Like our breed needs more of THAT.


----------



## cloudpump

I'm sure there are a lot of bybs out there that have no issue using a puppy as a stud.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline

How could you determine at that age if the adult temperament meets the breed standard or if in the future it will be temperamentally breed worthy? For a working breed like the GSD, that should be critical criteria.
@voodoolamb, I agree with the collection, no excuse not to if that is a concern. I have heard that some dogs today just aren't all that interested in completing the physical act. From what I hear, there seems to be a genetic component involved. Another question, if that is the case, is why are such dogs being bred? An unwillingness to breed should be an aberration, not something breeders are willing to breed an 8 month old puppy to test his mettle as a precaution.

But Voodoo, you and I, we are not breeders. Perhaps in some people's eyes that precludes us from having viable opinions.


----------



## Dainerra

voodoolamb said:


> There is no excuse to breed an unproven dog in 2017. A young stud can be collected and his sperm count tested by any reproductive vet across the country. No need to make real, live puppies in order to see if the dog can produce BEFORE putting the time and energy into him to prove his merit to the breed.
> .


honestly, this can be by almost anyone with a microscope and a little extra time on their hands. It won't be as accurate as a count from a repro vet but you'll know if there are abnormal sperm present and if they are active or lethargic.


----------



## JakodaCD OA

breeding any dog at 8 mths old is a real shame and totally irresponsible, trial litter or not..At 8mths old, they are not mature, they have no health testing which is a BIGGY in my book..shame on them or anyone who does it.


----------



## CranberryGSD

Thanks for confirming guys. Like I said, I thought it was his second litter- why two litters for a trial run? If that what it is.


----------



## LuvShepherds

CranberryGSD said:


> I'm asking because last year when looking for a puppy, the dad to one of the litters was 8 months old, and if I remeber right, it was his second litter. To me, that is wayyy too young, but is it really?
> 
> The mama was just retiring, about 8 years old.


The mom is too old, the sire too young. That is a problem when someone breeds dogs just because they are available, and not because they are the best of the breed. At 8 months, there is no way to know if a dog is breedworthy. They can’t be titled, they can’t have final OFAs, about all they can know is if the dog is DM Clear, which may not even mean that much depending on whether you think the tests are 100% accurate. At 8 months, their personalities are not fully formed. Male GSDs don’t fully mature until at leaat age 2. Was this an ASL breeder? I would guess the breeder is providing only pet dogs. No one who wanted to title or work a GSD would buy one.


----------



## CranberryGSD

LuvShepherds said:


> The mom is too old, the sire too young. That is a problem when someone breeds dogs just because they are available, and not because they are the best of the breed. At 8 months, there is no way to know if a dog is breedworthy. They can’t be titled, they can’t have final OFAs, about all they can know is if the dog is DM Clear, which may not even mean that much depending on whether you think the tests are 100% accurate. At 8 months, their personalities are not fully formed. Male GSDs don’t fully mature until at leaat age 2. Was this an ASL breeder? I would guess the breeder is providing only pet dogs. No one who wanted to title or work a GSD would buy one.


The pups were just pet quality. We did a pass on them, mainly due to the fact he was so young and she was well, old. We wanted a healthy pup.


----------



## selzer

voodoolamb said:


> Any "breeder" using such an old school method to test a young stud's viability could never be considered an morally ethical breeder in my book.
> 
> There is no excuse to breed an unproven dog in 2017. A young stud can be collected and his sperm count tested by any reproductive vet across the country. No need to make real, live puppies in order to see if the dog can produce BEFORE putting the time and energy into him to prove his merit to the breed.
> 
> What happens if that young stud produces 9 puppies then in the course of working him, they find that he has major flaws? Great. 9 more puppies on this planet with crap genetics. Like our breed needs more of THAT.


Once again, those who are not breeders, can tell breeders how it can be done. I know about collecting a dog and sperm count and motility. But, it doesn't always work. I bred to Gallos von Bad Boll, probably a dozen times, a variety of proven bitches as well as maidens. And his owner bred him more times than that. She had him collected, and his sperm counted and tested several times, and all came back fine. He never produced a puppy. So there is your theory shot right to the Fiery Pit. 

And it is not just a sample of one. Just this past year, a friend took a male home to breed to her female and had the sperm counted and tested -- no puppies, could be the female, but the lady is having puppies with other bitches, so she understands timing and heat cycles and such. I have heard of this with a number of dogs. 

Any breeder worth anything can tell if a pup of nine months is a genetic nightmare. Until you produce a litter with him, you don't know if he is capable, and you don't know what he produces. Breed him to a bitch who has the coat factor, and you will probably find out if he has it. There is plenty you can do on paper, but until you allow nature to put in its finger into the mix, you don't know anything. Any major flaw that will cause his get to have "crap genetics" does not require working with the dog past 9 months to find. 

But whatever, you'all know it all. Some breeders choose to wait. I say it doesn't hurt the dog to breed a litter young. As for whether the dog will produce a genetic nightmare, well that is a risk you take as a breeder. Having titles on the dog doesn't change who the dog is, or what he produces. Some awesome dogs pump out duds, time and again. It's no big deal in the career of a dog to find out later rather than sooner, but bitches only have so many litters in them, between waiting for this reason and that reason. Trying a bitch on a an unproven stud dog, might mean waiting a complete year before getting a litter out of your bitch. If you've already waited for her show career, etc., missing out on one breeding might actually mean missing out on puppies from a prized bitch. 

I have a bitch out of my imported female that has weird cycles. Like she will spot for a couple of days, then she is flagging, and the next day there will be nothing, no interest, nothing. I may never get anything out of her. She will be five in March, and if my boy who is around 11 months, can detect her heat cycle and do the job, awesome. I really don't care what non-breeders think about it. I know enough breeders who agree with me on this one. If he does his job, and she fails to produce, then I will probably never have puppies out of her. I do not like breeding a bitch for the first time much older than 5 years. 5 years 2 months, ok. 5 years, 9 months -- no, too many possible complications. 

It's a risk I am willing to take, because he may not be a producer. 

As for a producer, the only way to know what kind of producer you have is to produce with him. Having a couple of males that are mature out of your producer will tell you whether or not you should look for another dog, or go with him. You can wait yourself out of producing anything of consequence, by following silly rules that people who aren't even breeders think mean you are ethical. LOL. Whatever. After you have produced your masterpiece, out of a dog and a bitch that you bred, maybe out of 2, 3, or 4, generations of your lines, then you can tell me that you can succeed without breeding a young male. And THEN, I will tell you, good for you! That way worked for you. It doesn't mean it is the only way.


----------



## selzer

JakodaCD OA said:


> breeding any dog at 8 mths old is a real shame and totally irresponsible, trial litter or not..At 8mths old, they are not mature, they have no health testing which is a BIGGY in my book..shame on them or anyone who does it.


If you pre-lim hips and elbows, and know how to look at them, you can have a good idea if the dog's H&E look ok or not. Lots of breeders do breed off of pre-lims. There is NO guaranty that you will get good H&E off of OFA Goods on both parents. Yes, there is stacking the deck, but breeding him younger is not going to effect the H&E of the puppies. In the end, breeding him younger might mean you can use him fewer times if he does throw pups with dysplasia, because when his whelps are old enough to have problems, and get tested, he will still be young enough to make a difference. If you wait until he is 2, not that big of a deal. If you wait until he is totally titled and has a championship, and has protected the family from robbers, and has saved his first infant from a burning house, then the dog will probably be 5 or more years old, and before his get are old enough to show issues, he is retired.

Dogs with OFA Good hips and elbows, can be known to produce dogs with HD. Until you breed him, you do not know what he produces, regardless of his hip score.


----------



## LuvShepherds

Selzer, I am not a breeder so I could be all wrong but the breeder I bought from who has been breeding 30 years does not breed young dogs or very old females. If an older male is a good producer, she will use his sperm. Not every dog needs to be bred. There are many excellent dogs that will never be bred and there are still plenty of dogs for people who want to buy them. My feeling is that if a breeder misses out with one dog, there are other dogs with regular cycles they can breed. My breeder had two bitches in the time I was looking that either were not working out or eventually did not and she spayed, then sold them as pets. So two people got trained, beautiful quality females they could use for sports, OB and as pets. They could not be used for conformation because they were not sloped enough to title. I think breeders must be willing to pull any dog from a breeding program that does not work out. Maybe a dog with irregular cycles is not a good dog to breed.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline

@voodoolamb My predictions were confirmed.


----------



## cloudpump

I would never spend money on a puppy when I don't know the *adult temperament* of the sire. Which an ethical breeder should be concerned about also. 
Don't need to be a breeder to figure that out.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline

cloudpump said:


> I would never spend money on a puppy when I don't know the *adult temperament* of the sire. Which an ethical breeder should be concerned about also.
> Don't need to be a breeder to figure that out.


That would be like buying a pig in a poke.


----------



## LuvShepherds

cloudpump said:


> I would never spend money on a puppy when I don't know the *adult temperament* of the sire. Which an ethical breeder should be concerned about also.
> Don't need to be a breeder to figure that out.


I chose mine based on the mother’s temperament. Also her structure and overall look. She was age 4 and it was her first litter, so I took a chance. But I met the puppies a few times and felt it was a good choice. The breeder was obviously happy because she did a repeat breeding 18 months later. She only breeds a few times, then retires the mother.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline

LuvShepherds said:


> I chose mine based on the mother’s temperament. Also her structure and overall look. She was age 4 and it was her first litter, so I took a chance. But I met the puppies a few times and felt it was a good choice. The breeder was obviously happy because she did a repeat breeding 18 months later. She only breeds a few times, then retires the mother.


But your breeder knew what the sire's adult temperament was and how it would factor in to the breeding.


----------



## LuvShepherds

MineAreWorkingline said:


> But your breeder knew what the sire's adult temperament was and how it would factor in to the breeding.


She owns the sire and she knows what he throws. You have seen the pedigree. His dad is an incredibly great dog. So is his mom, but the dad is spectacular. My dog has characteristics of both parents. His mother is mellow and happy. His father is a high drive working line from excellent stock. Both are structurally correct for Working Lines. I researched breeders until I found one that could articulate exactly what she was as producing and why. She can tell you why that particular sire and dam, why she matched them and knows in advance what she is likely to get out of them. Because she also produces working dogs for LE, she needs a percentage of civil extremely high drive dogs, and then ones like mine from those same breedings that have civil tendencies but are a bit easier in a home setting.


----------



## voodoolamb

MineAreWorkingline said:


> But Voodoo, you and I, we are not breeders. Perhaps in some people's eyes that precludes us from having viable opinions.


You're right. I've not been knighted by the maic dog breeder stick and done the wonderfully difficult thing of putting two sexually mature dogs together...

The fact that i grew up with animal husbandry, that my family actively bred dogs and other species, that i myself have bred multiple other species (companion and otherwise), studied genetics at university level, have titled multiple dogs and otherwise been involved in the competition dog world for decades, and donated literally thousands of hours of my time in rescue - cleaning up the mistakes of BYBs... Yep. I have NO CLUE what constitues responsible and ethical breeding practices. :rollseyes:

Luckily the responsible breeders I know in real life don't hold such elitist attitudes. They'd be awful to work with and would make the clubs i go to a living nightmare! Then again they produce quality animals out of proven parents and have a strong sense of breeding ethics. No need for them to develop such a defense mechanism. 

Maybe if i was in the market for a lobotomized lab in a gsd coat, and wanted to drop thousands in vet bills dealing woth health issues ranging from skin problems, to HD, to bloat to DM then I would hang out with the BYBs, Greeders, and Iceberg breeders and run into that attitude more often? 

I stand by what I say. No ethical breeder will breed a young unproven stud. There is no GSD on this planet so special that his genes NEED to be passed on unless he really proves his merit. There are literally thousands of nice proven studs out there. Kennel blindness is a real issue. Atleast if a dog is proved on the field or in the ring there is a judgement passed on his suitability by an unbiased party. Plenty of health issues that dont crop up until well past puppyhood that have genetic components that shouldn't be passed on. *looks at her epileptic dog with no recent family history of epilepsy who didnt succumb until 18 months*


----------



## astrovan2487

I would wonder why such a young dog would need to be bred...there are many nice males out there that are never used for stud that are actually adults and titled/health tested. Why use a puppy for breeding that has not proven itself either in health or ability when there are much more suitable males out there? I think the main reason is convenience. Sorry but I wouldn't pay for a dog that was the result of a test run litter for a 9 month old stud puppy.


----------



## cloudpump

voodoolamb said:


> you're right. I've not been knighted by the maic dog breeder stick and done the wonderfully difficult thing of putting two sexually mature dogs together...
> 
> The fact that i grew up with animal husbandry, that my family actively bred dogs and other species, that i myself have bred multiple other species (companion and otherwise), studied genetics at university level, have titled multiple dogs and otherwise been involved in the competition dog world for decades, and donated literally thousands of hours of my time in rescue - cleaning up the mistakes of bybs... Yep. I have no clue what constitues responsible and ethical breeding practices. :rollseyes:
> 
> Luckily the responsible breeders i know in real life don't hold such elitist attitudes. They'd be awful to work with and would make the clubs i go to a living nightmare! Then again they produce quality animals out of proven parents and have a strong sense of breeding ethics. No need for them to develop such a defense mechanism.
> 
> Maybe if i was in the market for a lobotomized lab in a gsd coat, and wanted to drop thousands in vet bills dealing woth health issues ranging from skin problems, to hd, to bloat to dm then i would hang out with the bybs, greeders, and iceberg breeders and run into that attitude more often?
> 
> I stand by what i say. No ethical breeder will breed a young unproven stud. There is no gsd on this planet so special that his genes need to be passed on unless he really proves his merit. There are literally thousands of nice proven studs out there. Kennel blindness is a real issue. Atleast if a dog is proved on the field or in the ring there is a judgement passed on his suitability by an unbiased party. Plenty of health issues that dont crop up until well past puppyhood that have genetic components that shouldn't be passed on. *looks at her epileptic dog with no recent family history of epilepsy who didnt succumb until 18 months*


----------



## selzer

astrovan2487 said:


> I would wonder why such a young dog would need to be bred...there are many nice males out there that are never used for stud that are actually adults and titled/health tested. Why use a puppy for breeding that has not proven itself either in health or ability when there are much more suitable males out there? I think the main reason is convenience. Sorry but I wouldn't pay for a dog that was the result of a test run litter for a 9 month old stud puppy.


Well mine is not nine months. He is older. And the bitch is not in heat, but when she goes into heat, I hope he catches her. Because I really want something out of that bitch. And while I know people with dogs, more than one that was willing and set up to breed to her, I cannot schedule it because of the irregularity of her heat cycles. And one is in Cinncinnati and that is quite a haul to bring an unproven dog up here and waste my dog's last heat cycle before I believe she is too old to be bred for the first time. The dog was brought up here about a year ago, he is 8 now, and a friend had his sperm checked before she bred him to her bitch. No pups. Another good reason not to breed to him. The other dog is in Medina. It is also unproven. He is, I think, about 3. Nice temperament, but I'd have to borrow her dog indefinitely and have it live with my bitch until she goes into heat. There are a lot of dogs out there. I have another nice dog that lives around the corner from me in New Lyme. But again, the moment she went into heat, she went out before I could call the stud owner. So I will have to catch her. 

Call it convenience if you like. The bitch and dog's pedigrees are a fit as he was purchased to work with that pedigree and the pups out of that pedigree, Ramona and Quinnie. You still have to look at the dog and bitches, how they have grown out. Not worried about temperament at all. I have a lot of experience with the lines. I know what to expect. There was some planning in the convenience though. But whatever.


----------



## WateryTart

CranberryGSD said:


> I'm asking because last year when looking for a puppy, the dad to one of the litters was 8 months old, and if I remeber right, it was his second litter. To me, that is wayyy too young, but is it really?
> 
> The mama was just retiring, about 8 years old.


Dude, that's like a high school junior getting it on with the English teacher who is about to retire. Way too young.


----------



## selzer

voodoolamb said:


> You're right. I've not been knighted by the maic dog breeder stick and done the wonderfully difficult thing of putting two sexually mature dogs together...
> 
> The fact that i grew up with animal husbandry, that my family actively bred dogs and other species, that i myself have bred multiple other species (companion and otherwise), studied genetics at university level, have titled multiple dogs and otherwise been involved in the competition dog world for decades, and donated literally thousands of hours of my time in rescue - cleaning up the mistakes of BYBs... Yep. I have NO CLUE what constitues responsible and ethical breeding practices. :rollseyes:
> 
> Luckily the responsible breeders I know in real life don't hold such elitist attitudes. They'd be awful to work with and would make the clubs i go to a living nightmare! Then again they produce quality animals out of proven parents and have a strong sense of breeding ethics. No need for them to develop such a defense mechanism.
> 
> Maybe if i was in the market for a lobotomized lab in a gsd coat, and wanted to drop thousands in vet bills dealing woth health issues ranging from skin problems, to HD, to bloat to DM then I would hang out with the BYBs, Greeders, and Iceberg breeders and run into that attitude more often?
> 
> I stand by what I say. No ethical breeder will breed a young unproven stud. There is no GSD on this planet so special that his genes NEED to be passed on unless he really proves his merit. There are literally thousands of nice proven studs out there. Kennel blindness is a real issue. Atleast if a dog is proved on the field or in the ring there is a judgement passed on his suitability by an unbiased party. Plenty of health issues that dont crop up until well past puppyhood that have genetic components that shouldn't be passed on. *looks at her epileptic dog with no recent family history of epilepsy who didnt succumb until 18 months*


Nothing unethical in breeding dogs. Nothing. One can lie to buyers or cheat them, that would be unethical. be that as it may, but epilepsy could be genetic, not necessarily. Of course he should not be bred, but they say 13% (some study where they let beagles produce randomly), if you are producing more than that, then consider your breeding choices. As for health problems, some don't crop up until middle age, should we wait until middle age? Some do not crop up until old age, should we wait until old age? 

I guess with trial breedings, I would rather see a dog bred early, than a dog bred back to its dam or a bitch bred back to its sire. Those are done as a trial occasionally. Young genes are not necessarily going to be as big of a problem as truncating the number of available genes by in-breeding. 

BTW dogs CAN be tested for hips and certified through Penn Hip, earlier than OFA, and the SV does it at 1 year. OFA used to do it at 1 year.


----------



## selzer

WateryTart said:


> Dude, that's like a high school junior getting it on with the English teacher who is about to retire. Way too young.



Dude, that is like anthropomorphizing. Human morals and taboos do not apply to canines. As for humans, why do males reach their peak at 18 and women at 39. Probably surprising that more retiring HS English teachers aren't messing with brats. But that is where the taboos come in and are fairly effective in protecting children. Sure there are weirdos that we hear about, but all in all it is rare. 

Dogs may have some sort of moral range, but they do not follow human taboos. So, when the joker says, "He was in with his momma, I didn't think they would do anything...." Well, yeah that doesn't work. 

And a sexually mature dog sees nothing wrong with doing the nasty with an elderly bitch like Jenna. Thus I had to pull his little hormones out of her kennel and place them where they may do some good.


----------



## GypsyGhost

Look, we all make choices with what type of breedings we support. I personally wouldn't feel good about buying a dog from a breeder who cut corners and bred a very young male before his hips and elbows could be tested by any agency, and before his temperament was really known. But that's just me. I know no damage would be done, psychologically, to the too young male that had been bred. But that still doesn't make the breeding right. Or ethical. And I'm sorry, but I'm never going to buy that it's anything more than a breeding of convenience when something like this like this pops up. I have a hard time believing this type of breeding is done to better the breed. It seems to me that it would be done to make money. But I'm not a breeder. What do I know.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline

GypsyGhost said:


> But I'm not a breeder. What do I know.


You just disqualified yourself from having a credible opinion with those words. :grin2:


----------



## WateryTart

MineAreWorkingline said:


> GypsyGhost said:
> 
> 
> 
> But I'm not a breeder. What do I know.
> 
> 
> 
> You just disqualified yourself from having a credible opinion with those words.
Click to expand...

Nobody passed her the magic dog breeding stick.


----------



## WateryTart

Joking aside, this is not a breeding practice that is responsible or defensible. A person who defends it loses credibility, and rightfully so.


----------



## selzer

GypsyGhost said:


> Look, we all make choices with what type of breedings we support. I personally wouldn't feel good about buying a dog from a breeder who cut corners and bred a very young male before his hips and elbows could be tested by any agency, and before his temperament was really known. But that's just me. I know no damage would be done, psychologically, to the too young male that had been bred. But that still doesn't make the breeding right. Or ethical. And I'm sorry, but I'm never going to buy that it's anything more than a breeding of convenience when something like this like this pops up. I have a hard time believing this type of breeding is done to better the breed. It seems to me that it would be done to make money. But I'm not a breeder. What do I know.


It won't hurt the dog, but I don't think you can get papers if the dog is under 9 months at the day of breeding so most of the folks would be nutso to cut corners by cutting of the majority of their clientele, or by reducing the asking price significantly.


----------



## WateryTart

selzer said:


> GypsyGhost said:
> 
> 
> 
> Look, we all make choices with what type of breedings we support. I personally wouldn't feel good about buying a dog from a breeder who cut corners and bred a very young male before his hips and elbows could be tested by any agency, and before his temperament was really known. But that's just me. I know no damage would be done, psychologically, to the too young male that had been bred. But that still doesn't make the breeding right. Or ethical. And I'm sorry, but I'm never going to buy that it's anything more than a breeding of convenience when something like this like this pops up. I have a hard time believing this type of breeding is done to better the breed. It seems to me that it would be done to make money. But I'm not a breeder. What do I know.
> 
> 
> 
> It won't hurt the dog, but I don't think you can get papers if the dog is under 9 months at the day of breeding so most of the folks would be nutso to cut corners by cutting of the majority of their clientele, or by reducing the asking price significantly.
Click to expand...

But if he is 9 months, or 10 months...?


----------



## selzer

WateryTart said:


> Joking aside, this is not a breeding practice that is responsible or defensible. A person who defends it loses credibility, and rightfully so.


It depends on what you believe. 

Some believe they cannot tell the temperament of the dog before 2. They probably cannot. That does not mean that others cannot. 

Some believe the dog should be evaluated by a non-biased person. This can be done before 2. 

Some believe that the dog should have certain health screenings. Some of these cannot be certified by certain organizations before 2 years. Other organizations do certify earlier. And some breeders feel confident breeding on pre-lims. 

One does not wait until a police dog candidate is 2 before they start evaluating and training. One does not wait until a service dog candidate is 2 before they start evaluating and training. One does not wait until a sheep-herding dog is 2 before evaluating and training. One does not wait until a companion dog is 2 before introducing them to family members. Why should one wait until a stud dog is 2 before evaluating him prior to training/trialing, what have you?

I don't see any problem with a trial breeding. It won't hurt the dog. The puppies will give you good information as they grow to make further breeding decisions on.


----------



## voodoolamb

selzer said:


> Nothing unethical in breeding dogs. Nothing. One can lie to buyers or cheat them, that would be unethical.



Definition of unethical

:not conforming to a high moral standard :morally wrong :not ethical illegal and unethical business practices immoral and unethical behavior

Merriam-Webster

Multiple definitions of the word unethical. The context I am using it in is the first definition: not conforming to a high moral standard. 

There certainly ARE unethical practices in breeding dogs. 

There are breeders that breed dogs with known health issues. They produce pups that suffer their entire lives. There are breeders who breed dogs with known temperament issues. There are breeders who mass produce puppies for profit. There are breeders who breed against the standard. There are breeders who breed dogs in ways that put the dam at risk. Breeders who keep their dogs in unsanitary conditions. Breeders who do not keep their breeding stock in healthy physical condition. Etc Etc. 

We are not talking about some rare breed with a limited gene pool here. We are talking about German Shepherds. There are literally hundreds of thousands of them across the world, with the technology and infrastructure to exchange genetics globally. There is no excuse for breeders not to ruthlessly cull inferior dogs from the breeding pool. Breeding GSDs should be the best of the best.

NO breeder can 100% guarantee that a 9, 10, 11, or even 12 month old pup is going to mature into a breeding quality animal exactly the way they think they will. Experienced ones can make a pretty good educated guess, yes, but stuff happens. Otherwise you would never see breeders letting go of their holdbacks - something that happens ALL THE TIME when a young dog didn't quite turn out the way they wanted. 

And quite frankly, I see nothing wrong with allowing a dog to mature a bit before making the decision to breed. Pumping out as many litters as possible from a dog isn't always great for the gene pool as a whole. 

The biggest problem I see in unethical breeders is that they care more about their lines/personal accomplishments/$$$ than they do the _breed as a whole_. 

Selfish decisions in animal husbandry leads to the ruination and suffering of many purebreeds


----------



## voodoolamb

selzer said:


> It depends on what you believe.
> 
> Some believe they cannot tell the temperament of the dog before 2. They probably cannot. That does not mean that others cannot.
> 
> Some believe the dog should be evaluated by a non-biased person. This can be done before 2.
> 
> Some believe that the dog should have certain health screenings. Some of these cannot be certified by certain organizations before 2 years. Other organizations do certify earlier. And some breeders feel confident breeding on pre-lims.
> 
> One does not wait until a police dog candidate is 2 before they start evaluating and training. One does not wait until a service dog candidate is 2 before they start evaluating and training. One does not wait until a sheep-herding dog is 2 before evaluating and training. One does not wait until a companion dog is 2 before introducing them to family members. Why should one wait until a stud dog is 2 before evaluating him prior to training/trialing, what have you?
> 
> I don't see any problem with a trial breeding. It won't hurt the dog. The puppies will give you good information as they grow to make further breeding decisions on.


The difference between service dog candidates, police dog candidates, sheep herding dogs, pets and stud prospects is that the former "professions" do not create living, breathing, emotionally complex beings. 

If a service dog starts training at 1 and washes at 18 months... Ok, yeah, the owner of said dog is out some money and time, but that's it. 

What about the pups that an inferior stud dog puts on the ground before he is "washed"? They are out in the world representing the breed. Their health and temperament issues matter to the breed as a whole and to the individual families that take these pups into their lives.


----------



## WateryTart

selzer said:


> WateryTart said:
> 
> 
> 
> Joking aside, this is not a breeding practice that is responsible or defensible. A person who defends it loses credibility, and rightfully so.
> 
> 
> 
> It depends on what you believe.
> 
> Some believe they cannot tell the temperament of the dog before 2. They probably cannot. That does not mean that others cannot.
> 
> Some believe the dog should be evaluated by a non-biased person. This can be done before 2.
> 
> Some believe that the dog should have certain health screenings. Some of these cannot be certified by certain organizations before 2 years. Other organizations do certify earlier. And some breeders feel confident breeding on pre-lims.
> 
> One does not wait until a police dog candidate is 2 before they start evaluating and training. One does not wait until a service dog candidate is 2 before they start evaluating and training. One does not wait until a sheep-herding dog is 2 before evaluating and training. One does not wait until a companion dog is 2 before introducing them to family members. Why should one wait until a stud dog is 2 before evaluating him prior to training/trialing, what have you?
> 
> I don't see any problem with a trial breeding. It won't hurt the dog. The puppies will give you good information as they grow to make further breeding decisions on.
Click to expand...

You'll have to forgive me for not seeing it your way. We will agree to disagree.


----------



## lhczth

There is *NO* reason to breed an 8 or 9 month old puppy. *NONE*. Well...... $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ Seeing how they produce is just an excuse for $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. 

Dogs can have their hips and elbows certified through the SV ('a' stamped) at a year so if someone wanted to do a test breeding and only care about that part of the male, then it could be done after that. 

8 isn't too old for a female that is in good condition. Litters in older females tend to be smaller. If she has whelped easily before, is in good health and produces exceptional puppies, no reason why she can't be bred. I would not breed an 8 year old maiden, a female that is hard to bring back into condition or one that is not an easy whelper. 

Oh, and I am breeder.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline

If a puppy's adult temperament can be reliably determined at 8 or 9 months of age, there would be no washouts regardless of the venue. Apparently, the plethora of washouts, in real life, demonstrates and supports that it simply can't be done with a fair enough amount of accuracy. 

Now my bitch is still flagging her tail and the boys are all singing songs, I think I am going to breed her so that I can earn a magic wand and have credence.


----------



## Steve Strom

WateryTart said:


> Nobody passed her the magic dog breeding stick.


I think I need some clarification on this. It sounds kinda, gellman'y.


----------



## Tennessee

selzer said:


> It depends on what you believe.
> 
> Some believe they cannot tell the temperament of the dog before 2. They probably cannot. That does not mean that others cannot.
> 
> Some believe the dog should be evaluated by a non-biased person. This can be done before 2.
> 
> Some believe that the dog should have certain health screenings. Some of these cannot be certified by certain organizations before 2 years. Other organizations do certify earlier. And some breeders feel confident breeding on pre-lims.
> 
> One does not wait until a police dog candidate is 2 before they start evaluating and training. One does not wait until a service dog candidate is 2 before they start evaluating and training. One does not wait until a sheep-herding dog is 2 before evaluating and training. One does not wait until a companion dog is 2 before introducing them to family members. Why should one wait until a stud dog is 2 before evaluating him prior to training/trialing, what have you?
> 
> I don't see any problem with a trial breeding. It won't hurt the dog. The puppies will give you good information as they grow to make further breeding decisions on.


I guess you don't understand the optics of what you're saying...

You're using living creatures as a backyard science experiment. I'm not necessarily morally opposed to this idea in general (lab rats etc), but you're making money off these experiments and aren't in control of them when they leave your property. If they're a genetic mess or their hips are total crap by 2 and one of those people breeds them anyways. You've potentially spread the pain of HD etc etc around to what 16-18 homes? More? 

I'm not saying you're a bad breeder or your methods don't work for you, but that's the optics of it to me and I see a much higher potential downside than upside.


----------



## GSDguy4EVER

CranberryGSD said:


> I'm asking because last year when looking for a puppy, the dad to one of the litters was 8 months old, and if I remeber right, it was his second litter. To me, that is wayyy too young, but is it really?
> 
> The mama was just retiring, about 8 years old.



If the OP is asking if it is safe to breed an 8 month old male GSD from a health standpoint, my opinion is that it IS safe physiologically to breed a male gsd this young. If a dog this young willingly covers a female and produces puppies, that is Mother Nature saying that this dog is sexually ready to reproduce.

Those who disagree with me, please show me the scientific evidence supporting the position that it is unsafe physiologically to breed a male GSD at such a young age, and I will gladly reconsider my position.

Whether it is ethical or unethical to breed an 8 month old male to me is irrelevant. There are worse things that breeders and people in general do in life than to breed young dogs before all health clearances and titles are achieved. 

That being said, would I buy a puppy from a breeding from a 8 month old stud dog? The answer is NO. That is because I have higher standards as to what I want in a GSD.


----------



## selzer

For people all against making money in dogs, ya'all do dwell on it an awful lot. 

But whatever, I've bred young males, Dubya at 12 months, and Mufasa at 18 months. Both produced excellent progeny, no genetic nightmares. So, yes, it has worked for me. There is nothing immoral or unethical in it. Females are a different story, there is heavy workload, and if she is not mature enough, her pups will suffer from her inexperience. Not so with the dog. 

I expect they may pull my vendor's license, as I have registered no sales in the last six months, and I will register the same in January. Really sounds like someone in it for the dough, but whatever.


----------



## selzer

Tennessee said:


> I guess you don't understand the optics of what you're saying...
> 
> You're using living creatures as a backyard science experiment. I'm not necessarily morally opposed to this idea in general (lab rats etc), but you're making money off these experiments and aren't in control of them when they leave your property. If they're a genetic mess or their hips are total crap by 2 and one of those people breeds them anyways. You've potentially spread the pain of HD etc etc around to what 16-18 homes? More?
> 
> I'm not saying you're a bad breeder or your methods don't work for you, but that's the optics of it to me and I see a much higher potential downside than upside.


There is much worse than HD in shepherds, unfortunately. If I had a nickel for everyone that asks about hips when they call about puppies.... No one asks about epilepsy, MegaE, EPI, ED, DM, and so many other problems in the breed. Recently, I produced a couple of heart problems -- two different bitches, and the one dog was out of the other dog, so there was a common thread. I asked my vet if they thought that I should reconsider breeding with that dog in them, and she said, "No, your dogs have so few health issues, this is not a problem I would change breeding for." I asked the specialist about it as well that saw both dogs. And he said, no as well. For all of that, I am trying to back away from that dog and introduce different lines, because no one wants to produce devastating problems. 

For HD, until you breed the dog to a particular female, you do not know what you will produce, despite OFA ratings.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline

There is a lot of emphasis being put on genetic health problems while ignoring poor temperaments. Buyers have to live with these dogs. Most people can live with hip dysplasia in a dog but so many struggle with poor temperaments. 

But let's be honest, who on this forum has not spoke with a breeder, reputable, backyard or anything in between, that did not claim that there dogs or their dogs' offspring have good temperaments? Where is the proof? Anybody can say anything, that doesn't make it so.


----------



## cloudpump

MineAreWorkingline said:


> There is a lot of emphasis being put on genetic health problems while ignoring poor temperaments. Buyers have to live with these dogs. Most people can live with hip dysplasia in a dog but so many struggle with poor temperaments.
> 
> But let's be honest, who on this forum has not spoke with a breeder, reputable, backyard or anything in between, that did not claim that there dogs or their dogs' offspring have good temperaments? Where is the proof? Anybody can say anything, that doesn't make it so.


Well when you don't breed for uniform temperament, why bother? 
My friend just bred a litter. All but one is capable of competing in a sport. And the one that can't, is going to an active pet home that does club level rally


----------



## CranberryGSD

Wow everyone... thanks for all the info, but I didn't expect it to turn into a kitten fight lol.


----------



## GSDguy4EVER

MineAreWorkingline said:


> There is a lot of emphasis being put on genetic health problems while ignoring poor temperaments. Buyers have to live with these dogs. Most people can live with hip dysplasia in a dog but so many struggle with poor temperaments.
> 
> But let's be honest, who on this forum has not spoke with a breeder, reputable, backyard or anything in between, that did not claim that there dogs or their dogs' offspring have good temperaments? Where is the proof? Anybody can say anything, that doesn't make it so.


You make a good point. Although, I will argue that temperament has a genetic component, and therefore weak temperament is also part of the assortment of genetic health problems in GSDs. 

Yes, most breeders will claim their dogs and puppies have good temperaments. Some are telling the truth knowingly. Some are telling an untruth unknowingly. Some are telling an untruth knowingly. I think the ethical breeders are the ones that will have the honesty to disclose their dogs' and puppies' faults, physically or behaviorally, to potential buyers.


----------



## selzer

MineAreWorkingline said:


> There is a lot of emphasis being put on genetic health problems while ignoring poor temperaments. Buyers have to live with these dogs. Most people can live with hip dysplasia in a dog but so many struggle with poor temperaments.
> 
> But let's be honest, who on this forum has not spoke with a breeder, reputable, backyard or anything in between, that did not claim that there dogs or their dogs' offspring have good temperaments? Where is the proof? Anybody can say anything, that doesn't make it so.


There are more ways to skin a cat. An experienced breeder, experienced with their lines, can get them titled, even less sound specimens, if they tweak the circumstances, put them in shows where they are likely to succeed, and avoid situations where they are not likely to succeed. They can actually put titles on their dogs. Where is the proof in that? I am talking about AKC shows of course, as I don't do IPO. But I expect that there are many things an experienced hand can do to improve their dog's chances at succeeding, even though the dog is not as strong in temperament in that venue as well. 

So what have you? If you can go to the breeder's home, and view the dogs, what does that tell you? It tells you that on that day, the dog showed, what? Suspicion, comfort level with guest, a lack of spookiness? If it isn't thundering, then it doesn't tell you if the dog has that particular problem. It just tells you that on that day, in those circumstances, the dog seemed ok, or not. In the end, you either trust the breeder or you don't. If you trust the breeder, lack of accomplishments means little. Accomplishments do not transfer to the puppy. They do not make the puppy smarter, or give it a better temperament. If you don't trust the breeder than all the accomplishments will not prove anything to you, and it shouldn't, walk away.

What other people do with your pups, is good information. But, the thing is, even if people say they want to do IPO, or obedience, rally, what have you, few actually do. Every now and again, you do hear what people are doing with your dogs. And that is cool. You can show pictures and tell. But again, you still have to trust the breeder. Because really, anyone can _say _anything.


----------



## voodoolamb

MineAreWorkingline said:


> If a puppy's adult temperament can be reliably determined at 8 or 9 months of age, there would be no washouts regardless of the venue. Apparently, the plethora of washouts, in real life, demonstrates and supports that it simply can't be done with a fair enough amount of accuracy.


THIS. 1000X THIS. 

Reputable/responsible/ethical breeders don't make puppies from other puppies.


----------



## cloudpump

What temperament testing do they do in akc?


----------



## selzer

cloudpump said:


> What temperament testing do they do in akc?


There is a TT in the AKC.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline

selzer said:


> There are more ways to skin a cat. An experienced breeder, experienced with their lines, can get them titled, even less sound specimens, if they tweak the circumstances, put them in shows where they are likely to succeed, and avoid situations where they are not likely to succeed. They can actually put titles on their dogs. Where is the proof in that? I am talking about AKC shows of course, as I don't do IPO. But I expect that there are many things an experienced hand can do to improve their dog's chances at succeeding, even though the dog is not as strong in temperament in that venue as well.
> 
> So what have you? If you can go to the breeder's home, and view the dogs, what does that tell you? It tells you that on that day, the dog showed, what? Suspicion, comfort level with guest, a lack of spookiness? If it isn't thundering, then it doesn't tell you if the dog has that particular problem. It just tells you that on that day, in those circumstances, the dog seemed ok, or not. In the end, you either trust the breeder or you don't. If you trust the breeder, lack of accomplishments means little. Accomplishments do not transfer to the puppy. They do not make the puppy smarter, or give it a better temperament. If you don't trust the breeder than all the accomplishments will not prove anything to you, and it shouldn't, walk away.
> 
> What other people do with your pups, is good information. But, the thing is, even if people say they want to do IPO, or obedience, rally, what have you, few actually do. Every now and again, you do hear what people are doing with your dogs. And that is cool. You can show pictures and tell. But again, you still have to trust the breeder. Because really, anyone can _say _anything.


Any breeder that titles in venues that knows that a specific dog needs "tweaked" in certain areas or under certain circumstances* knows* their adult dog. Can't necessarily say that about a promising puppy. Only when, as training progresses over time and the puppy matures, does a breeder get to "know" what their puppy brings to the table.

No where did I say that the buyer should be able to assess an adult dog's temperament in a home, a field, or in a dog park unless that buyer is experienced. When it comes to puppies, any assessment is still an educated guess, experienced or not. 

Temperament is important, it is probably the most important factor that keeps a dog in a home. People will work around health problems, they will overlook less than pretty looks, but they will not be as conducive to keeping a dog that falls short of expected behavior.

What other people do with a breeder's pups has little to do with the topic. This discussion is what a breeder does with their own pups. How does one trust a breeder who is _deliberately_ putting two dogs together with too many unknown variables, such as the stud dog's true, adult temperament? 

Maybe breeding puppies works in other breeds where overly soft or weak nerved dogs are of no importance, but in a working breed, there are some traits that need maturity for proper expression and evaluation.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline

"TT : Temperament Test (USTTA). The Temperament Test administered by United States Temperament Test Associates (TT) *is not an AKC recognized title.* Neither is the TC Temperament Test which is run by the German Shepard Dog Club. They are both essentially the same in the testing methods as the WAC testing, with the TT test being a bit more stringent because it is focused on the breeds as they were originally intended to be when imported from Germany. All these tests are performed in an attempt to define a standard of acceptable temperament. The WAC test is currently the only one accepted by the AKC. Why? I haven't figured that one out yet!!"

Is this incorrect?

TEMPERAMENT TESTING, WHAT IS A TC OR TT TITLE MEAN?


----------



## Steve Strom

CranberryGSD said:


> Wow everyone... thanks for all the info, but I didn't expect it to turn into a kitten fight lol.


I'm not a breeder or trainer Cranberry, but I can tell you from owning and doing different things with dogs, in every single venue or even activity, at 8mos you're still guessing and hoping, at 2 they can either do it or they can't. By 4, you'll really see what you have.


----------



## WIBackpacker

selzer said:


> But, the thing is, even if people say they want to do IPO, or obedience, rally, what have you, few actually do. Every now and again, you do hear what people are doing with your dogs. And that is cool. You can show pictures and tell.


My network of dog connections must be quite different. Purpose-bred litters get sold to people who want to do things, and the majority of them go out and do them. At different levels, of course - some for fun, some more competitively.

If the sole intent of a litter is for companion homes, obviously this wouldn't apply. If the litter is not described/intended for work/performance of some sort, of course most buyers wouldn't be expected to invest the blood, sweat, and tears (and money) of training or titling. 



MineAreWorkingline said:


> If a puppy's adult temperament can be reliably determined at 8 or 9 months of age, there would be no washouts regardless of the venue. Apparently, the plethora of washouts, in real life, demonstrates and supports that it simply can't be done with a fair enough amount of accuracy.


And the above ^ really resonates with me, and ties in with my point above.

Some of my training friends own really good dogs who were placed or "washed" from a real working/competitive/potential breeding home as older puppies or young adults. They were started, trained up, and for one reason or another, the dog did not grow into the original breeder's ideal. So the dogs were thoughtfully placed into the hands of someone else where they're loved, continue training, and in many cases do compete - but they won't be bred.

At one point, every one of those puppies was a "keeper" - the most promising, the most ideal. Along the way, after fair comparison, pressure, training, and discerning evaluation, the dog didn't quite measure up. 

Since we aren't talking about black rhinos or lowland gorillas (there's no looming shortage of genetic material available in most breeds today), I don't see the justification for using juvenile males.


----------



## astrovan2487

selzer said:


> If you trust the breeder, lack of accomplishments means little. Accomplishments do not transfer to the puppy. They do not make the puppy smarter, or give it a better temperament. If you don't trust the breeder than all the accomplishments will not prove anything to you, and it shouldn't, walk away.
> 
> You are 100% right about trusting the breeder, you should and if you don't, then thats not the dog for you to buy.
> But I always thought the whole idea about a dog having titles or other publicly acknowledged accomplishments is that it was a kind of proof that the breeder knows what their dog is made of. If it trains in SAR, as a Service Dog, IPO, Mondio, ect. it is being put thru all kinds of different stressful situations that shows the breeder and others exactly what this dog is. The dog that does not compete or go out into the world to perform difficult tasks will never be tested in the same way so their breeder will never know as much about their dog as the breeder who trains.


----------



## WateryTart

astrovan2487 said:


> You are 100% right about trusting the breeder, you should and if you don't, then thats not the dog for you to buy.
> But I always thought the whole idea about a dog having titles or other publicly acknowledged accomplishments is that it was a kind of proof that the breeder knows what their dog is made of. If it trains in SAR, as a Service Dog, IPO, Mondio, ect. it is being put thru all kinds of different stressful situations that shows the breeder and others exactly what this dog is. The dog that does not compete or go out into the world to perform difficult tasks will never be tested in the same way so their breeder will never know as much about their dog as the breeder who trains.


Exactly. If I truly care nothing for what a German Shepherd should be, if I just want a lazy dog who looks sort of like a GSD mated with the Goodyear Blimp, then maybe it doesn't matter. But if I want an actual active companion who will go out with me into the world, it starts to matter a whole lot more.


----------



## Steve Strom

> You are 100% right about trusting the breeder, you should and if you don't, then thats not the dog for you to buy.
> But I always thought the whole idea about a dog having titles or other publicly acknowledged accomplishments is that it was a kind of proof that the breeder knows what their dog is made of. If it trains in SAR, as a Service Dog, IPO, Mondio, ect. it is being put thru all kinds of different stressful situations that shows the breeder and others exactly what this dog is. The dog that does not compete or go out into the world to perform difficult tasks will never be tested in the same way so their breeder will never know as much about their dog as the breeder who trains.


And that's a large part of the whole debate in a lot of these things. If you or your dogs (Plural) aren't out there doing these things, you aren't going to convince me they're capable of any of it. Another piece to that is if you don't maintain it by proving it, you'll lose it no matter what genetics or pedigrees you're banking on.


----------



## sitstay

selzer said:


> But whatever, I've bred young males, Dubya at 12 months, and Mufasa at 18 months. Both produced excellent progeny, no genetic nightmares.


Is Dubya the dog who dropped dead in his kennel for no apparent reason at a young age or his he the one you gave away to a pet home?
Sheilah


----------



## MineAreWorkingline

Not sure how one can make a claim that a dog has never produced a dog that was a "genetic nightmare" without some sort of qualified evaluation. It would seem that anything less would be just a personal opinion.


----------



## GypsyGhost

MineAreWorkingline said:


> Any breeder that titles in venues that knows that a specific dog needs "tweaked" in certain areas or under certain circumstances* knows* their adult dog. Can't necessarily say that about a promising puppy. Only when, as training progresses over time and the puppy matures, does a breeder get to "know" what their puppy brings to the table.
> 
> No where did I say that the buyer should be able to assess an adult dog's temperament in a home, a field, or in a dog park unless that buyer is experienced. When it comes to puppies, any assessment is still an educated guess, experienced or not.
> 
> Temperament is important, it is probably the most important factor that keeps a dog in a home. People will work around health problems, they will overlook less than pretty looks, but they will not be as conducive to keeping a dog that falls short of expected behavior.
> 
> What other people do with a breeder's pups has little to do with the topic. This discussion is what a breeder does with their own pups. How does one trust a breeder who is _deliberately_ putting two dogs together with too many unknown variables, such as the stud dog's true, adult temperament?
> 
> Maybe breeding puppies works in other breeds where overly soft or weak nerved dogs are of no importance, but in a working breed, there are some traits that need maturity for proper expression and evaluation.



I just thought this whole comment needed repeating.


----------



## WateryTart

sit said:


> selzer said:
> 
> 
> 
> But whatever, I've bred young males, Dubya at 12 months, and Mufasa at 18 months.
> 
> 
> 
> Is Dubya the dog who dropped dead in his kennel for no apparent reason at a young age or his he the one you gave away to a pet home?
> Sheilah
Click to expand...

Whoa. I missed this.


----------



## selzer

sit said:


> Is Dubya the dog who dropped dead in his kennel for no apparent reason at a young age or his he the one you gave away to a pet home?
> Sheilah


I put him down when he was five for rupturing a disk in his back. I checked backs as well as hips/elbows of his progeny. None of them had that problem -- spondylosis that caused the back problem. Mufasa bloated. I gave Rushie to a judge who used him as a service dog, when he died I got the dog back and gave him to my contractor. That is the only dog I used for breeding that I gave away. And I only used him the once, when he was 31months old -- he was 5 months younger than Babs who gave birth to that litter 3 days before she is 3 years old. The litter was not uniform in temperament or structure, so I never used him again -- his dam was WGSL, but his sire was WL/SL. It was not what I wanted to produce. 

I wonder if all the x-raying we do to females is really a good thing. Or males, really. But males produce sperms throughout their lives. The bitch has all her eggs. Now every vet will tell you that the amount of x-rays the bitch receives to do hips and elbows is not enough to hurt them. But they ask US if we are pregnant or going to become pregnant. And if WE help with the x-ray process we wear the lead apron. Not possible to protect the reproductive organs on critters, since they are right there where their hips are. And we know that the Nazi's experimented on humans, sterilizing them through x-rays. I wonder if in our charge to prevent HD and ED, we are possibly increasing the incidence of other genetic issues, as those eggs that exist maybe are compromised in the process. 

Quinnie turned 2 a few days ago, and I made an appointment for her today. I just wonder if it is the right thing to do. When you think about it. For some reason the lifespan of shepherds went from 12-14 years, down to 10-12 years with some really notable dogs, like Dallas dying even younger than that. And it isn't necessarily the BYB dogs that have all the health problems. I really don't hear of MegE in BYB dogs. Probably there, just don't hear about it as much. But I do hear about it in dogs from reputable breeders, heart problems, thyroid issues, and others. I thought maybe it is from breeding too closely for too many generations. But could it also be that some of the tests for preventing some things are causing other things? Some of the people do pre-lims and check them again, and again. Then they do more x-rays to determine pregnancy and puppy count. And that may be once, it may be 4 times, 6 times. And sometimes an x-ray to ensure the puppy is not blocking the birth canal -- sometimes necessary. And sometimes an x-ray to ensure no retained puppies. Sometimes an x-ray before a c-section even if there is a ultrasound done to ensure viable pups. I wonder if puppies from later litters are prone to more issues, because those eggs have been hit more times than pup-eggs from earlier litters. Maybe older bitches have fewer puppies because fewer eggs survive later in life.


----------



## WateryTart

selzer said:


> And it isn't necessarily the BYB dogs that have all the health problems. I really don't hear of MegE in BYB dogs. Probably there, just don't hear about it as much. But I do hear about it in dogs from reputable breeders, heart problems, thyroid issues, and others.


That's an interesting point. Yours don't seem to have those issues, so there's that.


----------



## JakodaCD OA

I think this bears repeating as well:

"There is *NO* reason to breed an 8 or 9 month old puppy. *NONE*. Well...... $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ Seeing how they produce is just an excuse for $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$." 

One can try and justify breeding "puppies" till the cows come home, doesn't make it ethical or responsible. But there's a sucker born every minute I guess and will dish out money for a puppy. Doing so, in my opinion, just shows what the above quote is saying..

There are so many really good responsible breeders out there, there is no need to by from someone who's pumping out puppies from puppies just for the bucks.


----------



## LuvShepherds

Selzer, I also wonder about X-rays. They re done often. My very first GSD never had one ever. I was not breeding so I did not need OFA. There are also a lot of ultrasounds of pregnant females. Is all that necessary? It may not harm the mother, but who know what it does to puppies.


----------



## selzer

WateryTart said:


> That's an interesting point. Yours don't seem to have those issues, so there's that.


I have produced one dog that bloated, three that had heart issues. No MegE, which scares me. I have had a dog with EPI. In 12 years I have produced 2 that have HD. I still have them. Joy and Hepsi, that I know about. If people aren't breeding, or using them for police work, and sometimes agility, they may never test them. Cujo had epilepsy. 1 dog out of 120 or so, it is not necessarily a genetic issue. 

2 of those heart problems came out of Jenna's last litter. The one dog, Nino had some weird problem that if he made it to two he would be free and clear, and he did. So they ended up giving him a clean bill of health. Nikki though had surgery. She was kind of a miracle pup. They found a slight heart murmur at one of her puppy visits, and the next visit it was gone, so I thought just a harmless puppy murmur. At her vet visit a year after her first rabies shot, they did not hear anything when listening to her heart. Good. At three years, they found a sizable murmur. I think it was the PDA valve that did not open or close whatever that should happen in utero. Any way, usually they find them and fix them as a puppy, if they do not the heart enlarges and the dog usually does not live to be over a year or two. She was three, and they did the surgery, and they say she should have a normal lifespan. 

They are live critters. There are going to be issues. I asked my vet about not breeding any more of the one dog, and she said no, that I have very few health issues in my lines, and this was not something I should not breed because of. 

Moofie bloated. And I have long felt that bloat has a genetic component. Partly because my dogs jump around like lunatics before and after I feed them. If I had bloat in the lines, some of them ought to have bloated, just because of this insanity at feeding time. I feed kibble, I generally feed once a day.  And, it is the male structure that often determines bloating, the deep chested dogs. So could be genetic. It is problematic in the breed. And I have had one go that way. A terrible thing. Over the course of a number of years you are going to lose dogs one way or another. Cancer, yep Arwen, and Tori, and Cujo1. Right now because my oldest litters are 11 and 12, I have heard of how some of them have died, those that weren't accidental, cancer -- prostate cancer, hemangiosarcoma -- one of my 11 year olds Rudy's owners just let me know. 

But yes, I have been fortunate with them. They are mostly doing very well.


----------



## Pytheis

selzer said:


> I really don't hear of MegE in BYB dogs. Probably there, just don't hear about it as much. But I do hear about it in dogs from reputable breeders, heart problems, thyroid issues, and others.


I think part of the reason you hear about it more in reputably bred dogs is because the owners actually get in contact with a well-bred dog's breeder. BYB dogs are usually sold, then never seen or heard from again. How would you ever find out if the dog you bred had those types of issues if you didn't even care, and had no way of getting in contact with the person that bought your puppy? Besides, dogs are rehomed often, so it may not even be possible to contact the current owner.


----------



## cliffson1

In my opinion, no dog should be purposely bred before 14 months, and no female before 20 months. A dog in Czech Republic can have hips and elbows done at one year, and be titled at 14 months. Many German females are bred at 20 months. Personally, I think breeding should be done by experienced breeders. I also think that some dogs ( males)can be bred at 18 months responsibly and other dogs need to wait until 2 or 2 1/2 before they are bred. 
AKC gives a lot of latitude in breeding requirements...which has been more curse than blessing. But at end of day, the number one thing for me is the track record of the breeder, and no responsible breeder is going to breed a dog before health and temperament has been established along with good genetics. That doesn't necessarily mean OFA and IPO, but it does mean proper radiography and working ability tested....and under a year of age is out of question in reference to OP's initial question. JMO


----------



## Nigel

From previous threads on breeding/breeders I wonder if even 2 years is too young. I believe it was Canto Weinerau who passed at 4 years of age. If he began being bred at 2 that leaves little time to see how he produces yet so many jumped on the bandwagon. I don't recall the other names, but there are similar stories with other dogs used often. Maybe waiting 3-5 years before breeding would help weed out further unforeseen issues? iDK squat about breeding, but it seems like it's rushed.


----------



## GSDguy4EVER

I find it interesting that this discussion has generated such strong opinions with regards to the ethics of dog breeding and what constitutes responsible breeding or lack thereof. Notwithstanding the fact that the OP query was regarding the safety of breeding a dog young.

Considering the varied breeding practices of GSD breeders as it relates to the overall effect to the GSD breed, I must ask these questions. Which is more harmful to the GSD breed- breeding young unproven dogs (for whatever reason) or breeding adult dogs with ill-gotten working titles lacking proper temperament? Which of these two breeding practices is more prevalent in the country that has the most influence in the evolution of the breed?


----------



## cliffson1

Both practices are detrimental to the breed. You can't measure one against the other because they exist in different worlds. Breeding too young is very much prevalent in the AKC show world( where a dog can get majors and titles before one year of age) and BYB.....I don't need to comment on the general condition of the breed in those worlds. Breeding unworthy titled dogs is very common in GermanSL( black and red) world, where money is prime driving force and 2500 to 5000 dollars for puppy is not uncommon as well as strong sales in India, China, Pakistan,Japan, South American countries where the understanding of good GS temperament is lacking due to very few real training facilities or clubs.
So take your pick&#55358;&#56631;*♀. 
I think the OP got a clear answer to the initial question with clarity and on most part with class. Most experienced and knowledgeable breeders I think gave pretty much same advice,( I use experienced and knowledgeable because you can be experienced breeder with limited knowledge or misguided priorities as seen by the above examples), and of course there are always extremes in both directions.


----------



## Thecowboysgirl

I recently heard Ian Dunbar say something to the effect that no male dog should be bred before he is 10 or so. If he has made it that far, he is totally healthy and great temperament, then let him get started. Females of course can't wait that long. 

That would rule out any issues that developed later in life or premature death by anything that could be heritable.

I didn't think it was a bad argument...

I don't breed dogs so no particular expertise here, I don't think Dunbar breeds either but he is a DVM I think. and I know he isn't popular here but I don't think this topic has any bearing on that or vise versa


----------



## lhczth

It would also eliminate a huge percentage of the males since most would be sterile by that point. Yes, we could all freeze the semen on the males thus requiring females be bred using surgical AI. Sounds like a great way to make money for the vets, lose valuable genetics to the breed, increase puppy prices even more and to cut down on the dog population.

I have been lucky to breed to some older males, but have had a few planned breedings not happen because that older male went sterile.


----------



## Nigel

Waiting until 10 seems a bit extreme imop. A 10 year old dog might be considered healthy for his age, but would he be healthy in regard to breeding? Would the dog @ 10 produce the same as if he was used at 4-5? The body begins to deteriorate with age, I would think this would affect the whole dog, but maybe not?


----------



## Steve Strom

Nigel said:


> Waiting until 10 seems a bit extreme imop. A 10 year old dog might be considered healthy for his age, but would he be healthy in regard to breeding? Would the dog @ 10 produce the same as if he was used at 4-5? The body begins to deteriorate with age, I would think this would affect the whole dog, but maybe not?


I think it depends on the dog. I think the best litter my dog's sire produced overall, was bred when he was 10. 4 IPO3's,and a 1 out of a litter of 6. The brother with a 1 is only because the owner lost a lot of time from training and the one sister isn't trained in any sport. 

Wagner vom Welzbachtal


----------



## Steve Strom

GSDguy4EVER said:


> I find it interesting that this discussion has generated such strong opinions with regards to the ethics of dog breeding and what constitutes responsible breeding or lack thereof. Notwithstanding the fact that the OP query was regarding the safety of breeding a dog young.
> 
> Considering the varied breeding practices of GSD breeders as it relates to the overall effect to the GSD breed, I must ask these questions. Which is more harmful to the GSD breed- breeding young unproven dogs (for whatever reason) or breeding adult dogs with ill-gotten working titles lacking proper temperament? Which of these two breeding practices is more prevalent in the country that has the most influence in the evolution of the breed?


Its people. Some are honest, some are cheaters, some are just delusional. You balance how much you want to see as proof vs how much you're willing to accept on trust. There's no single practice or anything thats the most harmful, its a changing mess created by different people for different reasons. I'm more interested in proof. The whole "My dogs can do it all" when neither you or they ever have, isn't someone I listen to.


----------



## Nigel

Steve Strom said:


> I think it depends on the dog. I think the best litter my dog's sire produced overall, was bred when he was 10. 4 IPO3's,and a 1 out of a litter of 6. The brother with a 1 is only because the owner lost a lot of time from training and the one sister isn't trained in any sport.
> 
> Wagner vom Welzbachtal


If I'm understanding the pedigree you linked correctly there are two seperate breedings using dogs at 9 years of age, one being Heavens dam Bona. The other was male and back a couple generations. There are a number of 7's and 6's too. 

I can't say I've looked at a lot of pedigrees, but those that I have, have 3,4, and 5 years of age being common. 

It's cool to see older dogs can be bred successfully, thanks.


----------



## WateryTart

selzer said:


> WateryTart said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, that doesn't apply given that I'm also participating in the agreement to disagree.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nice try, though.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't understand how you cannot understand how controlling you sound.
> 
> _We _do not _have _to agree to disagree, just because _you _suggest it. You can ask, that gives me a say in it. Otherwise, you have chosen to end an argument/conversation on your own terms regardless of what I think about it. _That _is controlling. Which gets up under my skin.
> 
> Which really won't make me lose any sleep. We do not have to agree to disagree. You can walk away. I can walk away. But neither of us can force the other to accept that the discussion is at stalemate.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm certainly sorry you feel that way.

The way I see it, logically we either agree or we do not. If we agree, great. If we do not, that's fine too, but then it follows that we must agree to disagree. The alternative is that you do not agree to disagree, in which case then you are coming around to agreeing with me that these are the irresponsible practices of a backyard breeder just in it for the money - but if you don't feel that way then we will agree to disagree.


----------



## WateryTart

voodoolamb said:


> selzer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe working line dogs are slower to mature to the point of actually being properly assessed.
> 
> 
> 
> Even if they are show line dogs... they are STILL a working breed. They should have a WORKING DOG temperament! That is the STANDARD!!!
> 
> And THAT it the point that is being missed here. There are items written in the GSD standard that YOU CANNOT PROPERLY ASSESS UNTIL MATURITY.
> 
> 
> 
> FCI GSD Standard said:
> 
> 
> 
> The German Shepherd Dog must be well-balanced (with strong nerves) in terms of character, self-assured, absolutely natural and (except for a stimulated situation) good-natured as well as attentive and willing to please. He must possess instinctive behaviour, resilience and self-assurance in order to be suitable as a companion, guard, protection, service and herding dog.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This is what EVERY GSD BREEDER IS SUPPOSED TO BE STRIVING FOR.
> 
> How many items of that "instinctive behavior" don't kick in until maturity?
> 
> Who here would trust an 11 month old pup to have true protective instincts?
> 
> How many service dogs get washed from programs between 1 year and 2 years?
> 
> I have been speaking with a herding instructor about doing a herding instinct test. She will test as young as 6 months, but says not to be too discouraged if the pup doesn't pass, and to try again at 1 year, 18 months, and even up to 2 years... because sometimes it just takes a while for the pup to mature into it.
> 
> Here's the thing... You don't KNOW for SURE if a dog will develop these instinctive traits UNTIL THEY DO. Yeah, you can make educated guesses based on the lineage... but even the best breedings will through duds every now and then.
Click to expand...

The whole, "But...but SHOW LINE!" reads to me as just looking for a reason to dismiss or disparage the working lines.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline

WateryTart said:


> The whole, "But...but SHOW LINE!" reads to me as just looking for a reason to dismiss or disparage the working lines.


Say it ain't so!


----------



## selzer

voodoolamb said:


> Even if they are show line dogs... they are STILL a working breed. They should have a WORKING DOG temperament! That is the STANDARD!!!
> 
> And THAT it the point that is being missed here. There are items written in the GSD standard that YOU CANNOT PROPERLY ASSESS UNTIL MATURITY.
> 
> 
> 
> This is what EVERY GSD BREEDER IS SUPPOSED TO BE STRIVING FOR.
> 
> How many items of that "instinctive behavior" don't kick in until maturity?
> 
> Who here would trust an 11 month old pup to have true protective instincts?
> 
> How many service dogs get washed from programs between 1 year and 2 years?
> 
> I have been speaking with a herding instructor about doing a herding instinct test. She will test as young as 6 months, but says not to be too discouraged if the pup doesn't pass, and to try again at 1 year, 18 months, and even up to 2 years... because sometimes it just takes a while for the pup to mature into it.
> 
> Here's the thing... You don't KNOW for SURE if a dog will develop these instinctive traits UNTIL THEY DO. Yeah, you can make educated guesses based on the lineage... but even the best breedings will through duds every now and then.


That's a good point. Sometimes, a breeder does evaluate their dogs and gives them a maybe even at 2 years, because they are still questionable. If you feel confident about your male's temperament at 12 months or 14 months, then they are individuals. If a dog at 12 or 14 months seems shy, nervous, not self-assured, but the dog seems to cover this better at 24 months, is it that the dog's temperament is not set or is it that the dog is now comfortable enough in the environment with its handlers/owners? When are most dogs re-homed due to temperament issues or neutered because of them? The teenager stage -- 8 months to 18 months. Maybe a little older. So if a young dog is having issues that clear up by maturity, than isn't he more likely to produce dogs that have trouble in this stage. 

Now the question is, do dogs suddenly, after 12-14 months become spooky nerve-bags. Or is it more likely for a dog to be a bit nervy prior and mature into a more stable specimen? 

I am not over-concerned with protection. The dogs have big pointy ears and large barks that a lot of people have enough trouble managing. Most WL people say that you cannot expect a dog to engage without training. Most of the people aren't going to do that training. And, many of them shouldn't. I've seen my dogs work the sleeve, and I have heard reports of them. So far none of them have sat there watching a robber rape and murder their owner. Yet. I think you can know that a dog has a strong temperament or a weak one by 12 months. 

If we are going to reject every dog that would be washed from police dog training between 1 and 2 from breeding, then we would wash the show-lines anyway. Which is poo. A lot more dogs are never selected to go down that road, well before they are 12 months old. How can they make that decision? The dog might grow into his temperament?


----------



## GSDguy4EVER

cloudpump said:


> I would want a male stud that is strong enough to breed with any female. Pass those genetics on. Not a pedestrian dog that is denied by a bitch.
> There is almost nothing as strong as the desire to breed for most dogs. If they are too soft to deal with being handled, muzzled, or told off by a bitch, well, that's telling.
> When breeders are breeding weak dogs, the breed suffers. And that sucks.


I believe this is one of the most basic selection criterion for stud dogs. In my opinion, finicky studs should be not used no matter how many positive qualities they have. This is why i prefer live cover over AI, so you can actually observe the virility of the male.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline

GSDguy4EVER said:


> I believe this is one of the most basic selection criterion for stud dogs. In my opinion, finicky studs should be not used no matter how many positive qualities they have. This is why i prefer live cover over AI, so you can actually observe the virility of the male.


I remember reading a thread where a breeder posted a picture of their dogs tied. Don't remember what forum it was on, could have been this one, maybe not, but people were upset about the puppy porn! LOL


----------



## selzer

WateryTart said:


> Well, I'm certainly sorry you feel that way.
> 
> The way I see it, logically we either agree or we do not. If we agree, great. If we do not, that's fine too, but then it follows that we must agree to disagree. The alternative is that you do not agree to disagree, in which case then you are coming around to agreeing with me that these are the irresponsible practices of a backyard breeder just in it for the money - but if you don't feel that way then we will agree to disagree.


No, it is semantics. You are not ready to throw in the towel and give up the argument, so you want for us to go out together. And that would be fine if you ask. 

But you will not ask, "Could we agree to disagree on this?" Instead you say, "We will have to agree to disagree." You can't see the difference. On the first, I can say yay or nay. On the next, I am an argumentative bitch if I continue the discussion. It is controlling. ASK. Sometimes people will say, "yeah, this isn't going anywhere, we can agree to disagree." But I will Never voluntarily stop a discussion because someone says I must or I have to, or we must or we have to. I think all I have to do is pay taxes, and die. Nowhere in that is agreeing to disagree with anybody about anything. That is a choice, and it should be.


----------



## voodoolamb

selzer said:


> I am not over-concerned with protection.


So you (a breeder) are saying that you are not over-concerned with a _key_ part of the German Shepherd Dog standard. 

That is very telling.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline

Can we get back to discussing dogs?


----------



## WateryTart

selzer said:


> WateryTart said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I'm certainly sorry you feel that way.
> 
> The way I see it, logically we either agree or we do not. If we agree, great. If we do not, that's fine too, but then it follows that we must agree to disagree. The alternative is that you do not agree to disagree, in which case then you are coming around to agreeing with me that these are the irresponsible practices of a backyard breeder just in it for the money - but if you don't feel that way then we will agree to disagree.
> 
> 
> 
> No, it is semantics. You are not ready to throw in the towel and give up the argument, so you want for us to go out together. And that would be fine if you ask.
> 
> But you will not ask, "Could we agree to disagree on this?" Instead you say, "We will have to agree to disagree." You can't see the difference. On the first, I can say yay or nay. On the next, I am an argumentative bitch if I continue the discussion. It is controlling. ASK. Sometimes people will say, "yeah, this isn't going anywhere, we can agree to disagree." But I will Never voluntarily stop a discussion because someone says I must or I have to, or we must or we have to. I think all I have to do is pay taxes, and die. Nowhere in that is agreeing to disagree with anybody about anything. That is a choice, and it should be.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry you feel that way.

I am also curious about the question voodoo posed. Is it okay for show line breeders to simply not care about a part of the standard?


----------



## voodoolamb

selzer said:


> If we are going to reject every dog that would be washed from police dog training between 1 and 2 from breeding, then we would wash the show-lines anyway. Which is poo.


Perhaps this wouldn't be an issue if (certain) breeders of show lines prioritized keeping the working instincts outlined in the GSD standard. 

Maybe by NOT breeding immature dogs who's instincts can't be properly assessed.


----------



## GSDguy4EVER

Selzer,

I may not agree with all your breeding practices and I may not even agree with you breeding the bloodlines that you have, but... if your breeding program is done legally, you take care of your dogs, and you find good homes for your puppies, then I support your right to breed dogs. This is America, land of the free and capitalism.


----------



## selzer

voodoolamb said:


> So you (a breeder) are saying that you are not over-concerned with a _key_ part of the German Shepherd Dog standard.
> 
> That is very telling.


I follow the AKC Standard:

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

"Watchdog" is not "personal protection dog." "Guardian" listed after "herding dog, I do not think suggests a PPD either. All my dogs are good watchdogs, and I have put some on herding sheep. I think they will be fine as livestock guardians but I have never used them in that role. They certainly put up a fuss when the black bear was chewing up my garbage. I know one of mine has taken down deer that jumped into its owner's yard, but my nutters would've gone after the black bear. If allowed. I did not allow it. But whatever. I am not worried about protection. I breed to the AKC standard.


----------



## voodoolamb

selzer said:


> I am not worried about protection. I breed to the AKC standard.




the AKC Standard:

"Temperament
: 
The breed
has a distinct personality marked by direct and fearless, but not 
hostile, expression, self
-
confidence and a certain aloofness that does not lend itself to immediate 
and indiscriminate friendships. The dog must be approachable, quietly standing its ground
and 
showing confidence and willingness to meet overtures without itself making them. It is poised, 
but *when the occasion demands, eager and alert; both fit and willing to serve in its capacity as *
companion, watchdog, blind leader, herding dog, or *guardian*

guard·i·an
ˈɡärdēən/Submit
noun
a defender, *protector*, or keeper.
(Thanks google!)

Seems to me that the AKC standard still requires natural protective instincts... Which most dog behavior savvy people would agree can not be properly assessed until maturity...


----------



## MineAreWorkingline

GSDguy4EVER said:


> Selzer,
> 
> I may not agree with all your breeding practices and I may not even agree with you breeding the bloodlines that you have, but... if your breeding program is done legally, you take care of your dogs, and you find good homes for your puppies, then I support your right to breed dogs. This is America, land of the free and capitalism.


With all due respect, reputable breeders are stewards who breed to the standard so that this magnificent breed can be passed down to successive generations for them to enjoy as we have had the privilege to know them. 

If a breed standard calls for erect ears, a buyer should expect erect ears, if it calls for a dog medium sized dog, a buyer should expect medium size, and if a standard calls for a dog that can naturally protect and guard (which they do with aggression), then a buyer should expect this behavior. Deliberately breeding for anything less could be considered a backyard breeder and does damage to our breed.

The breed standard is the blueprint of the breed, structurally and behaviorally. When a prospective buyer starts a puppy search, they should study breed standards to determine whether this breed is the right breed for them. Just because a breeder produces puppies, does not mean what they produce will be representative of the breed, and it is generally those puppies, that disappoint and that make their way into shelters and rescues. Who gets rid of a dog that matures into a welcome addition to the family and is everything they expected within limits? There is a much larger picture involved than finding homes for cute puppies, it is keeping puppies in homes, it is buyer satisfaction, and it is preserving the breed as it should be, among other factors. It just isn't that simple and it is usually the dog that will pay the price. If you are a true German Shepherd lover, then yes, this should be something you care about.

This is the land of the free and capitalism say the puppy millers and backyard breeders. With that said, I don't have a problem with a breeder making a profit as long as the dogs they turn out are taken care of and representative of our breed.


----------



## selzer

Every standard is open to interpretation. The AKC put the dog in the herding group because when the breed was developed, it was developed as a herding dog, not a police dog, not as a military dog -- that came later, that would have put us in the working group, if the breed's original purpose were those things. When MVS created the breed, the German farmers did not want to support two dogs for the job of tending sheep. The French employed a small dog to move the sheep and a great dog to guard them. The Pyrean Shepherd/Great Pyrenees. England has a number of tending dogs, the Collie can do both, the border collie moves sheep, but could not protect them from human or animal predators, so a larger dog might be employed as a Livestock Guardian. The German Shepherd Dog was created to do both tending jobs, herding and guardian. I choose to interpret the standard in that respect. 

There is little need for livestock guardians these days. There is no AKC LG title, that I know of. But if there was, I'd be interested in it. In my opinion, a LG dog, needs to be capable to live on a farm without injuring the farm's legal residents, while providing necessary guarding of the residents from outside threats. This would usually mean a watch dog that doesn't bother the farm's critters and would go alert and guard against predators. Some GSDs are not safe around small creatures like chickens, sheep, goats, etc, or big critters like horses. Guarding is not the same as a dog that is ordered to attack a subject. It might mean fighting with a critter to protect the farm's critters. Much more likely with humans to alert and then prevent them from getting to the people or animals. 

Again, not sure we have any sort of title as Livestock Guardian, but I do not see it as a protection dog. Protection training, which some of my pups do, is different. It is approached differently from the whelping box upwards. I am not breeding for that. If my puppy owners want to do that, good for them. Most of the people who tell me that is what they want to do, I send them down the road to the guy with working lines. Why? Because I think that how the dogs are bred and how they are treated in the nest makes a difference in how likely they are to fulfill individual's needs. I had a 3-4 (middle of the road to less confident but gentle) puppy go to a family and I flat out said "not a schutzhund dog." They did not want it as a schutzhund dog, but let me know later that they were doing it with him. And, he was the more dominant than the WL pup of the same age they had. Whatever. It is not what I am breeding for. Will these dogs guard? Yes. Will they attack on command? Not without overcoming the natural inhibition to biting humans. 



voodoolamb said:


> the AKC Standard:
> 
> "Temperament
> :
> The breed
> has a distinct personality marked by direct and fearless, but not
> hostile, expression, self
> -
> confidence and a certain aloofness that does not lend itself to immediate
> and indiscriminate friendships. The dog must be approachable, quietly standing its ground
> and
> showing confidence and willingness to meet overtures without itself making them. It is poised,
> but *when the occasion demands, eager and alert; both fit and willing to serve in its capacity as *
> companion, watchdog, blind leader, herding dog, or *guardian*
> 
> guard·i·an
> ˈɡärdēən/Submit
> noun
> a defender, *protector*, or keeper.
> (Thanks google!)
> 
> Seems to me that the AKC standard still requires natural protective instincts... Which most dog behavior savvy people would agree can not be properly assessed until maturity...


----------



## selzer

MineAreWorkingline said:


> With all due respect, reputable breeders are stewards who breed to the standard so that this magnificent breed can be passed down to successive generations for them to enjoy as we have had the privilege to know them.
> 
> If a breed standard calls for erect ears, a buyer should expect erect ears, if it calls for a dog medium sized dog, a buyer should expect medium size, and if a standard calls for a dog that can naturally protect and guard (which they do with aggression), then a buyer should expect this behavior. Deliberately breeding for anything less could be considered a backyard breeder and does damage to our breed.
> 
> The breed standard is the blueprint of the breed, structurally and behaviorally. When a prospective buyer starts a puppy search, they should study breed standards to determine whether this breed is the right breed for them. Just because a breeder produces puppies, does not mean what they produce will be representative of the breed, and it is generally those puppies, that disappoint and that make their way into shelters and rescues. Who gets rid of a dog that matures into a welcome addition to the family and is everything they expected within limits? There is a much larger picture involved than finding homes for cute puppies, it is keeping puppies in homes, it is buyer satisfaction, and it is preserving the breed as it should be, among other factors. It just isn't that simple and it is usually the dog that will pay the price. If you are a true German Shepherd lover, then yes, this should be something you care about.
> 
> This is the land of the free and capitalism say the puppy millers and backyard breeders. With that said, I don't have a problem with a breeder making a profit as long as the dogs they turn out are taken care of and representative of our breed.


And on another site, I get smacked around because people do not believe a GSD should be able to manage a CGC. If you read the standard, the AKC standard, which is what I register, it requires a dog that will stand its ground, allow overtures, without soliciting them. Will not try to bite the judge even if he tries to check his berries or teeth or whatever. Some breeders are not breeding for this, and are not concerned with it all. 

I've read Max's book, and I think the WGSL dog is much closer in temperament to what Max was producing. But everyone has a different opinion, and that is good. This breed is big enough for all of us. Lastly, just because people here disagree with me on this, does not mean I am wrong. The site is primarily WL people. Of course they need to believe their dogs are the only ones that should reach the Pearly Gates. The idea that some of us take a more ecumenical approach to being a shepherd, to them suggests that we have the weaker argument. We may have considered them the red-headed step child, but we are not against their existence. Ya'all aren't content with us being a red-headed step child, you want to obliviate the show lines. Kind of insecure attitude, but what have you. I breed to the AKC standard, and I am ok with that.


----------



## cloudpump

Threads like these really make me appreciate my *ethical* breeder. 
It's sad that there are "breeders" that omit the parts of a breed description on a whim. Breed another breed so we don't lose the abilities that we hold deer. 
A gsd should protect the herder. A dog that barks is useless. Hence, watch dog. Great for other breeds to do.


----------



## WIBackpacker

AKC Standard: 



> "The ideal dog is a working animal"


To the original topic - 

To be breedworthy, the dog needs to be old enough to be a proven working animal. 
-----

Regarding LGDs. Puppies/prospects are raised completely differently from all other sorts dogs. The objectives for what/who/how the dog bonds to and with are completely unique. 

LGDs don't act like other type of farm dog. At all.

There is no ethically humane way to have an LGD "title". To successfully do the work, the owner would need to let their dog beat the snot out of a coyote, a random sacrificial dog, maybe a trio of dogs.... While the judge cheerfully watches? Points for a full kill, deductions if the coyote limps off on three legs and gets away? Vet waiting just outside the arena with rabies boosters and peroxide?

Just, No.


----------



## voodoolamb

selzer said:


> , and I think the WGSL dog is much closer in temperament to what Max was producing... I breed to the AKC standard, and I am ok with that.


Serious question...

You have WGSL don't you? Why are you breeding to the AKC standard instead of SV then? 

Doesn't breeding to a different standard, you know, kinda defeat the purpose of having WGSL in the first place?


----------



## selzer

Shepherds were developed to herd and guard sheep. A shepherd dog in Germany, will take the sheep maybe a hundred, more or less, down a busy road, keeping them out of the crops and out of the road to the field where they will graze. He will then keep them from drifting into crops or roadways. 

A true herding test where the dog guards the sheep, maybe 100, from a coyote or wolf, and moves sheep keeping them out of the crops and the busy road, and well, that's not done either.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline

selzer said:


> And on another site, I get smacked around because people do not believe a GSD should be able to manage a CGC. If you read the standard, the AKC standard, which is what I register, it requires a dog that will stand its ground, allow overtures, without soliciting them. Will not try to bite the judge even if he tries to check his berries or teeth or whatever. Some breeders are not breeding for this, and are not concerned with it all.
> 
> I've read Max's book, and I think the WGSL dog is much closer in temperament to what Max was producing. But everyone has a different opinion, and that is good. This breed is big enough for all of us. Lastly, just because people here disagree with me on this, does not mean I am wrong. The site is primarily WL people. Of course they need to believe their dogs are the only ones that should reach the Pearly Gates. The idea that some of us take a more ecumenical approach to being a shepherd, to them suggests that we have the weaker argument. We may have considered them the red-headed step child, but we are not against their existence. Ya'all aren't content with us being a red-headed step child, you want to obliviate the show lines. Kind of insecure attitude, but what have you. I breed to the AKC standard, and I am ok with that.


Correct me if I am wrong, but don't you have West German Showlines? Yet you keep holding them to the AKC breed standard? WGSLs are not bred to the AKC standard. How can you do this?

Do you ever think that allowing a judge to "check his berries" could be a trained behavior?

Excuse me, but this is my dog:


----------



## sitstay

selzer said:


> Ya'all aren't content with us being a red-headed step child, you want to obliviate the show lines.


Speaking only for myself, I am NOT against showlines. I gave my heart to a showline and I have fostered and placed many, including an older female who really was a schutzhund dog and didn't just play one on t.v. in order to crank out puppies.

I am against poor breeding. This includes breeders who operate in such a grey area that they have to defend their choices by claiming that the breed doesn't have to do the work it was intended to do, so no big whoop if those characteristics are lost.
Sheilah


----------



## MineAreWorkingline

selzer said:


> Every standard is open to interpretation. The AKC put the dog in the herding group because when the breed was developed, it was developed as a herding dog, not a police dog, not as a military dog -- that came later, that would have put us in the working group, if the breed's original purpose were those things. When MVS created the breed, the German farmers did not want to support two dogs for the job of tending sheep. The French employed a small dog to move the sheep and a great dog to guard them. The Pyrean Shepherd/Great Pyrenees. England has a number of tending dogs, the Collie can do both, the border collie moves sheep, but could not protect them from human or animal predators, so a larger dog might be employed as a Livestock Guardian. The German Shepherd Dog was created to do both tending jobs, herding and guardian. I choose to interpret the standard in that respect.
> 
> There is little need for livestock guardians these days. There is no AKC LG title, that I know of. But if there was, I'd be interested in it. In my opinion, a LG dog, needs to be capable to live on a farm without injuring the farm's legal residents, while providing necessary guarding of the residents from outside threats. This would usually mean a watch dog that doesn't bother the farm's critters and would go alert and guard against predators. Some GSDs are not safe around small creatures like chickens, sheep, goats, etc, or big critters like horses. Guarding is not the same as a dog that is ordered to attack a subject. It might mean fighting with a critter to protect the farm's critters. Much more likely with humans to alert and then prevent them from getting to the people or animals.
> 
> Again, not sure we have any sort of title as Livestock Guardian, but I do not see it as a protection dog. Protection training, which some of my pups do, is different. It is approached differently from the whelping box upwards. I am not breeding for that. If my puppy owners want to do that, good for them. Most of the people who tell me that is what they want to do, I send them down the road to the guy with working lines. Why? Because I think that how the dogs are bred and how they are treated in the nest makes a difference in how likely they are to fulfill individual's needs. I had a 3-4 (middle of the road to less confident but gentle) puppy go to a family and I flat out said "not a schutzhund dog." They did not want it as a schutzhund dog, but let me know later that they were doing it with him. And, he was the more dominant than the WL pup of the same age they had. Whatever. It is not what I am breeding for. Will these dogs guard? Yes. Will they attack on command? Not without overcoming the natural inhibition to biting humans.


German Shepherds were once a part of the Working Group. There has not always been a Herding Group and the only reason it was created is because the Working Group became so large that it became unmanageable at shows.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline

"*More Alike Than You Might Think*

How do large-flock herding and the herding dog relate to Schutzhund?

Let me offer a few thoughts on the subject. Think about your Schutzhund protection exercises and the large flock HGH exercises. Up close, the HGH must hold its ground, hold the boundary, against the pressure of hundreds of hungry sheep wanting to get to the good crops on the other side. For this the dog must have the temperament, courage and sound nerves to command the respect of the flock by showing that it can and will use its bite to grip when and where necessary. When challenged or charged by sheep leaving the graze or on the road, the HGH must have the temperament, nerve and courage to fight back and to teach the sheep a lesson with a punishing grip.

The Schutzhund bark and hold requires the dog to find the man in the blind and to hold him there without biting him as long as the man stays in the blind — the HGH herding dog is required to hold the sheep inside the graze without gripping them as long as they stay inside the graze. Also, the Schutzhund escape from the blind requires the dog to bite the helper as soon as the helper moves to escape and to hold the helper as long as he struggles, fights and hits — the HGH herding dog is required to grip the sheep if a sheep tries to leave the graze and to release the sheep as soon as it stops struggling or heads back into the graze. In fact, the Schutzhund escape and attack exercises can all be compared to the duties required by the properly bred and educated large flock HGH herding dog.

Consider Schutzhund obedience during the protection phase. The Schutzhund dog must be under the control of the handler in a high-drive situation and so must the HGH. Yet in both disciplines the dog must perform on its own initiative out of instinct. In both Schutzhund protection and HGH the foundation of obedience is “STAY” and “OUT”. Without them you have no control over the dog in a high drive situation. For control and obedience in a high drive situation, these commands must be obeyed in a high drive environment whether that environment is the protection field or the sheep graze.

Those are some of the similarities. What would the difference be? It seems to me that the main difference between Schutzhund protection and HGH work is in the nature of the work itself. The HGH dog must work independently at a great distance from the shepherd while the Schutzhund dog must work closer to the handler and much more on command."

German Shepherd Herding » From HGH To Schutzhund


----------



## Thecowboysgirl

selzer said:


> Shepherds were developed to herd and guard sheep. A shepherd dog in Germany, will take the sheep maybe a hundred, more or less, down a busy road, keeping them out of the crops and out of the road to the field where they will graze. He will then keep them from drifting into crops or roadways.
> 
> A true herding test where the dog guards the sheep, maybe 100, from a coyote or wolf, and moves sheep keeping them out of the crops and the busy road, and well, that's not done either.


The most true herding test for a GSD is the HGH, right? 

What does that entail? I know it rarely happens in the US


----------



## WateryTart

selzer said:


> Lastly, just because people here disagree with me on this, does not mean I am wrong. The site is primarily WL people. Of course they need to believe their dogs are the only ones that should reach the Pearly Gates. The idea that some of us take a more ecumenical approach to being a shepherd, to them suggests that we have the weaker argument. We may have considered them the red-headed step child, but we are not against their existence. Ya'all aren't content with us being a red-headed step child, you want to obliviate the show lines. Kind of insecure attitude, but what have you. I breed to the AKC standard, and I am ok with that.


I have an American bred dog from conformation lines. She is bred to the AKC standard. She is not a red headed stepchild. She is also responsibly bred by someone who takes care to prove their dogs and doesn't irresponsibly have puppies produce puppies. One doesn't have to be in working lines to take issue with bad practice and it's disingenuous to make it about line type.


----------



## selzer

voodoolamb said:


> Serious question...
> 
> You have WGSL don't you? Why are you breeding to the AKC standard instead of SV then?
> 
> Doesn't breeding to a different standard, you know, kinda defeat the purpose of having WGSL in the first place?


My dogs are registered through the AKC. Some are shown in AKC shows. They have AKC numbers. 

And what I am breeding now, Quinn will be the next generation next year, year after, whatever, her fathers sire and dam were imported. Her mothers sire was imported. Her mother's dam was out of a dog whose sire was imported and dam was all WGSL, but the dam was an ASL/WGSL cross. Arwen was about 5/16 -3/8 WGSL, the rest was ASL, some nice dogs there. And It used to be that the ASL did bring in German dogs to improve their lines. I just keep breeding back to German dogs, and am not interested in going the other way, into American Show Lines. 

So four generations back I have some ASL in there. Lassie/Kojak will be all WGSL. So I am breeding both, WGSL and WGSL with a small amount of ASL. 

My ancestry is mostly German, with Hungarian and English and Dutch in there. But I AM an American. Only one Grandmother came from the Old Country, back at the turn of the century before last, 1900s. Back then, they came here and became Americans. She was forbidden to speak her native tongue so she would learn English. And we abide by American laws, not Hungarian, or German laws. So, I breed to the American Standard. I do not name my dogs, Cujo von der Selzer Haus, they are Evenstar's Quinn, Evenstar's Karma, etc. Because I am not trying to pretend that my dogs are German, if they are not. Lassie is Evenstar's Lassie, and she is out of two imports that I put together. Whatever. 

I am showing, and breeding in America, under the AKC and its standards and rules. Under its rules, I can breed a 7 month old puppy-dog, or an 8 month old bitch. I choose to wait longer than that, but that is a choice.


----------



## selzer

MineAreWorkingline said:


> Correct me if I am wrong, but don't you have West German Showlines? Yet you keep holding them to the AKC breed standard? WGSLs are not bred to the AKC standard. How can you do this?
> 
> Do you ever think that allowing a judge to "check his berries" could be a trained behavior?
> 
> Excuse me, but this is my dog:
> 
> View attachment 450818


The American Standard and the SV standard are not all that different. Not structure or temperament, or disqualifying faults. I do not breed AKC disqualifying faults.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline

selzer said:


> I just keep breeding back to German dogs, and am not interested in going the other way, into American Show Lines.


If you are not interested in breeding back into American show lines, then why are you using West German show lines but breeding to the AKC standard? Why not just breed ASL to the AKC standard? 

Am I the only one confused here?


----------



## voodoolamb

selzer said:


> So, I breed to the American Standard. I do not name my dogs, Cujo von der Selzer Haus, they are Evenstar's Quinn, Evenstar's Karma, etc. Because I am not trying to pretend that my dogs are German, if they are not. Lassie is Evenstar's Lassie, and she is out of two imports that I put together.


Dubya Von Selzer


----------



## WateryTart

selzer said:


> And It used to be that the ASL did bring in German dogs to improve their lines. I just keep breeding back to German dogs, and am not interested in going the other way, into American Show Lines.


No, there is no "used to." You are wrong. It is happening currently. I have the second generation product of one of those breedings sitting in a chair in my living room. I believe the dually sired litter Rumor has right now would be either half WGSL (Mailo vom Kuckucksland) or 1/4 WGSL (a Mailo son). There are many other show line breeders who are choosing to incorporate WGSLs into their programs.

Responsibly, of course, once the dog has matured and they know what he brings to the table.


----------



## selzer

MineAreWorkingline said:


> German Shepherds were once a part of the Working Group. There has not always been a Herding Group and the only reason it was created is because the Working Group became so large that it became unmanageable at shows.


But the reason they put us into the herding group was because that was our original purpose. I question some of the placements, but GSDs do belong in the herding group.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline

selzer said:


> The American Standard and the SV standard are not all that different. Not structure or temperament, or disqualifying faults. I do not breed AKC disqualifying faults.


Please, this is a German Shepherd forum and most of the people posting on this thread can tell just by looking whether a GSD is ASL or WGSL, it is pretty obvious, and let's not even get started on temperament. I am not judging either or, having had ASL in the past too, just saying ASLs are about as far apart from WGSLs as WGSLs are from WLs.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline

selzer said:


> But the reason they put us into the herding group was because that was our original purpose. I question some of the placements, but GSDs do belong in the herding group.


Obviously, but that does not mean that the breeds in the Herding Group are no longer considered working dogs.


----------



## selzer

voodoolamb said:


> Dubya Von Selzer


I bought him. He was not one that I produced. Out of him I have Jenna Evenstar, Babs Sweet Surprise, and Evenstar's Heidi. At that point, I went to Evenstar's whatever if I bred them. 

MahaRushie Von Selzer was not bred by me, but purchased. 

Odessa Von Aurelius maintained her kennel name as did my most recently purchased pup Kojak (call name). 

I do not name dogs I buy with my kennel name. Not generally.


----------



## selzer

WateryTart said:


> No, there is no "used to." You are wrong. It is happening currently. I have the second generation product of one of those breedings sitting in a chair in my living room. I believe the dually sired litter Rumor has right now would be either half WGSL (Mailo vom Kuckucksland) or 1/4 WGSL (a Mailo son). There are many other show line breeders who are choosing to incorporate WGSLs into their programs.
> 
> Responsibly, of course, once the dog has matured and they know what he brings to the table.


I was reading the red book today. And I noticed a few dogs that were being incorporated were WGSL. Not many, not at that level. One major one, can't remember the name. Not the dog you mentioned. 

In my club WGSL are the red-headed step child that is pretty well shunned. The opinion is that they don't want the roach-backed dogs to contaminate their pretty ASL dogs.


----------



## selzer

MineAreWorkingline said:


> Obviously, but that does not mean that the breeds in the Herding Group are no longer considered working dogs.



Certainly, I think the true herding dog is more of a working dog than the dogs that most of you play with going out weekends to nibble on the sleeve. But whatever. I don't have a couple of hundred head of sheep either. I have a pup out there living on a sheep farm. Her owners are in their 80s, and although she is good around the sheep, I don't know if they trained her to herd them.


----------



## selzer

voodoolamb said:


> Dubya Von Selzer


And if you are looking crap up, there is a Cujo von der Selzerhaus. LOL! He was owned by my parents, and they named him. But yeah, I named Arwen Evenstar after the character, and she became my foundation dam. So the pups out of her had the Evenstar name. Jenna Evenstar, Babs was kind of special as she showed up late while I was sleeping and even the vet said she was done. 

But everyone else either out of Arwen or out of any breeding that I put together that I registered are Evenstar's ________.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline

selzer said:


> Certainly, I think the true herding dog is more of a working dog than the dogs that most of you play with going out weekends to nibble on the sleeve. But whatever. I don't have a couple of hundred head of sheep either. I have a pup out there living on a sheep farm. Her owners are in their 80s, and although she is good around the sheep, I don't know if they trained her to herd them.


Define true herding dog what a true herding dog means to you.

Not sure if you read this the first time around, but let me repeat my definition and source:

More Alike Than You Might Think

How do large-flock herding and the herding dog relate to Schutzhund?

Let me offer a few thoughts on the subject. Think about your Schutzhund protection exercises and the large flock HGH exercises. Up close, the HGH must hold its ground, hold the boundary, against the pressure of hundreds of hungry sheep wanting to get to the good crops on the other side. For this the dog must have the temperament, courage and sound nerves to command the respect of the flock by showing that it can and will use its bite to grip when and where necessary. When challenged or charged by sheep leaving the graze or on the road, the HGH must have the temperament, nerve and courage to fight back and to teach the sheep a lesson with a punishing grip.

The Schutzhund bark and hold requires the dog to find the man in the blind and to hold him there without biting him as long as the man stays in the blind — the HGH herding dog is required to hold the sheep inside the graze without gripping them as long as they stay inside the graze. Also, the Schutzhund escape from the blind requires the dog to bite the helper as soon as the helper moves to escape and to hold the helper as long as he struggles, fights and hits — the HGH herding dog is required to grip the sheep if a sheep tries to leave the graze and to release the sheep as soon as it stops struggling or heads back into the graze. In fact, the Schutzhund escape and attack exercises can all be compared to the duties required by the properly bred and educated large flock HGH herding dog.

Consider Schutzhund obedience during the protection phase. The Schutzhund dog must be under the control of the handler in a high-drive situation and so must the HGH. Yet in both disciplines the dog must perform on its own initiative out of instinct. In both Schutzhund protection and HGH the foundation of obedience is “STAY” and “OUT”. Without them you have no control over the dog in a high drive situation. For control and obedience in a high drive situation, these commands must be obeyed in a high drive environment whether that environment is the protection field or the sheep graze.

Those are some of the similarities. What would the difference be? It seems to me that the main difference between Schutzhund protection and HGH work is in the nature of the work itself. The HGH dog must work independently at a great distance from the shepherd while the Schutzhund dog must work closer to the handler and much more on command.

German Shepherd Herding » From HGH To Schutzhund


----------



## onyx'girl

Thecowboysgirl said:


> The most true herding test for a GSD is the HGH, right?
> 
> What does that entail? I know it rarely happens in the US


Follow Ulf Kintzel, he is hosting a trial this coming weekend. He would be the best go to for answering your questions.

Sheep Herding German Shepherd Dogs Training


----------



## cloudpump

onyx'girl said:


> Follow Ulf Kintzel, he is hosting a trial this coming weekend. He would be the best go to for answering your questions.
> 
> Sheep Herding German Shepherd Dogs Training


I'm going to watch! 

A true working dog.


----------



## WIBackpacker

onyx'girl said:


> Follow Ulf Kintzel, he is hosting a trial this coming weekend. He would be the best go to for answering your questions.
> 
> Sheep Herding German Shepherd Dogs Training


There's also his Facebook group, HGH Herding in America, which is really interesting.... he posts quite a few video clips, complete with explanations and critique.


----------



## Whiteshepherds

selzer said:


> In my club WGSL are the red-headed step child that is pretty well shunned. The opinion is that they don't want the roach-backed dogs to contaminate their pretty ASL dogs.





selzer said:


> Ya'all aren't content with us being a red-headed step child, you want to obliviate the show lines. Kind of insecure attitude, but what have you. I breed to the AKC standard, and I am ok with that.



Please clarify...The AKC breed standard reads as follows: *Topline - The withers are higher than and sloping into the level back. The back is straight, very strongly developed without sag or roach, and relatively short.* You've indicated that in your club the WGSL is shunned because of the roached backs....why would this come as surprise given the wording in the standard?


----------



## Thecowboysgirl

onyx'girl said:


> Follow Ulf Kintzel, he is hosting a trial this coming weekend. He would be the best go to for answering your questions.
> 
> Sheep Herding German Shepherd Dogs Training



Thanks, yes I already have his page bookmarked although I didn't realize he was doing anything this weekend I did know he was there and training dogs for this type of herding. It's definitely on my list to get there and see it.


----------



## WIBackpacker

Thecowboysgirl said:


> Thanks, yes I already have his page bookmarked although I didn't realize he was doing anything this weekend I did know he was there and training dogs for this type of herding. It's definitely on my list to get there and see it.


If you join that group and scroll back through the posts from this spring/summer, there's a lot to read - 

He's been raising up a board & train (young adult) out of someone else's breeding who will be trialed this fall, and he's also been commenting on the raising of young puppies from his own lines. That is one of the few space-book groups I'm in that tends to stay 99.9% on topic. Recommend!

If I didn't have to work next weekend, I'd roadtrip myself out to NY to watch (very jealous of you, cloudpump). Maybe next year....


----------



## Steve Strom

Whiteshepherds said:


> Please clarify...The AKC breed standard reads as follows: *Topline - The withers are higher than and sloping into the level back. The back is straight, very strongly developed without sag or roach, and relatively short.* You've indicated that in your club the WGSL is shunned because of the roached backs....why would this come as surprise given the wording in the standard?


You're going to find a lot of contradictions with people who interpret standards rather then trying to adhere to them.


----------



## Nigel

Whiteshepherds said:


> Please clarify...The AKC breed standard reads as follows: *Topline - The withers are higher than and sloping into the level back. The back is straight, very strongly developed without sag or roach, and relatively short.* You've indicated that in your club the WGSL is shunned because of the roached backs....why would this come as surprise given the wording in the standard?


On the "relatively short" part. I see gsds which have something of an elongated body, more so with showlines. I have two gsds which resemble this and two that are a bit more "square". What's correct? Or is this something that's also become exaggerated to some degree ? It's a bit off topic, but it's seldom mentioned.


----------



## GSDguy4EVER

Nigel said:


> On the "relatively short" part. I see gsds which have something of an elongated body, more so with showlines. I have two gsds which resemble this and two that are a bit more "square". What's correct? Or is this something that's also become exaggerated to some degree ? It's a bit off topic, but it's seldom mentioned.


I highly recommend for anyone interested in learning more about the proper GSD conformation to visit this website and read the articles:

The German Shepherd Dog - Welcome to my Website - The German Shepherd Dog

The writer's name is Louis Donald. I have never met this gentleman, but based on his writings and his credentials, I would consider him a true breedmaster for our beloved GSD.


----------



## Tennessee

selzer said:


> Certainly, *I think the true herding dog is more of a working dog than the dogs that most of you play with going out weekends to nibble on the sleeve. * But whatever. I don't have a couple of hundred head of sheep either. I have a pup out there living on a sheep farm. Her owners are in their 80s, and although she is good around the sheep, I don't know if they trained her to herd them.


So salty.

Can I just say, I really don't understand what your point is at all. 

You're virulent defending a breeding practice you yourself don't even engage in out of ethical reasons. And your justification is that you can "just tell" if the dog has major temperament issues and you're not breeding your dogs to do anything other than stand there and look pretty and not bite a judge when he handles their privates. Except you don't really know just how solid their temperament is on the whole because you never push them anywhere close to a point where they might break.


----------



## Tennessee

Nigel said:


> On the "relatively short" part. I see gsds which have something of an elongated body, more so with showlines. I have two gsds which resemble this and two that are a bit more "square". What's correct? Or is this something that's also become exaggerated to some degree ? It's a bit off topic, but it's seldom mentioned.


AKC Standard:

"...Size, Proportion, Substance: The desired height for males at the top of the highest point of the
shoulder blade is 24 to 26 inches; and for bitches, 22 to 24 inches. The German Shepherd Dog is
longer than tall, with the most desirable proportion as 10 to 8½..."

Males:
x/24 = 10/8.5 
[x/24 * 24] = [10/8.5 * 24]
[x] = [240/8.5]
x =28.24
following this we determine males should be between 28.24 (length) x 24 (height) - 30.59 x 26

Females: 
Same math as above
25.88 x 22 - 28.24 x 24


----------



## cloudpump

selzer said:


> Certainly, I think the true herding *dog is more of a working dog than the dogs that most of you play with going out weekends to nibble on the sleeve. *But whatever. I don't have a couple of hundred head of sheep either. I have a pup out there living on a sheep farm. Her owners are in their 80s, and although she is good around the sheep, I don't know if they trained her to herd them.


You really have no clue what's involved. 
You most likely have a pet out there. Not a working dog. Something even a sl should be able to do. But that's besides the point.


----------



## Thecowboysgirl

I've only seen it on YouTube but nibbling is not the word I would use ?

If I scratch my dog he nibbles me while I scratch him

Am I the only one who wishes we didn't all have to try to crap on each other's preferred type of GSD...as long as they all continue to be called the same breed I sure wish we could all be in it together and genuinely want to ourselves produce the best dogs we can and help others to achieve that too.

I see nothing that comes out of all this putting down other than more division. and I for one don't feel the division helps the breed.


----------



## Steve Strom

> Am I the only one who wishes we didn't all have to try to crap on each other's preferred type of GSD...as long as they all continue to be called the same breed I sure wish we could all be in it together and genuinely want to ourselves produce the best dogs we can and help others to achieve that too.


My crapping all has to do with the people, not the dogs. Honest is always fine, no matter what type of dog. Cheaters and delusional are where the problems come in.


----------



## Nigel

GSDguy4EVER said:


> I highly recommend for anyone interested in learning more about the proper GSD conformation to visit this website and read the articles:
> 
> The German Shepherd Dog - Welcome to my Website - The German Shepherd Dog
> 
> The writer's name is Louis Donald. I have never met this gentleman, but based on his writings and his credentials, I would consider him a true breedmaster for our beloved GSD.


I recall reading an article from Loius Donald a ways back, there was a thread on it as well. I'll have to look into again as I remember coming away a bit mixed. 



Tennessee said:


> AKC Standard:
> 
> "...Size, Proportion, Substance: The desired height for males at the top of the highest point of the
> shoulder blade is 24 to 26 inches; and for bitches, 22 to 24 inches. The German Shepherd Dog is
> longer than tall, with the most desirable proportion as 10 to 8½..."
> 
> Males:
> x/24 = 10/8.5
> [x/24 * 24] = [10/8.5 * 24]
> [x] = [240/8.5]
> x =28.24
> following this we determine males should be between 28.24 (length) x 24 (height) - 30.59 x 26
> 
> Females:
> Same math as above
> 25.88 x 22 - 28.24 x 24


Ok, thanks, I'll do the math on my own dogs later and see what I come up with. My previous dogs were labs and malamute, they were both more square. Seeing such a variation within the GSD breed is confusing.


----------



## lhczth

selzer said:


> Shepherds were developed to herd and guard sheep. A shepherd dog in Germany, will take the sheep maybe a hundred, more or less, down a busy road, keeping them out of the crops and out of the road to the field where they will graze. He will then keep them from drifting into crops or roadways.
> 
> A true herding test where the dog guards the sheep, maybe 100, from a coyote or wolf, and moves sheep keeping them out of the crops and the busy road, and well, that's not done either.



The GSD was developed USING herding dogs, farm dogs, service dogs and fancy dogs to be a utilitarian working dog. The herding dogs worked way more than 100 sheep and were expected to protect the shepherd also from bad people. Later on their great courage and easy trainability made them excellent war dogs and then for police, detection, customs, guarding the farm while also limited amounts of real boundary/herding work. The dogs protective nature has always been a kee component of the dog. To not test it nor even care about it is to not care about the GSD and to breed for a prick eared animal that may look like a GSD, but is only an empty shell. 

BUT this is the USA where breeders can produce the types of dogs that they wish (and I am too freedom minded to say it shouldn't be even if it drives me nuts). The AKC and the GSDCA sure don't care and most buyers are clueless.


----------



## lhczth

This thread has become unpleasant so I felt it was time to close it. 

ADMIN Lisa


----------

