# lmlloyd's thread: should GSD's be outcrossed?



## Freestep

Against my better judgement, I'm continuing the "Artica" thread that swayed off topic and got shut down. I had a no-show this afternoon and I am bored, I so I'm starting up where the "Artica" thread left off...



lmlloyd said:


> Ah yes, the troll card.
> 
> Oh look, I don't like what he is saying, he must be a troll. I'm amazed it has taken this long for someone to decide that is the best way to deal with a dissenting opinion.


It has nothing to do with whether we agree or not. In fact, I actually agree with you on some points. But you present your argument in a style and tone that is condescending, negative, and deliberately inflammatory. As you may remember from your high school debating team, this type of argument is often effective in getting people angry, but it is not highly regarded as a cogent, logical, or persuasive argument, and will not win you points. 

I think your point was "German Shepherds should be outcrossed". You're not the first person to think that, talk about it, or even do it, so your idea is not unique, and your argument has already been presented in many ways. If you want to have a constructive, elucidating discussion rather than make jeering snipes about how stupid and closed-minded everybody else is (and yes, that is what trolls do), you might want to alter your approach.

So I'll ask: What breed do you think we ought to outcross to?


----------



## selzer

Isn't outcrossing just when you breed a GSD to another GSD where there is no line breeding within so many generations.


----------



## shepherdmom

Freestep said:


> So I'll ask: What breed do you think we ought to outcross to?


Missed the original thread, but someone were to outcross Shepherds it needs to be to a more stable temperment. Maybe a St. Bernard ?


----------



## Emoore

Hasn't that been tried? Shilohs, Shepalutes, etc?


----------



## selzer

For as relatively few Saint Bernards, overall population, I remember two incidents where Saints have killed small children. I do not think Saint Bernards would be the best candidate to improve temperament in GSDs, who for there much larger numbers, have a relatively few number of fatalities when you look at it with respect to population.

Maybe crossing GSDs to English Setters. But then, you would probably get are really stupid, docile, funny looking dog.


----------



## Lucy Dog

What would be the point? To get away from what the German Shepherd is even more?

Would this strictly be for the pet market?


----------



## Andaka

And if we outcross to another breed to fix, say, temperament, what other probems are we going to cause? 

The breed is already splintered enough as it is, and unless you are careful about what you are breeding, the lines can be dangerous to cross.


----------



## Freestep

Lucy Dog said:


> What would be the point? To get away from what the German Shepherd is even more?
> 
> Would this strictly be for the pet market?


You'd have to ask lmlloyd. He/she is the one who is lamenting about the state of the GSD and blaming the small gene pool (amongst other things).

As to St. Bernard, I believe that mixing GSDs and Mastiff-type dogs has been done, I can't remember what the breeder named her mix, but it was basically a mix of GSD, Malamute, and Mastiff. The breeder wanted to sort of mellow out the GSD drives and make more of a laid-back temperament. A better "family" temperament. I do not know whether the experiment was successful. For the sake of discussion I will leave my opinion out of it for now.

If the GSD were truly in a position that it needed to be crossed with another breed in order to survive, I would first look to the landrace herding dogs in Germany, the types that went into the making of the GSD in the first place. Although, some years ago I talked to an old Geman breeder who said this had been tried, and that there was "nothing to gain" from such crosses.

In some European countries, GSDs are routinely crossed with Malinois and Dutch Shepherd to make police and sport dogs. Personally, I would not want to see the GSD go this route. A Malinois is a Malinois and a GSD is (and should be) something different; GSD already have nerve issues and the addition of a high-drive, low-threshold breed would be counterproductive IMO.

Then again, I'm not a breeder because I wouldn't want to make these kinds of decisions.


----------



## shepherdmom

selzer said:


> For as relatively few Saint Bernards, overall population, I remember two incidents where Saints have killed small children. I do not think Saint Bernards would be the best candidate to improve temperament in GSDs, who for there much larger numbers, have a relatively few number of fatalities when you look at it with respect to population.
> 
> Maybe crossing GSDs to English Setters. But then, you would probably get are really stupid, docile, funny looking dog.


:laugh: well I don't know, I'm not a breader. I was just thinkng they were big and loyal. I hadn't heard of any with bad temperments. I would have suggested Akita but I know that some of them have bad temperments too.


----------



## Mrs.K

Nope. No outcrossing... that is just going to open up a whole other can of worms. 

If you want crosses, there are already breeders with Mal/GSD mixes. That's the only mix I would get and even those can be tricky.


----------



## Lucy Dog

shepherdmom said:


> :laugh: well I don't know, I'm not a breader. I was just thinkng they were big and loyal. I hadn't heard of any with bad temperments. I would have suggested Akita but I know that some of them have bad temperments too.


Is beethoven still available for stud? He was a pretty cool st bernard.


----------



## marbury

Its done every day in back yards, vacant lots, and trash dumps across the USA. And we see tens of thousands of them in animal control holding pens and gassing chambers from coast to coast.
I'd say that's a heck of a breeding program, and look what it's gotten us. I think it's a safe bet that there has probably already been almost every GSD mix possible at one point or another, and although hybrid vigor will get you a 'healthier' dog in the short run you sacrifice any semblance of control over what you get the moment you abandon your known lineage.


----------



## selzer

Hybrid vigor is a myth last I heard. If you breed a GSD with a questionable hip history with a Lab or Golden with a questionable hip history, you are going to get a mess of puppies with as bad of a risk of hip problems as if you bred those dogs within their breeds.


----------



## LARHAGE

Emoore said:


> Hasn't that been tried? Shilohs, Shepalutes, etc?


2 of the stupidest, most aggressive dogs I've ever known were my sisters Saint Bernards, and they were not related, just horrible temperaments and dumber than a box of rocks.


----------



## LARHAGE

I personally would rather just see superior dogs of all the different lines being bred into each other than going out to another breed, for one , NO BREED is perfect. I love the German Shepherd, I don't want Husky or Malinois in it, for that matter I rather have a mutt of my choice, or just stick to my little rotten terriers. I personally love my German Shepherds.


----------



## Freestep

I might go so far as to say Labrador. Every GSD/Lab mix I've ever met was a good dog. High energy, yes--but overall stable, honest temperaments. My first dog was believed to be a GSD/Lab cross, and she was awesome.

But let me be clear--I don't think the answer to the GSD's problems is outcrossing. Hip problems are prevalent in almost every large breed (save for the sighthounds). Allergies are prevalent accross the board in pure and mixed breeds. Maybe the incidence of Pannus would be reduced, but then again, with outcrossing you never know what problems you might be introducing.

I don't think the GSD gene pool is dangerously small, but the backmassing that is often seen in pedigrees is concerning. I think that if a line needs new blood, they ought to go to another GSD line. Very carefully and with due diligence, of course.


----------



## Lakl

What bothered me was that his whole point was that he believed that the GSD gene pool was too small in order for any breeders to seriously think they were improving the breed or could consistently produce good stock, and that all the hype behind accomplishments and titles was just more or less a way for breeders to pretend that a problem did not exist (in a nutshell). 

IMO, he was basing all of this off of a couple genetics articles he read, one which started off stating that they didn't like German Shepherds, his own personal experience with a weak nerved dog, and a few people he'd spoken to who had chosen to purchase bad breeding stock. His mind was set that the entire breed was doomed and was probably better off being crossed with other breeds. My hope was that we could bring more knowledgeable breeders into the discussion to delve into the whole genetics debate about this breed, as he seem solidly closed-minded to any argument contrary to his beliefs.


----------



## JakodaCD OA

it's ridiculous to think that the GSD's gene pool is to small. My gosh, there is a whole world of GSD's out there to 'pick' from.

There is no need to outcross to another breed, I for one, want a GSD, not one mixed with a different breed. 

It's pretty easy to find a GOOD GSD, all you have to do is find a good breeder which there are many


----------



## Lakl

JakodaCD OA said:


> it's ridiculous to think that the GSD's gene pool is to small. My gosh, there is a whole world of GSD's out there to 'pick' from.
> 
> There is no need to outcross to another breed, I for one, want a GSD, not one mixed with a different breed.
> 
> It's pretty easy to find a GOOD GSD, all you have to do is find a good breeder which there are many


I whole heartedly agree! :thumbup:


----------



## Jack's Dad

You people are missing the point. 

I mean look how well out crossing has worked for humanity. :crazy::crazy::crazy:


----------



## Whiteshepherds

Lakl said:


> What bothered me was that his whole point was that he believed that the GSD gene pool was too small in order for any breeders to seriously think they were improving the breed or could consistently produce good stock, and that all the hype behind accomplishments and titles was just more or less a way for breeders to pretend that a problem did not exist (in a nutshell).


He actually raised some interesting points as the thread went on. Unless people want to read the other thread first or at least his posts on that thread, this one seems sort of pointless. 

http://www.germanshepherds.com/foru...g-breeder/171525-artica-german-shepherds.html


----------



## Lakl

Whiteshepherds said:


> He actually raised some interesting points as the thread went on. Unless people want to read the other thread first or at least his posts on that thread, this one seems sort of pointless.
> 
> http://www.germanshepherds.com/foru...g-breeder/171525-artica-german-shepherds.html


I'm sorry, my perception of his argument was pointless??


----------



## shepherdmom

Jack's Dad said:


> You people are missing the point.
> 
> I mean look how well out crossing has worked for humanity. :crazy::crazy::crazy:


:spittingcoffee:


----------



## Whiteshepherds

Lakl said:


> I'm sorry, my perception of his argument was pointless??


I didn't mean your post was pointless, I meant this whole thread is pointless if people don't have a frame of reference. Your perception is what it is, and you're entitled to it. 

My point was, the poster wrote several long messages that covered all sorts of things and some of them were pretty interesting including genetic diversity. How long can a breed survive and thrive etc. I hate to see this thread turned into a "we shouldn't breed GSD's to labs and that poster was an emotional idiot" thread, because they actually touched on some pretty thought provoking topics whether you agree with them or not. (general you, no one in particular)


----------



## cliffson1

I personally do not think the breed needs to be out crossed with another breed. But other than that, conception ally I agree with everything he wrote about the genetic/science part. I have been saying these same things for years and years. Most of the lines need hybrid vigor and you are not going to improve weaknesses in the lines by staying in the line with phenotype. We have the last 30 years of breeding of some lines that more than shows this.


----------



## minerva_deluthe

I vote for outcrossing. Labs? They have a calmer temperament, but on their own are a bit overly goofy for my taste. Hmm what else. I have a friend who has a Shepherd/Pit Bull cross. He is a lovely dog, very ball-focused, not dog aggressive, friendly with people, a very sturdy reliable dog. 

I didnt know hybrid vigour was a myth? I noticed pet health insurance is less expensive on crosses than purebred GSDs.


----------



## Lakl

Whiteshepherds said:


> I didn't mean your post was pointless, I meant this whole thread is pointless if people don't have a frame of reference. Your perception is what it is, and you're entitled to it.
> 
> My point was, the poster wrote several long messages that covered all sorts of things and some of them were pretty interesting including genetic diversity. How long can a breed survive and thrive etc. I hate to see this thread turned into a "we shouldn't breed GSD's to labs and that poster was an emotional idiot" thread, because they actually touched on some pretty thought provoking topics whether you agree with them or not. (general you, no one in particular)


No, I get that, which is why I asked him to start a new thread. I don't breed or carry enough knowledge about the genetics of the different lines, so I didn't really feel equipped to continue the discussion. I think Freestep created this thread was to bring him back into the discussion and perhaps others that could discuss it on the more scientific level that he perceived it. I don't think anyone called him an idiot unless I missed something, but he was close minded about breeders, their goals for this breed, and the perception of genetics regarding the breed as well.


----------



## Whiteshepherds

cliffson1 said:


> I have been saying these same things for years and years. Most of the lines need hybrid vigor and you are not going to improve weaknesses in the lines by staying in the line with phenotype. We have the last 30 years of breeding of some lines that more than shows this.


So it's not that the gene pool isn't large enough, it's that people don't take advantage of it?


----------



## Liesje

Normally I'd say why would anyone cross breeds. Lately though having gotten into flyball I've been able to observe several dozens of intentional cross breeds and talk to the breeders about their dogs. I talked to someone at our last tournament about his cross breeding and despite there being two breeds involved, it was no different than talking to a GSD old-timer about bloodlines and pedigrees. I mean this guy knew the dogs for several generations, explained exactly why they did the cross they did (and not just the breeds but the specific dogs and their lines, why the female was the breed she was and the male the breed he was and not the other way around, and how the cross they did would be used in their breeding program in the future). I guess it's a free country so who am I to criticize? I think he knew more about his cross breeds than I do about my purebred GSDs! This type of cross breeding gets criticized for being "extreme" (breeding for a certain sport) but that is not always the case. He was explaining to me that the crosses he's done are not just for the best flyball dog but a more trainable dog overall, a good size and strength for a robust dog but small enough to do a number of other sports. If he was wanting to only breed dogs that excelled at flyball the breedings would have been different. Granted this was just one experience learning about one particular breeding program but it was pretty enlightening and I was impressed. If you looked past the fact that two breeds were involved it's really no different than GSD breeders breeding Schutzhund dogs that *also* can excel at agility, obedience, police work, etc. and be great pets.


----------



## Freestep

Whiteshepherds said:


> My point was, the poster wrote several long messages that covered all sorts of things and some of them were pretty interesting including genetic diversity. How long can a breed survive and thrive etc. I hate to see this thread turned into a "we shouldn't breed GSD's to labs and that poster was an emotional idiot" thread, because they actually touched on some pretty thought provoking topics whether you agree with them or not. (general you, no one in particular)


That's why I re-started the thread, to give the OP a chance to state his/her case (hopefully in a less inflammatory way this time) so that the conversation could continue. Hopefully OP will come back so we aren't talking amongst ourselves about something someone else said in another thread... :crazy:


----------



## cliffson1

@ Whitesshepherd....Certainly, look at the different type of extremes in the different lines. This was never meant to be(extremes) from a dog made up of at least 3 or 4 type of dogs. Before the seventies, you never saw a Show or Working winner that was always the same color or same body type, or extreme angles, or extreme prey drive. You can't develop these themes by opening up the genepool, only by closing it, to using dogs that give these characteristics. And guess what, BYB didn't do this....supposedly reputable breeders have advanced this. Also, its a scientific fact that with close breeding and backmassing over long periods of time health and mental health suffers(ever heard of incest)....think about lines with heaviest inbreeding or backmassing and you will find the highest incidences of health issues and mental health issues. Now please, lets not have some imbecile come on here and say " Oh this lines never has any health or mental health issues", I'm not saying that and obviously reading comphrehension isn't your strong suit, BUT the more you find it the HIGHER incidence of these things occurring is what I am saying.....unequivocally!!! And supposedly reputable passionate knowledgable breeders would never use breeding practices that are certain to increase health/mental health.....Would they????????


----------



## Mrs.K

Here we go again... the same discussion over and over and over again... 

We all know what the problem is. We all know how it's made. Problem is, it's too lucrative not to change it. The only thing you can do, and in the US it's actually possible, is to breed outside the box!


----------



## Liesje

Are we talking outcrossing to other lines or other _breeds_? I was assuming Freestep was referring to other breeds.

I won't agree or disagree. I've seen people put a LOT more thought, experience, and research into crossing breeds than most people that breed purebred GSDs.


----------



## Lakl

I don't think the argument was whether or not there was a problem in backmassing within the breed. It was about whether or not there was a large enough gene pool for knowledgeable breeders to consistently produce sound dogs - health and temperament wise, without going outside the breed?


----------



## bocron

My issue with this is that I don't think there is another breed that would be complement the GSD and isn't just as fraught with issues. So it's out of the frying pan into the fire. 
For example, someone mentioned the St.Bernard back at the beginning of the thread. I wonder if that person has spent much time with modern day Americanized St. Bernards? I've been around a dozen or so in the last 5-6 years in our training business. They seem to be extremely slow witted and/or extremely fear/aggressive. Once again, not at all the breed I remember as a child (my neighbors always had one).
I just don't know what you'd go to assuming you are considering outcrossing to another breed.


----------



## Debbieg

I do not want to see the GSD purposely mixed with other breeds. 

I think we have a very large gene pool that knowleagable people with time, patience could use to improve the breed, but many choose to stay in a little crowded pool.

However here is a website that has much success in mixing breeds for sport. I have met a few of these dogs and they are very nice do well in flyball agility as Lies was saying

Blue Cedar Sport Dogs


----------



## shepherdmom

bocron said:


> For example, someone mentioned the St.Bernard back at the beginning of the thread. I wonder if that person has spent much time with modern day Americanized St. Bernards?


That was me, I've never spent any time around a St. Bernard. I was just tossing idea's out there to get the conversation rolling. Only Lucy Dog got where I was coming from. :laugh: 

"Is beethoven still available for stud? He was a pretty cool st bernard.  "

Now that is exactly the St. Bernard I was thinking of.


----------



## Mrs.K

shepherdmom said:


> That was me, I've never spent any time around a St. Bernard. I was just tossing idea's out there to get the conversation rolling. Only Lucy Dog got where I was coming from. :laugh:
> 
> "Is beethoven still available for stud? He was a pretty cool st bernard.  "
> 
> Now that is exactly the St. Bernard I was thinking of.


Yeah, but Beethoven is for the St.Bernards what RinTinTin is for the Shepherds.


----------



## bocron

shepherdmom said:


> That was me, I've never spent any time around a St. Bernard. I was just tossing idea's out there to get the conversation rolling. Only Lucy Dog got where I was coming from. :laugh:
> 
> "Is beethoven still available for stud? He was a pretty cool st bernard.  "
> 
> Now that is exactly the St. Bernard I was thinking of.


Lol I got it, I was just pointing out that almost every breed has developed many of the same issues we are facing in the GSD. Even the "companion" breeds have managed to create many of the same problems just on a different plane.

Oh and didn't Beethoven manage to almost wreck the house and the guy's career in every movie? And the drool!!


----------



## shepherdmom

Mrs.K said:


> Yeah, but Beethoven is for the St.Bernards what RinTinTin is for the Shepherds.


 
If I remember correctly in one of the movies his puppies not only popped out fully trained but they were also talking. Now that's what I'm looking for in a puppy.


----------



## shepherdmom

bocron said:


> Oh and didn't Beethoven manage to almost wreck the house and the guy's career in every movie? And the drool!!


Drool, I forgot about that part.


----------



## cliffson1

No more lectures, my point simply being that this person's take on gentics and breeding and the downfall of many purebreds is basically factual. The irony is that this breed is comprised of 3 or 4 different dogs so there is no reason the genepool should be as narrow as it is. We don't need to introduce another breed, and the OP, I think realizes this. What he is saying is that if the value system, of shows, trial, and breeders breeding for awards, prizes, money, and personal likes continues, then another breed interjected will be necessary to preserve the working heritage.....if that means anything to anyone. I hope they return to clarify their points further.


----------



## msvette2u

Every breed out there is a mess right now due to poor breeding. There'd be no way to improve by outcrossing.

In a perfect world, everyone would breed the WHOLE PACKAGE, not ignoring temperament in favor of color or in many cases, just money.


----------



## Beau

cliffson1 said:


> I hope they return to clarify their points further.



Me too! This was a fascinating discussion and I really hope it continues!


----------



## Freestep

cliffson1 said:


> No more lectures, my point simply being that this person's take on gentics and breeding and the downfall of many purebreds is basically factual. The irony is that this breed is comprised of 3 or 4 different dogs so there is no reason the genepool should be as narrow as it is.


It's artificially narrow because breeders are hesitant to cross the lines. This fact bothers me, but I don't blame them.

[/quote]We don't need to introduce another breed, and the OP, I think realizes this. What he is saying is that if the value system, of shows, trial, and breeders breeding for awards, prizes, money, and personal likes continues, then another breed interjected will be necessary to preserve the working heritage.....if that means anything to anyone. I hope they return to clarify their points further.[/QUOTE]

Me too. But I *think* OP was saying that we *should* outcross to other breeds. 

I agree with OP's point about how the "value system" is flawed. I think most of us actually agree with that, it's just that OP could have been more diplomatic about the way it was said, and who/what was to blame.


----------



## DianaM

Rather than doing an outcross and then having to cull (not the "pretty" definition, either) pups that turn out awful, it's much better to just travel around and check out GSDs from other lines. Whites shouldn't be written off, either. Some have excellent pigment and very nice, solid structure. A good dog is a good dog. But good outcross breedings to other lines are only as good as the planning, execution, and follow-up. Anyone planning on a major outcross needs to be involved with their program for a long time so as not to leave behind a mess of useless dogs and genetics.


----------



## jmdjack

I think the OP raised some interesting points. However, I respectfully disagree with his premise that the GSD gene pool is too small and his conclusion that the GSD needs to be outcrossed to another breed in order to improve the GSD. Rather, I think good breeders who have their hearts and heads in the right places will make improvements in the breed. Hearts and heads in the right places is the key. 



With that said, I am not philosophically opposed to crosses and do not view it as a taboo so long as it is done with a purpose rather than pandering to a perceived market. A good dog is a good dog. 

As others have mentioned, there are people crossing mals/dutchies with GSDs now. Law enforcement seems to be the target market of these breedings. Moreover, there have long been rumors of mals/dutchies in the GSD gene pool without them appearing on the official pedigrees. For instance, it has been rumored that there is mal blood behind Orry vh Antverpa. I am not saying this is true, but I would not be surprised if there lurks unknown mal/dutchie blood in the GSD gene pool. 

GSDs are my breed of choice. However, I must admit that I am intrigued by the KNPV malinois/dutch shepherds. From my limited knowledge, it is no secret that the breeders have folded in different breeds in order to get what they wanted. I do not know that I would want to live with a KNPV mal/dutchie, but my very limited exposure to them left me more than a little impressed with these un-pedigreed "mixes."


----------



## GsdLoverr729

I find this topic very interesting.  

In my opinion, if linecrossing is done then the genepool is not too small (though since I'm no breeder this is just a consumer opinion- I have met quite a few mixes of WGSL and DDR/Czech lines lately whom I have found quite remarkable). 
However, if outcrossing were necessary to save our beloved breed or simply to create a new breed that is more stable... I do have a few breeds I think might work. Of course, the dogs of these pedigrees would all still need to be health, temperament and ability tested just like any purebred shepherd breeding. 

To stabilize the temperaments a little more, into a less reactive dog, I believe I would add some Maremma sheepdog into the lines. Because they are a lesser known breed they have had a little less exposure to crooked breeders, at least in the US (to my research thus far), than other breeds. They are also not much larger in standard than shepherds. However, this crossing could bring about a more dominant/independent dog. I have found no commonly occurring health issues yet, but hip displasia would be a concern (as well as a few others that I just haven't unearthed yet).
Aside from the Maremma, I may breed in some American Indian Dog. I chose this breed because, like our beloved shepherds, they are highly versatile. They are reserved of strangers but are not meant to be vicious. Introducing their bloodline would, however, truly require an experienced and in control handler as well as very careful and consistent socialization. The breed has no breed specific genetic issues, and is not easily found so hasn't really been bred into smithereans (sp?). They are a little smaller than shepherds, but not small enough that I would expect "puny" offspring to result.
My last breed that comes to mind is the Karst Shepherd. Again, they require knowledgeable owners. However, if raised, trained and exercised correctly they are known to have very stable temperaments. Like the other breeds I have chosen, they have little exposure in the US and are generally tricky enough to find that there has been minimal damage to their lines. They are usually between 58-88 lbs so their size ranges in the shepherd's standard. I have not found any evidence of breed-specific genetic issues for these guys, either. 

So, IMO, shepherds do not need outcrossing with other breeds. Other lines maybe, but not other breeds. And honestly, if all good breeders expand their range for breeding (even in their lines), we may have no issues at all with the genepool. But, those are my three top choices for breeds that I would likely agree to outcross shepherds to. OF COURSE: This would not just depend on breed, but also on the specific dogs being brought into the breeding and their pedigrees.


----------



## cliffson1

@ Freestep......if intelligently crossing lines is the answer, than why wouldn't you "blame" them?? Crossing lines can be done by knowledgable breeders who place the overall health and vigor of the breed over their and the publics personal likes. So why don't you blame them???? Now crossing lines can be a disaster for superficial, title and testing reliant people; who know very little about lines, traits, genetics, history, of the breed and lines. BUT should we want these people breeding anyway????? Arent these the people that developed the lines and took them to extremes?? Somebody said it is what it is so we should let it be. Bah Hombug!! 
We have big problems in the breed, there have been two solutions mentioned.....one inside the breed, and one outside the breed. The consensus is we don't want to go outside the breed. Then why wouldn't we "blame" responsible breeders that don't seek improvement "inside" the breed. Sure, you won't hear the sport or show people champion this(notice how quiet they are), but they never move until the reward is changed or the line becomes a pariah. But we still can encourage people to show the integrity to breed for what the breed should be.JMO


----------



## Mrs.K

DianaM said:


> Rather than doing an outcross and then having to cull (not the "pretty" definition, either) pups that turn out awful, it's much better to just travel around and check out GSDs from other lines. Whites shouldn't be written off, either. Some have excellent pigment and very nice, solid structure. A good dog is a good dog. But good outcross breedings to other lines are only as good as the planning, execution, and follow-up. Anyone planning on a major outcross needs to be involved with their program for a long time so as not to leave behind a mess of useless dogs and genetics.



Under the FCI the whites are a different breed and the SV will NEVER ever even recognize the existence of a white German Shepherd. Just ask people who are involved with the white GSD and fighting for the acceptance of the Berger Blanc Suisse with the AKC. 

The SV is very very stoic when it comes up to people claiming that there is a white German Shepherd because there is no such thing. 

If you outcross to another breed, you are on your own. The SV will never do it nor agree to it.


----------



## Freestep

cliffson1 said:


> @ Freestep......if intelligently crossing lines is the answer, than why wouldn't you "blame" them?? Crossing lines can be done by knowledgable breeders who place the overall health and vigor of the breed over their and the publics personal likes. So why don't you blame them???? Now crossing lines can be a disaster for superficial, title and testing reliant people; who know very little about lines, traits, genetics, history, of the breed and lines.


That is exactly why... because it can be a disaster, and I don't blame breeders for not wanting to risk a disaster. I think it would be a long-term project that might not gel for the first few generations. It would require hard culling and delayed gratification. When a breeder has had a lot of success with the line they have chosen, they may feel that "if it aint broke, don't fix it."

That said, if the breeder knows what they are doing, has a long-range goal, and isn't afraid of the criticism, by all means, they *should* intelligently cross the lines and I will applaud them!


----------



## Whiteshepherds

Freestep said:


> That is exactly why... because it can be a disaster, and I don't blame breeders for not wanting to risk a disaster. I think it would be a long-term project that might not gel for the first few generations. It would require hard culling and delayed gratification.


If someone bred one extreme to another, (and no good breeder is going to do that) I can see where it might be a disaster, but otherwise I don't follow your reasoning. 



Freestep said:


> When a breeder has had a lot of success with the line they have chosen, they may feel that "if it aint broke, don't fix it."


If their line doesn't have enough genetic diversity isn't it going to "break" eventually?


----------



## Lakl

I don't think it even takes breeding one extreme to another to get a disaster. Genetics are a tricky thing.


----------



## Freestep

Whiteshepherds said:


> If someone bred one extreme to another, (and no good breeder is going to do that) I can see where it might be a disaster, but otherwise I don't follow your reasoning.


Take, for example, a gorgeous showline dog with flawless movement, but a bit weak in nerve, and breed him to a working line bitch with super drives, solid nerves, and powerful protection work. The idea is to get the best of both worlds, right? A gorgeous dog that stable in the mind and super in the work? But often you can get the worst of both worlds, a dog with high drives and weak nerves. THAT is a disaster.



> If their line doesn't have enough genetic diversity isn't it going to "break" eventually?


Yes, it probably will. Therein lies the problem.


----------



## Jack's Dad

Freestep said:


> Take, for example, a gorgeous showline dog with flawless movement, but a bit weak in nerve, and breed him to a working line bitch with super drives, solid nerves, and powerful protection work. The idea is to get the best of both worlds, right? A gorgeous dog that stable in the mind and super in the work? But often you can get the worst of both worlds, a dog with high drives and weak nerves. THAT is a disaster.
> 
> 
> If someone did try this type of breeding, how long would it take to figure out if they were on the right track or that it was a disaster?
> 
> In other words, how many generations approximately to achieve the goal or realize it is not working?


----------



## Lakl

Just to add to the discussion, Jinopo currently has a litter due soon from a working/show cross that is a repeat breeding. It has caused quite a stir, and I've read a few less than enthusiastic comments about it. However, the sire also has some showline in his pedigree, though those commenting didn't seem to want to acknowledge that. 

ZEN z Jirkova dvora x CARRY Sandau Bohemia	Due July 6 2012

The feedback on the previous litter was "balanced, naturally protective dogs with proper balance of drives. Calm, but protective with good prey drive for work."

I cannot repeat this as fact, as it's only what I've read from someone closely involved with Jinopo, but I know Jinopo has been breeding for a LONG time. Not sure if I am allowed to post a pic of a pup from the previous litter since it is not my dog, but it was an awesome "looking" pup.

I would love to hear comments from Cliff, Carmen, and Lee on this particular breeding!


----------



## Whiteshepherds

Freestep said:


> Take, for example, a gorgeous showline dog with flawless movement, but a bit weak in nerve, and breed him to a working line bitch with super drives, solid nerves, and powerful protection work.



I can't picture a good breeder using the dogs you gave as an example. Seems like a really bad match.
If the stud had that much to offer and it's nerves weren't bad, just not great, I think I'd look for a female with good nerves and drive but I'd stay away from super drive. (I know there would be more to making the match) I'd see if I could improve the nerves while maintaining the good structure, and work towards improving drive with future litters. Without good nerves, who cares about super drive?


----------



## cliffson1

@ Freestep....where to start.....lol Why would a responsible breeder breed a dog with weak nerves???? Isn't that how we got weak nerves to be so ingrained in some lines? AND, if they did breed the structurally flowing dog with weak nerves, why would they use a high drive, hard working dog. Doesn't sound like a breeder that has the intelligence to HELP the breed if that is their thinking, regardless of whether they go outside show lines in this case. 
Why would we NOT educate the breeders of the advantages of genetic vigor, and the pathway to accomplishing it, rather then tacitly support breeding practices that end up in an increase of physical/mental maladies. Sure, it takes more homework and knowledge on the breeders part!, but it never ceases to amaze me how we can expect newbies to" do their homework" in acquiring a dog, yet expect less from breeders!


----------



## Freestep

cliffson1 said:


> @ Freestep....where to start.....lol Why would a responsible breeder breed a dog with weak nerves????


I don't know, but apparently, dogs with weak nerves will be bred if they are pretty enough. Not saying it's right, just saying it happens. 

This is just a hypothetical situation. If the weak-nerved show dog is great in every other aspect, a breeder might want to improve upon this by breeding to a strong working bitch with good nerves. But my point is, this often has the opposite effect and brings out the worst of both dogs. If I were breeding a show to working line, I'd want BOTH dogs to have solid nerves.



> Why would we NOT educate the breeders of the advantages of genetic vigor, and the pathway to accomplishing it, rather then tacitly support breeding practices that end up in an increase of physical/mental maladies.


Why would we not? I don't know, as I'm not educated enough to do so myself. Are YOU educating them? If so, good! If not, why not?


----------



## cliffson1

LOL....Sometimes students are in school and don't realize they are there. I think educating owners and potential breeders with knowledge will help have a greater positive effect on the breed than people think. I think when many people hear things today, it is difficult for them to discern good, better, and best.....in terms of breeding practices and breeding dogs. If you don't understand/know.....gentics, bloodlines, and history of the lines, it is very very difficult to make good breeding decisions. Ithink the correlation of student/teachers is as important as owner/breeder. These are pathways in which information can hopefully get to enough people so as to help the decision making in the breed. Lofty thoughts?.....Maybe....but long term solutions really appeal to me as I get older....


----------



## Freestep

cliffson1 said:


> .....in terms of breeding practices and breeding dogs. If you don't understand/know.....gentics, bloodlines, and history of the lines, it is very very difficult to make good breeding decisions.


That's exactly my point. I don't think we are disagreeing here. I think the only point of contention is that, while I think intelligent crossing of the lines should be done, I understand a breeder's reluctance to do it at this point. I may not necessarily agree with it, but I sympathize. 

Crossing the lines is risky. You may end up with a fantastic, gorgeous dog that can do it all, or you may end up with bunch of messed-up offspring that aren't suited for show, work, sport, or pet. If we were crossing hunting/show Golden Retrievers, that would be different--but GSDs have the potential to be dangerous animals in the wrong hands. What do you do with the weak-nerved, high-drive offspring? Most breeders these days don't have the stomach to cull. Of course that is a risk in ALL bloodlines even if kept pure, but if a breeder spends a lifetime (or generations) working with a single line, they will get to know it pretty well, and be able to predict what they're getting. Throw an outcross in there, and all bets are off. It's scary.

Still, I personally want to see a German Shepherd Dog that can do it all, a single whole breed that can do work, sport, be a good family pet, with correct conformation to boot. However, I personally don't like the way most VA dogs are looking these days. I don't think a humped back is correct according to the standard. So I don't think working line breeders ought to acheive that look. Showline breeders will probably disagree, and say that showlines are the true GSD, and it's on working line breeders to change THEIR dogs.

So you see, it's fraught. The minds of judges will have to change as well, to reward a more moderate, correct conformation, rather than what they are putting up as VA now.

Personally, I think we ought to be using SG and V rated working lines of sound character, solid nerves, and good drive (not extreme drive) to build more working ability into the showlines. I think the extreme, hyperactive sport dogs that could not live in a household with a family are just as incorrect as a roached back, so a breeder would need to use caution about which working lines are used, as well as which showlines--only those with good drives and very solid nerves. A proper GSD should be able to do it all, then go home at night and relax with his family. But that is only one person's uneducated opinion. I am sure it is more complicated than that.


----------



## cliffson1

NOPE, Freestep, it's not more complicated than that. Your last paragraph pretty much says it all. Breeders like Carmen, Chris W, Blackthorn, and others are and have been doing it for years. What do they have in common?? Knowledge, commitment, understanding of what the breed should be, knowledge of genetics, and lastly, they don't breed for fads whether it is sport, show, or pet. Just like there were pathways for the dogs to be specialized, there are pathways to correcting things. BUT, there are no shortcuts.....be it knowledge or breeding practices.


----------



## Fast

msvette2u said:


> Every breed out there is a mess right now due to poor breeding.


This is nothing but trite nonsense. There are plenty of breeds that are not a "mess". And no,* I'm not saying that there are breeds without health problems*. 


Since hips were talked about already in this thread, lets look at that problem. According to OFA stats 19% of GSDs have bad hips and 3.9% have excellent hips. On the other hand Malinois have 5.4% bad hips and 18.4% have excellent hips. So if you are saying that Malinois are a "mess" then the GSDs hip stats would indicate a catastrophic crisis. I could give other examples with different breeds and problems but I think you get my point. 

The GSD is in crisis and you need to embrace the truth about this.


----------



## msvette2u

> The GSD is in crisis and you need to embrace the truth about this.


Hm. So how do you figure my comment is "trite nonsense"?

Yeah, I overgeneralized. 
But trust me, as a rescuer I am acutely aware of the "crisis" every dog breed out there is in, yes there's a pocket here and there of good breeders but irresponsible ones far outweigh the good ones, at least in my neck of the woods.

What I meant was-- the notion that you could add another breed into the mix to help fix another breed is flawed.


----------



## DianaM

Mrs. K, I know. Believe me. Just saying... I've seen some seriously impressive, well built whites. The working ability might not be all there, though. 

Freestep, someone who has very deep knowledge of lines can likely make a successful outcross. At one point, the dogs begin to be quite the same. There may be some hidden gems in some pet or show lines that only a breeder with thorough knowledge of past GSDs may be able to reveal. Of course, with the animal rights yahoos, it sure makes it tough to deal with the oopsies. Glad I have no plans to jump into this can of worms!


----------



## Mrs.K

Okay, I got to chime in on whites. 

My mom was watching a white shepherd for a friend of mine. she's always boarding her dogs when she went back to the US. We lived together in Heidelberg. Her husband is an MP. They lived right opposite us. 

She is a nice girl, loves her dog to death and I love her dearly, but her dogs don't get out a lot, not in the way a working dog gets out and worked and she re-homed the gorgeous Shepherd that she asked me, if I wanted to have her. Remember, the gorgeous showline? Well, she re-homed her, I would have taken her, but oh well...

Anyhow, my mom boarded her white girl. In the time she was on the farm she became the most loved dog that you can think of. She has an outstanding temperament and she actually developed quite a bit of drive while she was there. 

My mom fell absolutely in love with that white Shepherd and she said it's the first white Shepherd she met she'd keep for herself. THAT MEANS SOMETHING!

My friend was actually thinking about leaving her with my mom because they have an Odyssey ahead of them and she did not want to put her girl through all those changes. 

The dog actually wanted to go back with mom, when she dropped her off. It's a great dog. Mom said, the day she dropped her off, she looked like a sport dog and not like a pet dog. She was lean, muscular, drivey and energetic. Now she's back to living on post and in a week they are moving back to the US. 

Just thought I'd share that. Not all whites are bad dogs. I believe some are very well bred and there are a lot of gems in the rough. Problem is, a lot of people don't even think about them as working or sport dogs so they end up being kept in the house as pets.


----------



## DianaM

Mrs. K - great post.


----------



## Fast

msvette2u said:


> Hm. So how do you figure my comment is "trite nonsense"?
> 
> Yeah, I overgeneralized.


I'm glad you recognized that. 




> But trust me, as a rescuer I am acutely aware of the "crisis" every dog breed out there....


"Every dog breed"? Really? In what way is the Greyhound in crisis? 

This is more nonsense. Not every breed is in crisis. Some are doing fine health wise. Most breeds have fewer health problems than GSDs. 



> What I meant was-- the notion that you could add another breed into the mix to help fix another breed is flawed.


More nonsense. It's not a notion, it's science. You can have your own opinions but not your own facts. Hybrid vigor is a fact of science and one breed can, IN FACT, help to fix another breeds problems. 

Here is something that might help you to see why I call your posts nonsense. Here is how the Pointer helped the Dalmatian.
http://www.luadalmatians.com/History.html

Here are the results. 
luadalmatians

So it is a FACT that one breed can help another breed overcome health problems.


----------



## Fast

Mrs.K said:


> Problem is, a lot of people don't even think about them as working or sport dogs so they end up being kept in the house as pets.


But they make such nice pets! I have been working with a lot of white dogs in the last couple of years and they have all been really nice dogs. The white dog folks seem to have their stuff together nowadays. Sad to say, but their temperaments seem to be better than most of the colored dogs on average.


----------



## marbury

Let's put it this way instead: all dogs have the potential for heath problems. Voila!

It's been said before but we can say it again; the more popular (aka more frequently produced) the breed, the more health problems we find. There isn't a burgeoning market for Silken Windhounds, so they probably aren't victims of ridiculous malpractices. But when every neighbor wants a GSD then supply meets demand; it's a simple concept.

What we need is for the GSD to be less awesome and less in demand. Then we can get back to a few core breeders managing only the best dogs to create strong examples of the breed. Perfect world, right?


----------



## DianaM

- Terrierman's Daily Dose -

And the LUAs were finally allowed back in! I didn't hear about this, that is awesome. 

Fast, have you worked with any whites that have a fair chance of working in schutzhund, not as sport dogs but as simply good dogs?


----------



## msvette2u

> "Every dog breed"? Really? In what way is the Greyhound in crisis?


Greyhounds?? Wow, what an example you'd have chosen!

6th Annual Greyhound Wellness Conference to be held June 30 - Hopkinton, MA - Hopkinton Crier

Greyhound Companions of New Mexico - Behavior Adoption Rescue



> the more popular (aka more frequently produced) the breed, the more health problems we find. There isn't a burgeoning market for Silken Windhounds, so they probably aren't victims of ridiculous malpractices. But when every neighbor wants a GSD then supply meets demand; it's a simple concept.


Even Portuguese water dogs, a breed considered to be tightly controlled through breeding clubs, are subjected to increasing popularity and therefore, substandard breeding practices. 

There's a few breeds out there unaffected by overbreeding, but by and large, when people want what they want, now, they will get it one way or another and there's breeders and puppy mills out there ensuring there is indeed supply.


----------



## Freestep

Fast said:


> More nonsense. It's not a notion, it's science. You can have your own opinions but not your own facts. Hybrid vigor is a fact of science and one breed can, IN FACT, help to fix another breeds problems.


Yes, it some cases, it can. I know that the Pit Bull was used to improve the Irish Setter as well.


----------



## Fast

DianaM said:


> Fast, have you worked with any whites that have a fair chance of working in schutzhund, not as sport dogs but as simply good dogs?


Yes. But I have not met one that would be a very high level dog.


----------



## Jack's Dad

Fast:

You should visit more often. 

I enjoy your knowledge and your posts.


----------



## Fast

This thread is really sad to me. You guys are using the same arguments my 7 year old does... "Well they did it too!" "I know I screwed up but look at them!"

Let me tell you all what I tell her..."Two wrongs does not equal a right"


----------



## onyx'girl

LARHAGE said:


> I personally would rather just see superior dogs of all the different lines being bred into each other than going out to another breed, for one , NO BREED is perfect. I love the German Shepherd, I don't want Husky or Malinois in it, for that matter I rather have a mutt of my choice. I personally love my German Shepherds.


I agree...but not bottlenecking line breeding to achieve a cookie cutter. And breeding pedigrees together to compliment the match, not putting SL/WL together just because they are the 'best of their line' GSD's are so unique because they are(for the most part) not exactly the same over and over and over. And I truely believe that* temperament and health should come first over the look*....a working dog that is bomb proof with an off switch/higher threshold=perfect!
I have a blanket long stock coat, a stock coat bi-color and a stock coat sable. Within those colors and coats we see a variety of differences range far and wide(talking looks not temperament). Only one do I have a pedigree to know the background on, but I love the fact that this breed isn't like others in the same ol' same ol' looks catagory.
I think the Australian Kelpie is the next breed that will be exploited in the US. Luckily they aren't bred for looks.


----------



## Fast

marbury said:


> Let's put it this way instead: all dogs have the potential for heath problems. Voila!


Yes they do. And some breeds are worst than others. GSDs are one of the worst. 



> It's been said before but we can say it again; the more popular (aka more frequently produced) the breed, the more health problems we find.


More absolutely completely untrue nonsense. Do you have a study or footnote to back this up? 

If this were true the hips on Otter Hounds (there are only a handful of OH litters born every year) would not have the 4th worst hip stats in OFA and Labrador Retrievers, that have been one of the most popular dogs in the country for decades, would not be way down the list at 87th. 








> What we need is for the GSD to be less awesome and less in demand. Then we can get back to a few core breeders managing only the best dogs to create strong examples of the breed. Perfect world, right?


IMO, this is the opposite of what needs to be done. This would only shrink down the gene pool and bring more genetic problems to the surface. Google _cheetahs and genetic bottlenecks_ if you don't understand what I'm saying.


----------



## marbury

Oookay, I won't step in the way of your agenda. Carry on with your ranting.


----------



## Fast

msvette2u said:


> Greyhounds?? Wow, what an example you'd have chosen!
> 
> 6th Annual Greyhound Wellness Conference to be held June 30 - Hopkinton, MA - Hopkinton Crier
> 
> Greyhound Companions of New Mexico - Behavior Adoption Rescue


What is your point? The first article is not about genetic issues at all. The second has a few things that they think *might* have genetic components to it. I'm beginning to think that you do not have the background knowledge to continue this conversation. 







> There's a few breeds out there unaffected by overbreeding, but by and large, when people want what they want, now, they will get it one way or another and there's breeders and puppy mills out there ensuring there is indeed supply.


The genetic problems are not just in puppy mill and BYB dogs. How many people do you think buy a GSD from a BYB or the mall and then send test results and x-rays to OFA? Nope the stats I'm using come from well bred dogs from responsible breeders. And how many responsible breeders have dogs that go back to BYB or puppy mill dogs?

No folks, these diseases are in the best GSD lines both work and show; German and American. 

The first step to healing is admitting that you have a problem.


----------



## Fast

marbury said:


> Oookay, I won't step in the way of your agenda. Carry on with your ranting.


Can't find that study or footnote? 

I guess it's ranting when someone is not going to accept the trite nonsense that gets floated around this board and accepted as facts. If you want this breed to survive you have to, at the very least, open your eyes to the real world.


----------



## marbury

No, that's just my real-world observation. Science is fantastic, and if I'm writing a paper I need my research sources to be proven. But this is an internet messageboard. Most of us don't have degrees in animal behavior or genetics, so a lot of us just have to go by what we know to be true in our own experiences.

Here's an example, although I have no study to back it up: I've met more messed up teacup chihuahuas and Pomeranians (common puppy mill dogs) than I've met messed up Cotons (not common puppy mill dogs). I've met more messed-up GSDs (second most popular breed in the US in 2011 and 2010, link for proof: American Kennel Club - American Kennel Club Announces Most Popular Dogs in the U.S.) than I've met messed-up American Foxhounds (AKC Dog Registration Statistics). I've only ever shown one AF in UKC, and his owner mentioned that he was the *only* male AF shown that year in all the shows she went to. I've only ever *met* three of them. All three were fantastic.

So my personal experiences may be complete nonsense and I certainly can't back them up with research, as I don't have the requirements necessary to publish papers on the subject. But hopefully we can all recognize that we all have excellent and wonderful opinions regardless, and this board is for the express purpose of sharing this knowledge and bettering everyone's experiences. So peace to you, my friend.


----------



## Fast

marbury said:


> ....Most of us don't have degrees in animal behavior or genetics, so a lot of us just have to go by what we know to be true in our own experiences.
> 
> 
> So my personal experiences may be complete nonsense and I certainly can't back them up with research, as I don't have the requirements necessary to publish papers on the subject. But hopefully we can all recognize that we all have excellent and wonderful opinions regardless, and this board is for the express purpose of sharing this knowledge and bettering everyone's experiences. So peace to you, my friend.


I understand that but the dogs don't live in your experience, they live in the real world. And if you want to help the breed, you need to help the dogs where they live. If everyone just throws out a bunch of crap into the real issues this only pollutes the conversation and impedes progress toward solving the problems.

And you want to educate yourself on this subject you can't sit back and rest on a bunch of junk info. There is a lot of stuff on the internets. If you want a reading list shoot me a PM and I'll give you all I got. Peace to you too.


----------



## msvette2u

Do you have a point, or just a bunch of insults for everyone?
Obviously you're the smartest person here, so tell us your game plan to fix this breed!

What's amusing is you actually thing your pontificating on an internet message board is going to mean something...as if it would actually fix the breed :laugh:


----------



## Lakl

In the real world, I'm a senior analyst for a major corporation and I have an MBA in Management and Strategy. I know every aspect of my business from operations to marketing to the cost of doing business, and Microsoft excel is my second language. When someone with less experience comes to me with their thoughts or ideas or sad looking spreadsheet for a meeting, I manage to sit down and discuss the problems with their ideas or try to teach and help them make a better presentation without belittling their intelligence or berating them for lack of knowledge. In my personal experience, when you are trying to get a point across or to educate others, the words or intention is easily missed when the lesson is surrounded by insults. Just my thoughts...


----------



## marbury

Aww, I tried. Good luck, y'all.


----------



## msvette2u

marbury said:


> Aww, I tried. Good luck, y'all.


You did fine 
The rest of us underlings must be content to worship the god of all knowledge, you can sit here beside me ats seat:


----------



## Dogaroo

No simple answers here, are there? Uncommon breeds often have health issues due to genetic bottlenecks & shallow gene pools, and popular breeds have health issues resulting from poor breeding practices. If, at some point, outcrossing must be done to improve the health of a breed (whether the GSD or another breed), I would hope it would be done with careful consideration of desired traits-- and specific individuals with those particular traits selected from within a breed or breeds, with a close eye on whether or not the desired outcomes are achieved. I don't think it's going to be as simple as picking a single breed & breeding a bunch of these to a bunch of those & hoping it all works out. 

When you look at the development of landraces, you see trait selection with an eye toward function & purpose, with more consideration given to proven working ability & sound structure than to breed names/labels or cosmetic features that aren't likely to affect the dog's ability to get the job done. In most cases, dogs used for breeding stock had already proven themselves as working dogs. Landraces usually have fairly healthy gene pools, at least until lack of demand causes their population to drop dangerously low, or we impose restrictive conformation standards on them & artifically shrink the gene pool by overusing popular sires/dams/bloodlines, or the wrong kind of popularity triggers a population explosion of carelessly bred Snufflehunds or Barkledogs, courtesy of puppy mills & other make-a-buck breeders....

How do breeders preserve the health & original purpose of a breed when there are a relatively limited number of prospective owners who are capable of handling the breed as it was originally meant to be? A number of working breeds are facing extinction; others are maintaining their popularity as pets, but gradually losing their working abilities.


----------



## Fast

msvette2u said:


> Obviously you're the smartest person here, so tell us your game plan to fix this breed!


If you really want to hurt me for treating you so mean, why don't you prove me wrong? Make me shut up! That would really hurt my feelings. :smirk:

There is no "fixing" the breed in my opinion. I think there is only making things better. The genes that are causing the problems are too concentrated in the breed. Trying to add in enough outside blood to end the problems would also cause too many changes to temperament and conformation to still be a GSD, IMO. I think outcrossing would have worked decades ago though. 


I think the most logical first step is to look at other breeds and types of performance animals and how they are bred. Learn from them. Figure out how and why the Border Collie can be one of the best working breeds in the world. Talk to the Greyhound breeders that produce the fastest dogs in the world. Studies the strategies that consevationist are using in an attempt to save the cheetah. You can't keep looking through the same window and expect for the view to change. 

I think breeders need to let go of the SV system that is based on 18th century ideas and start over again. Make a system that works in the modern world. For instance, drop the requirements for breeding. I can't think of a breed of dog, that is the best at anything, that has a breed test. Can you?

Also, if the GSD clubs and associations could quit fighting and bickering for a moment, they might pool their resources and sponsor research into these genetic problems. 


Do you have any ideas?


----------



## Fast

Dogaroo said:


> No simple answers here, are there? Uncommon breeds often have health issues due to genetic bottlenecks & shallow gene pools, and popular breeds have health issues resulting from poor breeding practices. If, at some point, outcrossing must be done to improve the health of a breed (whether the GSD or another breed), I would hope it would be done with careful consideration of desired traits-- and specific individuals with those particular traits selected from within a breed or breeds, with a close eye on whether or not the desired outcomes are achieved. I don't think it's going to be as simple as picking a single breed & breeding a bunch of these to a bunch of those & hoping it all works out.
> 
> When you look at the development of landraces, you see trait selection with an eye toward function & purpose, with more consideration given to proven working ability & sound structure than to breed names/labels or cosmetic features that aren't likely to affect the dog's ability to get the job done. In most cases, dogs used for breeding stock had already proven themselves as working dogs. Landraces usually have fairly healthy gene pools, at least until lack of demand causes their population to drop dangerously low, or we impose restrictive conformation standards on them & artifically shrink the gene pool by overusing popular sires/dams/bloodlines, or the wrong kind of popularity triggers a population explosion of carelessly bred Snufflehunds or Barkledogs, courtesy of puppy mills & other make-a-buck breeders....
> 
> How do breeders preserve the health & original purpose of a breed when there are a relatively limited number of prospective owners who are capable of handling the breed as it was originally meant to be? A number of working breeds are facing extinction; others are maintaining their popularity as pets, but gradually losing their working abilities.


Excellent post!!! The best I have seen on this forum in a very long time.


----------



## msvette2u

> Uncommon breeds often have health issues due to genetic bottlenecks & shallow gene pools, and popular breeds have health issues resulting from poor breeding practices.


Interesting this is what we had already said 



> I think


And that's _all_ the rest of this is, is a bunch of postulations. 

To even say this or that breed is "in crisis", is to ignore the good things that are going on with the breed. I'm sure there's many breeders breeding functional dogs that would beg to differ. 
Just because one sect or another is doing things back-asswards doesn't mean everyone is.



> If you really want to hurt me for treating you so mean,


I don't want to "hurt you", I don't even know you - but neither do you know me and your attitude that nobody is worthy of discussing things on here isn't going to fly.


----------



## cliffson1

@ dogaroo.....very knowledgable informative post that many can learn from in assessing the situation with this breed.....you should post more often, it would benefit all of us.


----------



## DianaM

Fast, some breed tests are tough and potentially detrimental because they are subject to the human eye and ideals of the moment. Real world herding and stockdog trials works because cattle won't follow trends; they may try to whip around and trample a dog and the dog can either run or put the cattle back in place. If the cattle chores are completed by that dog, it is probably good. Even better if it is working daily. Same with real hunt tests. If the bag is filled at the end of a hunt trial and the dog retrived all shot birds, it is probably good. Again, better if it is hunted regularly in all sorts of conditions. Either the dog can find and retrieve birds or it can't. Seems that they use easier breeding qualifications, too. Does it herd well and has good health and endurance and can live with the family? Then breed it with that dog that shows the same traits. Does it do great on pheasant and grouse? In fields and in brush? Cool, breed it with that dog that hunts pheasant and quail and sometimes ducks. If the dog doesn't hunt, don't breed it. 

What would you propose for the GSD? 

Also, there is a difference between really popular breeds and breeds that have a decent population but aren't on everyone's wish lists. I believe it also depends on how breeds came about. If they were built on generations of dogs chosen because they were working similar tasks, many issues would have been weeded out over time simply because "that dog is useless/breaks down/dumber than mud." Appearance varied widely but a general phenotype formed just based on the tasks. Look at the histories of terriers and spaniels and foxhounds and collies. Breeds then differentiated further based on specific tasks. Cockers were differentiated from springers just because size made them better suited to smaller birds. Then the show people said "ooooh pretty" and destroyed the American cocker spaniel and split the English springer into show/working lines. 

Can't comment on otterhounds only to say I met one. Sucker took a few hours to dry with a K9-II blower and had one heck of an oily coat. Very patient dog, though.


----------



## GSD Fan

I disagree with the generalization about uncommon breeds and popular breeds. One of the breeds I like, the siberian husky, isn't as popular or common as the german shepherd, but the siberian breed has a lot less problems with hip dysplasia and is generally a more healthy breed than a lot of breeds. Siberians have a very small gene pool, with ALL siberians, especially in the states, coming from only 26 dogs.


----------



## GSD Fan

If I were a breeder and it came down to outcrossing to save the german shepherd breed, I would go back to where it all began. Wolves.


----------



## DianaM

GSD Fan, horrrrrible idea. A lot of temperament issues in the GSD may be due to early introductions of wolf blood. The people involved early on learned their lesson and left the wolf where it belongs. Do some reading on the subject, especially if you can get your hands on the Von Stephanitz book, and you'll realize that wolves are temperamentally similar and yet way too different to have any benefit.


----------



## Whiteshepherds

Fred Lanting at one time wrote:
"An interesting side-note is that there are still a few white German Shepherd Dogs (and recognized by that name) in Germany and Holland that trace their heritage directly to the white GSDs of the early 1900s - 1920s, despite not being allowed registration by the SV. They represent an untapped (as yet) vein of rich genetic gems for the future of the White Shepherd."

Wouldn't it stand to reason that there are also some uptapped genes in the GSD's that are bred to the standard? Maybe out there doing real work just not involved in Sch, shows, etc. so their names aren't well known?


----------



## Debbieg

Whiteshepherds said:


> Fred Lanting at one time wrote:
> "An interesting side-note is that there are still a few white German Shepherd Dogs (and recognized by that name) in Germany and Holland that trace their heritage directly to the white GSDs of the early 1900s - 1920s, despite not being allowed registration by the SV. They represent an untapped (as yet) vein of rich genetic gems for the future of the White Shepherd."
> 
> Wouldn't it stand to reason that there are also some uptapped genes in the GSD's that are bred to the standard? Maybe out there doing real work just not involved in Sch, shows, etc. so their names aren't well known?


 And maybe those untapped genes could do much to help shepherds of all colors?
How do we determine which dogs have these needed untapped genes ? Do we need to change criteria and consider breedworthy only dogs actively working in SAR, Police K9, Herding, Tracking, Service Dogs etc... But not everyone who purchases a pup from one of these dogs, will want to do that type of work, so how to determine if their dog should be bred?


----------



## radulf

Hello.
I don't know how diverse is the gene pool of the GSDs, but the fact that they are numerous doesn't mean they have a lot of diversity, there could be millions of GSDs but if the founding population was of only, lets say 50 *unrelated* dogs, the effective population of those millions would be at best of only 50 dogs.

Here are a few interesting articles:

Only 8 Border Collies

Breed islands

Dog Breeds are Closed Populations

Dogs were not created by inbreeding

Considering Odd Colors in Salukis 

Herefords and heterosis

Bye.


----------

