# breeding dogs with problems



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

so, general question. 

i read many times that if you don't breed dogs that have relatives with problems then you will end up with no dogs to breed

With so many things that can go wrong with gsds it seems true. So how does a breeder choose which faults are OK to breed and which are not.


----------



## wolfstraum (May 2, 2003)

It is a risk assessment thing.....

For example.....HYPOTHETICALLY a female has 5 litters - total of 40 pups. 3-5 per litter x-rayed - so 20 .....All have normal elbows, 3 Excellent, 3 Fails, 1 Fair and the 13 Goods/Normals...the Fails are marginal and these dogs show no issues.....Would you then breed one of her Good rated progeny? Look deeper at the pedigrees of the ones that fail....find that the sire's grandsire is NZ and has quite a high percentage of NZs and fails, and so do 3 other sons....and the sire has 4 out of 15 that are NZ or worse....the percentage of fails is small in the female, so for the next litter you look deeper into the male's pedigree.....

You have a female with a very high profile pedigree...daughter of a highly popular much used sire....you breed her to a son of the same popularity.....you get 2 dwarfs and a nice nice female.....Do you breed again? Do you breed the nice female from her? 

This one actually happened to me....No - the female is spayed, the nice nice female pup goes to a non breeding home and is spayed.....Many people do breed a female after producing a dwarf...siblings as well....it is a matter of what risk is acceptable....Probably 2/3 of the breeding dogs owned by people on this board will have dogs related to that female and those pups in 2 - 3 generations.....should they all spay those dogs???? 

You have to study production from the family - from similar crosses - and gather as much info as possible.....then make a decision based on what risk you are comfortable with.....I know a breeder who knowingly bred to a male whose sire produced insane nasty aggression - even 2 gens down.....that breeder was willing to take that risk to get the type of working ability shown by the male.....was willing to euthanize dogs that might be nasty and be returned at 1-2 years old to get what HE wanted....that one did not come to pass as the female did not get pregnant.

If there was a litter of 6 and 4 had problems in health or temperament (H/T), and other litters from the dam had ~25% H/T problems - then you should really reexamine your goals....

But nothing is ever totally 100% perfect and you just have to assess the risks and decide how much you are willing to assume, because there will ALWAYS be risks....

Lee


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

First of all, why is it that if dogs can't be bred or have problems in their pedigrees they should be fixed? This is from your comment that 2/3 of the people on the forum have the dogs related to that dog and should they all spay? Others said that too. 

Why fix? Why not let them remain intact and just not breed?

But anyway. So it's a bunch of tough choices. 

OK another question. It must be extremely tough to do the right thing sometimes. For example, you have a dog with some nice titles, everything is perfect about him and then some health problem comes along. Something serious. I can't give a good example because I don't know anything about this but something that will be passed along.

How do you let all the work go and not breed? It must be extremely tough. From what I know it takes years of work to title a dog, so do you just start over with another one? Breed anyway?


Another question. Are there obvious no no's? Or every breeder has their own lines that they won't cross?

Like are there things that should never be done and if a breeder does it then he's unethical? Or it's all what you're comfortable with?


Also, someone who only has 5 dogs, what if 3-4 turn out unsuitable later on?
I just can't imagine someone doing the right thing and scrapping their program and starting over?
Or If you know what you're doing then you can tell way before you put much work in the dog?

I heard some things can crop up years down the line. 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

And a few more. They're probably naive and ignorant. Bear with me. 

When I first started reading the forums I was shocked that people can look at pedigrees and know things about dogs. How's that possible? How many dogs are out there breeding to each other that people can read a pedigree and know half the dogs on it. 

Or it's not that the dogs that they know, it's something else?

And inbreeding. It was explained already why people do it but i still can't get over it. Isn't there a different way to achieve the same goals?
Or it's not true that health problems are caused by inbreeding?


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Merciel (Apr 25, 2013)

lalachka said:


> How do you let all the work go and not breed? It must be extremely tough. From what I know it takes years of work to title a dog, so do you just start over with another one? Breed anyway?


It is tough, and I won't pretend to know the right answer. I've never bred a dog in my life.

I will say, though, that I know a couple of people (none of them in GSDs) who have put a _ton_ of blood, sweat, and tears into training and trialing their dogs, only to find that the dogs -- although extremely successful in their chosen venues -- were unsuitable for breeding. They spayed those dogs. In one instance, it actually did not become clear for several generations, but the line wasn't getting stronger, it was getting weaker with each generation, so the breeder completely terminated the line.

I think that decision is harder to make if you're in a rare breed and refusing to breed that dog will significantly reduce the gene pool available to that breed. But the people I'm thinking of were all in fairly popular sport breeds (mostly BCs), so while eliminating their dogs from breeding was a huge personal blow, they were able to take some consolation in knowing that they'd done the right thing for their breed.

It's a very tough decision. Most of the people I know who were in that situation ended up getting out of breeding for several years or altogether. It was more heartbreak than they wanted to endure again.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Yep. I will never breed but if I ever did i'd like to think i'd make the right decision but lol everyone likes to thing they're doing or would do the right thing. 

I respect someone who can do that. 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Skywalkers Mom (Oct 26, 2012)

I am sadden by the hard truth. Many dogs are bred and if not" good enough" what do you think happpens to them? Some of dog show people are severe narcissitic people and few are not. They bred more and more sloped back GSD's only to prolethicate Hip Dysplasia. They dont care . Euthinize and start again So many people on this site are small minded with blinders on. They want to win win win and its awful.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Skywalkers Mom said:


> I am sadden by the hard truth. Many dogs are bred and if not" good enough" what do you think happpens to them? Some of dog show people are severe narcissitic people and few are not. They bred more and more sloped back GSD's only to prolethicate Hip Dysplasia. They dont care . Euthinize and start again So many people on this site are small minded with blinders on. They want to win win win and its awful.


can you give examples of the "small minded with blinders on"?
showline slopes are horrible, i can't even look at them. my boy has a roach too and his legs look a little funny.

i also watched the BBC documentary and wow. the poor spaniels with heads too small for brains, the pugs with a myriad of problems and teeth that need to be pulled because otherwise they're biting themselves, bulldogs that can't breed on their own and need to be jerked off. you can't make this stuff up.


----------



## Vandal (Dec 22, 2000)

Angulation has nothing to do with hip dysplasia.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Vandal said:


> Angulation has nothing to do with hip dysplasia.


yeah since other "non angulated" breeds have it as well. so how did it develop?


----------



## LoveEcho (Mar 4, 2011)

Skywalkers Mom said:


> I am sadden by the hard truth. Many dogs are bred and if not" good enough" what do you think happpens to them? Some of dog show people are severe narcissitic people and few are not. They bred more and more sloped back GSD's only to prolethicate Hip Dysplasia. They dont care . Euthinize and start again So many people on this site are small minded with blinders on. They want to win win win and its awful.



Wth? WHO on this site is like that? What does prolethicate even mean?

Once again, thank you for taking an educational thread and destroying it with your nastiness. Someone who is extremely experienced and who cares deeply both about their dogs and about the breed is giving valuable insight. Why are you even here? 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Vandal (Dec 22, 2000)

Breeder bashing is the new black...didn't you know? lol... So many people spewing emotional BS with zero to minimum knowledge of what they are ranting about. Concerning the so called "documentary"....I wouldn't consider a video made purely with the intention to elicite emotion vs thought, to be anything other than propaganda.


----------



## hunterisgreat (Jan 30, 2011)

Vandal said:


> Breeder bashing is the new black...didn't you know? lol... So many people spewing emotional BS with zero to minimum knowledge of what they are ranting about. Concerning the so called "documentary"....I wouldn't consider a video made purely with the intention to elicite emotion vs thought, to be anything other than propaganda.


The documentary brings up good points. Arbitrary breeding towards some visual "standard" without any eye to proper function or health, is the target of the documentary. Have you watched it?


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Vandal said:


> Breeder bashing is the new black...didn't you know? lol... So many people spewing emotional BS with zero to minimum knowledge of what they are ranting about. Concerning the so called "documentary"....I wouldn't consider a video made purely with the intention to elicite emotion vs thought, to be anything other than propaganda.


it was def meant to elicit emotion but is it not true that daschunds get paralyzed because of their backs, that pugs can't breathe, they need their teeth pulled because they don't fit in their mouth and they're misaligned so they bite themselves, that cavaliers have syringomyelia (sp?), that english buldogs can't reproduce naturally and give birth naturally and so on?

there were more nasty things in that documentary


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Vandal said:


> Breeder bashing is the new black...


i'm not sure who you meant by this comment. i didn't start the thread to bash the breeders. i have a lot of respect for breeders that are doing it the right way and for the right reasons


----------



## Vandal (Dec 22, 2000)

My comments were not directed at you..just the part about the documentary. That video is Animal Rights propaganda.


----------



## Vandal (Dec 22, 2000)

> it was def meant to elicit emotion but is it not true that daschunds get paralyzed because of their backs........


Sure, those things happen....do you think breeders set out to create dogs with those problems? Sure, I can complain about the way some people do things too but when a film wants you to go away hating the entire group.....nope....propaganda.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Or maybe they're just showing the way things really are. 
They didn't make up the pics or the videos. They showed side by side of dogs from a hundred years ago and today. 

They showed a gsd on his hocks barely walking that won that day. They interviewed some breeders. When a Rhodesian ridgeback breeder was complaining about the fact that new young vets are so hard to work with because they refuse to euth pups without a ridge - yeah, I was disgusted. 

I guess it is propaganda, the people and the breeders were shown in a light that makes them look shallow and creepy. 

But everything they're saying is true. 

The show ring is all about looks. Everyone has their own standards of beauty. Poor dogs. 

I hope I don't offend anyone, def not my intention and I'm sure many people are attached to the breeds I'm about to list, I apologize. 

But I look at pugs, bulldogs, sharpeis and so on and I wonder, do they like living in those deformed bodies? Yeah, people like to say that dogs don't realize it. Maybe they don't. But I'm sure not being able to breathe, having horrible headaches, not being able to run, not being able mate doesn't feel good. 
You can argue with the last 2 but you get my point. Poor dogs. 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Vandal said:


> Sure, those things happen....do you think breeders set out to create dogs with those problems? Sure, I can complain about the way some people do things too but when a film wants you to go away hating the entire group.....nope....propaganda.





Breeders didn't set out to create sick dogs, I want to believe that. But because they wanted to create dogs that, for example, look like human babies with flat faces they created dogs that need surgeries to breathe. 

I don't know at which point they should've realized it and stopped breeding but at this point for sure it's almost unethical to breed them. 

If a dog is unable to reproduce and give birth naturally, then also, I think it's time to stop. 


I'm going to get flamed for this but I feel bad for small dogs too. They might not realize they're small but something seems wrong about it to me. To take a wolf and reduce it to a 10 lb yapping stuffed toy. 

But this is just my personal opinion and personal preference. Pugs, bulldogs, cavaliers, etc - that's just wrong. 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

Opinions are like you know what..everyone has one..so heres mine:

Compromise: I would assume that all breeders are searching for their ideal dog, health, temperment, drive, bloodline, etc.

My version of compromise is breeding an average female instead of an exceptional one. 
Average interms of drive/nerve. Happens all the time regardless of the accolades breeders post on their websites about their "extreme" females.
Maybe this female is a solid IPO dog but doesnt have the drive to be National level. Maybe she lacks true aggression but is still solid in protection because her nerves are decent.
Maybe she isnt a superhero in the nerves/attitude (not talking about fear) department but is solid and reliable.
Maybe the female brings a desirable blood line or some other quality the breeder desires like hunt etc. 

They breed to a male that hightens what the female possesses and hopefully bring more of what she lacks.

Thats fairly normal and I personally have no issue with it. 
Extreme x Extreme does not always produce great or even good dogs. 
Wheras extreme x normal can still potentially produce very well even great, especially if the blood line meshs well.


Now if the dog in question has genetic heritable health issues or temperment issues then that is not acceptable to me.

It is in other people's, when your pups pay the mortgage I guess you do what you have too. Or maybe some people just dont know any better.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

So any genetic diseases? Just the parents or all relatives too?


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

lalachka said:


> So any genetic diseases? Just the parents or all relatives too?
> 
> 
> Sent from Petguide.com Free App


If the sire/dam had a genetic defect in temperment or health I wouldnt even think about it especially if a sibling also manifested the same traits.

If the breeding was a tight line breeding which tends to be higher risk I wouldnt worry to much if a litter mate had issues. The goal being to concentrate all the qualities you like in one dog that is also more likely to be prepotent due to the concentration of certain genetics. There is also higher risk that goes along with the potential rewards. 

Keep the best cull the rest.

Im sure many will virulently disagree


If there were several breedings to different sires and issues crop up consistently in all litters then you know you have an issue with your bitch.


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

lalachka,

What Anne is trying point out is that the "documentary" used the worst of the worst to scare people away from ALL breeders, ALL purebred dogs. It elicited an emotional knee jerk reaction instead of attempting to educate. That makes it propaganda.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

OP, step back from the forum and see what people do in the real world. The fact is, if you’re breeding dogs with problems, you lose your reputation really fast. On top of that, if you are trying to be a somewhat reputable breeder, you’re more than likely selling dogs to friends/family, fairly close acquaintances that do know you past the buyer/seller relationships. People talk, and the last thing you want is to leave someone with a dog that has issues which they will then tell all their friends about and all your friends about. A sire or a dam lose their worth really quickly when it is found out they produce certain issues, and usually it just takes one litter.

Most breeders are regional and don’t have/need a national reputation. Some people develop a national reputation when a dog they bred or trained goes to a national competition, and when it happens repeatedly people take notice and demand spikes in other areas of the United States…but most breeders will really only sell in their general area. Maybe a pup or two get shipped somewhere else, but the majority don’t.

Point being, if you’re trying to stay in the business, it’s in your best interest to produce good, healthy animals. Most people that are trying to breed working dogs, sport dogs, show dogs, will try hard to reduce the risk of the bad things happening. You can’t really talk about those that are aiming to produce “just pets” or just breeding their own pets to make a quick buck.

People talk about dogs just like they do on this forum. But in real life, people are likely looking at actual dogs and seeing those issues manifest rather than just predicting they will off of a piece of paper. But...if they do know that dogs close by have had issues, you'll lose demand for that litter really quick. Those that plan on doing big things, investing big money into their dogs...don't take chances. You'll lose those people really quick if you're making bad breeding decisions. And those are the people that help make a kennel name.


----------



## wolfstraum (May 2, 2003)

as this was right after my post:



lalachka said:


> First of all, why is it that if dogs can't be bred or have problems in their pedigrees they should be fixed? This is from your comment that 2/3 of the people on the forum have the dogs related to that dog and should they all spay? Others said that too.
> 
> Why fix? Why not let them remain intact and just not breed?


Spay - do not breed - whichever - just as long as you take out of the gene pool - the practice of spaying is not the object of discussion!

Sometimes the genes for the issue - esp in rare things like dwarfism - are 6 to 12 generations back.....and thousands of dogs go back to that dog....there is no way to take every dog with Canto Wienerau out of the gene pool....it is RARE that some things come through....

But some things are FAIRLY common in dogs 2 or 3 generations back....so you study pedigrees, and see patterns and avoid those patterns because the popular dogs are very very widespread




lalachka said:


> But anyway. So it's a bunch of tough choices.
> 
> OK another question. It must be extremely tough to do the right thing sometimes. For example, you have a dog with some nice titles, everything is perfect about him and then some health problem comes along. Something serious. I can't give a good example because I don't know anything about this but something that will be passed along.
> 
> How do you let all the work go and not breed? It must be extremely tough. From what I know it takes years of work to title a dog, so do you just start over with another one? Breed anyway?


Yes - it is very tough....and expensive.....I figure that the female with the dwarfs was overall at LEAST a $10,000 loss....AND she had it all...super temperament, beautiful work, wonderful drives...took her to SchH3, KKL...all cost $$$$ to do....figured to have 3 to 4 litters from her....if I counted those litters.....figure another potential $15 to 20K lost.....

It is called ETHICS - it is called doing the right thing and living with your conscience!




lalachka said:


> Another question. Are there obvious no no's? Or every breeder has their own lines that they won't cross?
> 
> Like are there things that should never be done and if a breeder does it then he's unethical? Or it's all what you're comfortable with?


Sure - a dog fails OFAs - out of the gene pool....even if marginal and would probably pass 'a' stamp....EPI dogs, PA dogs....anyone breeds these is IMO unethical....

for ME - serious temperament problems.....not sharpness or appropriate aggression if the dog is stable socially - serious environmental problems will drop them from breeding consideration as well....

Some breeders will breed females even if the majority of the litter is not sound in some way...they got the good one, so they breed it....I don't know if I would - have never been in that position....I hope I would not.



lalachka said:


> Also, someone who only has 5 dogs, what if 3-4 turn out unsuitable later on?
> I just can't imagine someone doing the right thing and scrapping their program and starting over?
> Or If you know what you're doing then you can tell way before you put much work in the dog?
> 
> I heard some things can crop up years down the line.


that is the problem...by the time some problems are found...it is too late - there are 2 or 3 generations bred and some of those individuals are "OK" - so the problems are still there in the genes, and will come out here and there.....

If you have 2 or 3 dogs that are young and showing issues - YES - you rehome or spay (whatever!) and start over....unfortunately - I have seen too many people accept problems and try to "fix" them through breeding when they SHOULD just start over....they accept that a high percentage will have whatever issue and hope to get that one or two that don't to go on with.

Lee


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

I'm with Lee...I think the biggest "no-no" is a temperament issue. Something major like fear aggression, human aggression, even dog aggression. Things that make the dog very hard to live with and a burden on the family. There are genetic diseases that could be considered a huge financial burden as well, but many of those probably won't get passed on because it would take some very bad ethics to breed a dog like that. Say something like mega-esophagus or a cancer of some sort, first...the dog is unlikely to survive that long anyways, and second...it's just not right to breed that dog lol.

I question breeding "fair" hips but understand it. I would personally not buy a puppy out of a breeding with a "fair" parent...but mostly because there's dozens with good or excellent so why would I take that risk? I'm also not looking for any particular line or mix of dogs in a puppy...just a puppy that in the future will be able to do what I ask of it.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Lee - not sure if this was a conversation I had with you or someone else! But is it true that often the "issues", or good things, often skip a generation and what you saw in the grandparents will show?

I can't remember who I was talking to but am sure that was part of the conversation.


----------



## wolfstraum (May 2, 2003)

martemchik - *No dog is perfect....NONE - not mine, not yours*......you have to accept and work with what you have and recognize what issues or flaws....You have to be realistic about what is there and what happens if you rule out every single dog who is related to a dog with some thing! Someone else posted a good post about breeding dogs who are average but solid....same thing...you look for both similar good things - complementary and better on the issues - compensatory....

Dog aggression isn't fun, but is trainable, controllable and something to consider when you breed....I have bred to a dog aggressive male, and diminished the problem considerably with a very very dog friendly female - that is the compensatory factor....it is a not a deal breaker - as long as you don't breed 2 dog aggressive dogs!

Mega can be a birth defect that is NOT genetic, and cancer??? No one knows for sure....I know of a dog who developed it at 10!!!! BYB dog - huge huge dog - ribby at 110 pounds - another breeder I know had a mega pup from a female who never produced it, nor did her dam or sisters produce it....

So so so so many GSDs have hemangio......if you rule out a pup whose grandmother or a littermate to a sire or dam were lost to hemangio at 10 or 12.....you are going to rule out pretty much every breeder out there.....it is that common. 

As far as "fair" hips....they are NOT DYSPLASTIC!!!! the Fair rating can be something as simple as a thicker femoral neck!!!!! I had a female who had B hips (FCI) produce 2 OFA Excellents! Another with FN hips produce an OFA Excellent.....you have to look past the Sire and Dam and look at the FAMILY and the production record....

Lee


----------



## wolfstraum (May 2, 2003)

Jax08 said:


> Lee - not sure if this was a conversation I had with you or someone else! But is it true that often the "issues", or good things, often skip a generation and what you saw in the grandparents will show?
> 
> I can't remember who I was talking to but am sure that was part of the conversation.


Maybe - not sure.....but it is a very common saying.....just like a puppy out of 2 gorgeous parents (ie V rated) may not be gorgeous  but she can go on and produce V ratings.....Basha produced a couple and she was not a V for example...

And this is why people breed to progeny of famous dogs (and horses!) and buy grandprogeny of them even if the parents are totally unknown and/or unproven

Lee


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

Lee...I don't get why you got all worked up I'm just telling you my opinion and what I would look for in a breeder, what some of my "no-no's" would be.

I don't care what you do or how your decisions are made. I'm simply stating that when I'm going to be spending $1000+ on my next puppy. I won't touch one where the parents have fair hips. I don't care as much if the grandparents, or the great grandparents had fair. I'm stating that *I *personally won't buy a dog out of fair hips. There's too many options out there out of good or excellent for me to "settle" for fair hips.

The dog aggression thing...I won't agree with you on that. Have fun breeding that dog. There's hundreds of dogs out there without dog aggression, no need to be breeding to a male with dog aggression (and I'm talking about the uncontrollable stuff, where the dog just loses his head when he sees another dog). Same thing...I personally don't need to be risking my hard earned money on a dog that is predisposed to DA. Even if the breeder tells me that they're "diminishing it."

The mega thing or cancer...not saying don't breed a dog that is related to a dog that has it. Just don't breed one that has mega. If the mega is genetic, that means EVERY puppy is going to be a carrier...why would you do that? Especially if you're planning on continuing on with that line.

I get what breeders try to do...but I'm sorry, if you breed a dog that you know has an issue, and that issue shows up in the puppy, its the family that has to deal with that dog for the next decade, not the breeder. And what? As a breeder all you'll say to them is...well we tried to diminish the problem...sorry that you go the one pup that got the genetic disease or the aggression that you don't have the resources to deal with.

That's one reason why people keep going to BYBs that are selling dogs for $200. Reputable breeders can't guarantee things, and even admit to taking chances by breeding dogs with issues...the reason to go to a good breeder is that you should trust that they're screening their stock, not just "trying to diminish" MAJOR problems they're already seeing in that stock.

It's crap like that many people don't understand...well the dog in front of me doesn't have any issues, but the pedigree is questionable...and everyone tells you not to breed it. But a dog in front of you that does have issues, but has a beautiful pedigree, and people give you the green light to breed it on this forum...just stupidity.


----------



## Wolfgeist (Dec 4, 2010)

wolfstraum said:


> martemchik - *No dog is perfect....NONE - not mine, not yours*......you have to accept and work with what you have and recognize what issues or flaws....
> Lee


I always feel like this is one of the most important statements in this topic. We don't get to hear about the flaws of a dog used in any given breeder's program, we just hear about all the good stuff. Then we get our puppy we wonder where certain traits (negative and positive) came from, do they always come back to the breeder and ask why their puppy or young adult possesses that trait?

For any breeders participating in this thread, how often does a puppy buyer ask you "what are you looking to improve in this one dog by breeding to the other" or alternatively, "what faults does this breeding dog have"?

I strongly believe in the "no dog is perfect" mantra... so all breeders are breeding some "faults", some issues, because they literally will never be able to find a genetically perfect, structurally perfect, perfect temperament specimen to breed to another perfect specimen. 

That being said, a reputable breeders is essentially doing the best they can with the nicest dogs they can find that fit their ideal as close as possible... but in the end, no matter how hard ANYONE tries, breeding will never produce the perfect specimen - there are too many variables in too many categories for that to ever be possible without genetic engineering in a lab.


----------



## Wolfgeist (Dec 4, 2010)

Also, isn't it true that an amazing specimen of a dog can be a poor producer, and vice versa? How many breeders will risk breeding a less than average dog because he or she producer far better than itself?

That comes back around to the idea that breeding two amazing dogs does not guarantee amazing puppies.

Two parts - the dog (encompassing its genetics, pedigree history, evaluations) and how he or she produces.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

lhczth said:


> lalachka,
> 
> What Anne is trying point out is that the "documentary" used the worst of the worst to scare people away from ALL breeders, ALL purebred dogs. It elicited an emotional knee jerk reaction instead of attempting to educate. That makes it propaganda.




Got it. I didn't get scared away, I stuck with my opinion on good breeders but I was disgusted with what I saw. 

I didn't learn anything new about gsds, I leaned a bunch about diff breeds.


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Vandal (Dec 22, 2000)

Most people who do not breed, don’t quite understand the nuances but they are usually the loudest about how things should be done. Throughout history, dogs with certain “problems” have been used. Canto was mentioned by Lee, he is one. Some of the stronger bloodlines for working ability came with their own set of health issues in the line. Mostly, immune weakness that manifested in an array of problems. Then we have the lines known for not producing the best hips but were simply spectacular as far as toughness, courage, hardness, fight drive etc. 
As a breeder, you have to decide what you are willing to live with in the pups you produce. Some issues are easier to “breed away from” than others. Sometimes things will surprise the heck out of you, even when you know dogs in the lines and have “never seen that before”. It is not a case of simply throwing a dog away when you have one bad litter. It then becomes a case of determining if it was more a problem with the combination. However, if more than one breeding produces a large percentage of problems, it is time to quit. 
Mostly, it is always about the combination. No, you should not breed dogs with the condition but, depending on what it is, you can breed away from a problem in the line and actually improve what your line produces. It is silly to tell yourself any line you use for breeding is free of problems. Things can lurk in the lines for generations and be brought into the pups by selecting the “wrong” partner. 

I remember when koermeisters would write breeding recommendations on a dog’s koer report. Actually directions for breeders telling them what lines to avoid with their dog, etc. This was when koermeisters really were breed masters. They knew the lines and the problems and would make recommendations.....because that is what breeding is about. People talk about “improving the breed” Well, this is what it means. All along, it has been known that the breed had great things to offer but there were also problems that needed to be bred away from. You will be hard pressed to find a koer report like what I just talked about, nowadays. There are a number of reasons and one of them is the AR agenda that makes talking about the realities of breeding a very difficult thing to do.

Mostly, breeders remain quiet because of the over emotional response from the less informed. You read it all the time on this board. There was an example of it early on in this thread where breeders were called narcissists etc. We have a strong animal rights push going on right now where breeders are demonized for just about everything they do. They are greedy and make decisions based on paying their mortgage. People just can’t seem to help it, they almost don’t even realize they are doing it. BTW, I have never met someone who lives off breeding dogs....there is not enough money to do that. Like me, who breeds occasionally, they might have a boarding or training facility or another job. That is what pays the mortgage.

The film mentioned never offers the breeder’s perspective. It makes it seem as if they are heartless jerks who don’t give a rat’s arsh when these things occur. Also, about it being the truth. Ok, yeah those dogs had the condition. It’s like saying GSDs are bred to have hip dysplasia and showing only dogs who can barely walk. The images are designed to upset you and then channel the resulting anger at breeders. 
I run into people daily now who recoil when you tell them you are a dog breeder. Comes in handy when I don’t feel like answering endless questions about my dogs. I just say breeder and they leave. HA! However, make no mistake, this is all in the plan and even people who are hard core working people and enthusiasts just can’t seem to stop themselves from joining in . I have said plenty about what people have done to the breed. I have my beliefs as well but this is becoming a case where laws are being passed to regulate breeding out of existence. The laws cannot differentiate between who is breeding what you like. It will be a case of no more of the better dogs along with the rest. Baby with the bath water will all go down the drain. People need to wake up and realize that it is happening. 

Last, in an ideal world, a breeder should feel safe to tell the truth and allow the buying public to determine if they want one of their dogs. Unfortunately, people are simply not informed enough themselves to grasp what a breeder might be telling them. Some people will rage about a breeder using a dog for breeding with fair hips. It’s ridiculous what a little knowledge can turn into and that hatred for breeders is being encouraged by groups with a ton of money and the ability to share their propaganda on a very large stage.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

I will reply later, but quick question. With all these variables, do you (abstract) even know what you're doing when pairing dogs? You can try to complement one side with another but how do you know that it will get complemented? Maybe the pups won't get those traits from the stronger side?

Internet makes things sound diff. I like good breeders, respect them and my questions are not to try to make them look bad. I'm really interested. 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Wolfgeist (Dec 4, 2010)

Vandal said:


> I remember when koermeisters would write breeding recommendations on a dog’s koer report. Actually directions for breeders telling them what lines to avoid with their dog, etc. This was when koermeisters really were breed masters. They knew the lines and the problems and would make recommendations.....because that is what breeding is about.


I had no idea that koermeisters used to include that in breed reports, and it is very very very sad that we have lost that... that would be so valuable.

I hope I am not one of the ones who _do not breed yet are the loudest_, as you mentioned, I am just trying very hard to learn. I appreciate anytime someone corrects me when I am wrong or ill-informed. 

I may not be a breeder but getting involved in these conversations makes me a more knowledgeable and informed breed enthusiast and I appreciate learning from those with experience.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Vandal, I should've mentioned. That film didn't make me dislike breeders and I didn't realiE that this was the point of it. I thought it was about the show ring. 

And I still stay with my opinion on pugs and most flat faced dogs. It was there before the film and just got reinforced. 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## SusiQ (Jul 27, 2007)

*Sickening!*



Skywalkers Mom said:


> I am sadden by the hard truth. Many dogs are bred and if not" good enough" what do you think happpens to them? Some of dog show people are severe narcissitic people and few are not. They bred more and more sloped back GSD's only to prolethicate Hip Dysplasia. They dont care .* Euthinize and start again* So many people on this site are small minded with blinders on. They want to win win win and its awful.


I agree - this is so sick IMHO. Almost as bad as dumping a senior because he/she has become "sickly."


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

lalachka said:


> I will reply later, but quick question. With all these variables, do you (abstract) even know what you're doing when pairing dogs? You can try to complement one side with another but how do you know that it will get complemented? Maybe the pups won't get those traits from the stronger side?
> 
> Internet makes things sound diff. I like good breeders, respect them and my questions are not to try to make them look bad. I'm really interested.
> 
> ...


The good breeders don't really have "extremes." I think you're imagining that breeders have extreme dogs, then try to balance them with the other extreme. This rarely happens. Breeders see that a dam is a little more one way than another way, they'll get a sire to complement her and balance that out.

Like, if you have a prey driven dog that doesn't really go into defense. You might try to balance that out with a dog that is a little more defense (but not extreme defense) to get to a better middle ground than you are currently at.

And...on a different note. I could personally care less about the decisions other people are making. All I control is who I give my money to, and I'll tell you my opinion about who I would give my money to. I personally NEVER tell someone to go with or not go with a particular breeder, I'll give a recommendation only in regards to the breeder I got my dog from. I think its a complete joke that people make comments like "people that don't breed are the loudest." Do you want us all to pop out a litter so that our opinion mattered more? I could do that in 8 weeks if you'd like. Will that give me some more cred?


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

No, I doubt it's extremes all the time. But I read them say things like 'she has some this so I bring a male that will complement that'. Since there's no guarantee that he will, it sounds like it's mostly luck. You hope it will complement but not sure. 

Or are there rules? Like if a female is lacking this and a male has it then the pups will have it?


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

It depends on what you're talking about...some personality/drive traits, they tend to kind of blend. You'll always end up with puppies that are more like sire and others that are still more like dam...but you've still managed to get a middle ground of some sort.

This is kind of where linebreeding is important as well, because the more linebred, the more you can accentuate traits that you see in the dog that you're linebreeding on. This is why many breeders stay with similar lines and don't really like to throw in random dogs that are completely different than what they already have.

The moment you start really reaching, and trying to take your lines somewhere else way too quickly, is when you don't get a very similar litter and the puppies end up all over the place in look and temperament. But if you do it slowly (over 2-3-4 generations) you can introduce some new traits while also keeping the traits that you already like in your current line.

This is why many people don't agree with crossing show/working lines. Many times is a complete crapshoot and mix of lines. It's hard to say what kind of puppies you'll get out that mix. But say you do it, and you get decent dogs without any genetic issues. You can then breed one of those puppies back to one of the original lines you put into it so that you get more of the traits you prefer to see, but still have the traits that you tried to introduce in the original breeding. Many of the reputable breeders that do this, will have a 3-4 generation plan before they start with that first breeding in the first place.

A lot of this is why the vocabulary words that are commonly used on this forum are very important. Understanding the difference between, drive, energy, nerve, ect is very important. To a novice, they all sound like they are the same thing, but they aren't.


----------



## Vandal (Dec 22, 2000)

> I think its a complete joke that people make comments like "people that don't breed are the loudest." Do you want us all to pop out a litter so that our opinion mattered more? I could do that in 8 weeks if you'd like. Will that give me some more cred?


Actually, I had written my post last night and posted it this morning without seeing the rest of the previous pages, (just Lee's second post in the thread), because they did not load on my computer. I had no idea fair hips were something you were "against" as far as breeding. I simply mentioned that because I have seen it come up over and over on this forum. If you think I meant you, by all means put that shoe on, I can't control what people choose to take personal. It is also not a joke when you are asking breeders to tell you about breeding. It fits right in with the points I made in the rest of the post. As for being loud, I wasn't really referring to you either, since I had not read your post until after I posted. I was referring to one poster in particular, who spewed a number of "myths" and insults. Another person who I would consider to be less informed, just agreed with her on the last page. 

It does fit the point I was making, in how people have a tendency to over-react when they don't have enough information. Especially people who do not breed dogs and do not understand just how difficult it is and how impossible it can be, to explain to someone who operates mostly on an emotional level. There seems to be more of those kinds of people nowadays and it is indeed being encouraged for people to operate on that level when it comes to animals..... as I said earlier. 

That leads me back to the film. Lalachka, you can think anyway you want. I am simply trying to inform you of what is happening and what I believe to be the intent behind that film. IMO, the intent is to incite not inform, as Lisa said.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

I agree with everything Anne said here, and not just because I respect her opinions and experience. I just read her post and thought, why bother to write my own? 

http://www.germanshepherds.com/foru...130-breeding-dogs-problems-4.html#post5629057

I have bred my dog and he is not perfect, I would be the first to say that. Those that know the parents and the litter or actually know me and the puppies I kept back know what we were looking to maintain, what we wanted to improve, and whether or not we believe that has happened. Just as an example, my dog never outgrew being east/west in front. It's obvious in photos and is something I don't personally like. I'm watching his puppies develop and at least the three I'm keeping closer tabs on do not have this so I am pleased. This is just ONE thing (so please do not start a thread about how people are breeding specifically for straight front feet!), I just wanted to provide a concrete example. People who have expressed a legit interest in breeding to my dog discuss all the pros and cons with me. I don't feel the need to start a million threads about my dog or asking John Q Public their opinion on whether or to whom he should be bred, nor do I need to come here for any justification of my choices to breed or not breed.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

I brought the film up to illustrate a point. OK forget about the film. And thanks for letting me think any way I want. 

Showline gsds do look bad IMO. Pugs do too. Some breeders did that to the dogs because they were chasing a certain look. To me that's wrong. It's the animals that are suffering living with those flat faces and messed up teeth, screaming of pain because their head is too small for their brains and can barely walk. 

I watched that film because I was already reading up on this and the film popped up in one of the links. 

I'm assuming it's me that you're calling less informed. So please inform me on the above. I'm always willing to learn and always admit if I was wrong. 


ETA before someone misinterprets something else. Not all show line gsds look bad. I'm talking about those with extremely sloped and/or roached backs and weird gaits. 




Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

As far as the film goes, I assume we're talking about the Pedigree one from the UK? The issue I have (in addition to what Anne said about the obvious AR agenda and single perspective) is that the footage they used for the GSD breed is terrible. Just as someone who has done some conformation in multiple venues with a GSD from similar lines as the one in the film, they did an awesome job of picking the worst footage. It would be like someone filming me and making a documentary trying to prove I'm unhealthy and lazy so they only shoot a few second clips of me sleeping, watching TV, and eating snacks but then completely ignore 9-10 hours a day working, working out, spending time being active with my dogs, etc. In those clips the dog is not being shown well and they are purposely using those awful clips. If you want to judge that dog or even try to judge and entire line/type of a dog why would you use a few short clips you KNOW have an anti-breeding, AR agenda?


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

lalachka said:


> Showline gsds do look bad IMO. Pugs do too. Some breeders did that to the dogs because they were chasing a certain look. To me that's wrong. It's the animals that are suffering living with those flat faces and messed up teeth, screaming of pain because their head is too small for their brains and can barely walk.


Oh come on...have you actually seen this? Lets talk about what you've actually seen and what's out there. Taking the worst example of anything and then saying ALL of this type of dog is like that is not fair to anyone...especially those that read things to learn. That's what those types of movies do, they make everyone think that all breed X is like that, when in truth, its a very small percentage that is truly that bad.

ASL bashers love to bring up "hock walking" well...go to a show and tell me how many dogs you see walking on their hocks. Do they look like my WL? No... But is my WL the best example of conformation? No...

At the end of the day, find a breeder that does things that line up with you ethically and pay them money for a dog. Show that dog, trial that dog, make that dog a walking advertisement of what you believe a GSD should be. Tell people all about your dog and how great he/she is. Don't worry what others are doing, there is no changing what others are doing and what kinds of dogs other breeders are throwing together.

Don't like the pair that's being thrown together? Move on to the next one. It's not a big deal. We're not dealing with a rare breed, or one that only has 10 breeders across the nation. There are probably 10 breeders within an hour drive of where you live that are producing GSDs. Not saying all are good, not saying all are bad, but all you can do is vote with your $$$ at this point.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Liesje said:


> As far as the film goes, I assume we're talking about the Pedigree one from the UK? The issue I have (in addition to what Anne said about the obvious AR agenda and single perspective) is that the footage they used for the GSD breed is terrible. Just as someone who has done some conformation in multiple venues with a GSD from similar lines as the one in the film, they did an awesome job of picking the worst footage. It would be like someone filming me and making a documentary trying to prove I'm unhealthy and lazy so they only shoot a few second clips of me sleeping, watching TV, and eating snacks but then completely ignore 9-10 hours a day working, working out, spending time being active with my dogs, etc. In those clips the dog is not being shown well and they are purposely using those awful clips. If you want to judge that dog or even try to judge and entire line/type of a dog why would you use a few short clips you KNOW have an anti-breeding, AR agenda?


I guess I was wrong to mention the film on the gsd thread. That footage didn't affect me. I also didn't realize that it was AR agenda. Lol I'm naive to a large degree. 

But anyway, what did affect me was the pugs, cavaliers and bulldogs. 

So forgetting about the gsd for a minute, what do you think of the pugs, for example? 






Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

Vandal said:


> As a breeder, you have to decide what you are willing to live with in the pups you produce.


I really like this line and respect it.

At the end of the day, you need to find a breeder that really does care about what they're selling and where its going. What kind of a "burden" they are laying on the family that's paying them.

Basically, you have to trust the breeder enough to understand that they don't want to produce a dog with issues, and that they are smart enough to weigh the risks themselves on the chances a certain dog produces the qualities they don't want.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

martemchik said:


> Oh come on...have you actually seen this? Lets talk about what you've actually seen and what's out there. Taking the worst example of anything and then saying ALL of this type of dog is like that is not fair to anyone...especially those that read things to learn. That's what those types of movies do, they make everyone think that all breed X is like that, when in truth, its a very small percentage that is truly that bad.
> 
> ASL bashers love to bring up "hock walking" well...go to a show and tell me how many dogs you see walking on their hocks. Do they look like my WL? No... But is my WL the best example of conformation? No...
> 
> ...



Before I had a dog, before I saw a movie, before I knew there were different lines, I knew that gsds should come with a sloped back. Not just me, apparently. When I got my pup a few people told me he's not pure (he might not be) because he doesn't have the slope. 

The perception is out there. I pay attention to any gsd I see outside. They're mostly sad looking. 

I can't speak about the show ring, I've never watched a show. I do know that xeph from here has a beautiful show line dog with no slope and a beautiful gait. 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Vandal (Dec 22, 2000)

> I'm assuming it's me that you're calling less informed. So please inform me on the above. I'm always willing to learn and always admit if I was wrong.


No, I was not referring to you. My comments to you started where I wrote your screen name and then proceeded from there.

I've said all I have to say, I'm just out of time.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

lalachka said:


> Before I had a dog, before I saw a movie, before I knew there were different lines, I knew that gsds should come with a sloped back. Not just me, apparently. When I got my pup a few people told me he's not pure (he might not be) because he doesn't have the slope.
> 
> The perception is out there. I pay attention to any gsd I see outside. They're mostly sad looking.
> 
> ...


And there you go...look at those dogs and realize that you don't want to perpetuate that type of breeding or that type of line.

When people talk to you about your dog, tell them all about it and how great it is or isn't. If they're interested in GSDs, tell them where they can get educated.

I personally really enjoy the "theoretical perfect breeder" discussion. But it's something that is just fun to talk about and isn't really attainable. What we can do though is effect the people we meet by showing them how great these dogs can be.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

martemchik said:


> And there you go...look at those dogs and realize that you don't want to perpetuate that type of breeding or that type of line.
> 
> When people talk to you about your dog, tell them all about it and how great it is or isn't. If they're interested in GSDs, tell them where they can get educated.
> 
> I personally really enjoy the "theoretical perfect breeder" discussion. But it's something that is just fun to talk about and isn't really attainable. What we can do though is effect the people we meet by showing them how great these dogs can be.




I do. I also hope that I changed a few people's mind about breeding their unproven pets. But time will tell. 

I also like these discussions, that's why I ask the questions. I like bringing up something I read or watched and asking how people feel about it. It helps me think of sides I haven't thought of on my own. 



Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

lalachka said:


> I guess I was wrong to mention the film on the gsd thread. That footage didn't affect me. I also didn't realize that it was AR agenda. Lol I'm naive to a large degree.
> 
> But anyway, what did affect me was the pugs, cavaliers and bulldogs.
> 
> So forgetting about the gsd for a minute, what do you think of the pugs, for example?


Personally, I absolutely cannot stand any brachycephalic breed for many reasons and you couldn't pay me to own one but that preference has nothing to do with the film. I don't know what it has to do with breeding GSDs...


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Liesje said:


> Personally, I absolutely cannot stand any brachycephalic breed for many reasons and you couldn't pay me to own one but that preference has nothing to do with the film. I don't know what it has to do with breeding GSDs...



Nothing. I thought I can bring it up though. It does fall under breeding dogs with problems though remotely)))) and in a diff context




Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

I know that no dog is perfect and that dogs who are bred more than once are probably going to produce something "bad" along the way, but I think the goal should be to study the combinations of lines and eliminate those problems as best as possible, and not just say "well at least he doesn't have -----" or "at least she didn't produce -----". It would be easy for me to point fingers at other breeds because I don't like them and can find health problems in their lines, but I don't think that excuses the poor health in our own breed (GSD).


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Is it true that inbreeding caused all the problems in gsds? If not then what did?

I also hear that mutts are healthier. Is that a myth?


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

lalachka said:


> Is it true that inbreeding caused all the problems in gsds? If not then what did?
> 
> I also hear that mutts are healthier. Is that a myth?
> 
> ...


Inbreeding for the wrong traits like color and structure is a contributor. 
Look at how the Dutch knpv breeding program I think the best in the world right now for working dogs. 
Lots of line breeding structure is not a consideration. Only health and if the dog can work. If the dog cant work he is culled. Training program that many consider harsh yet exposes weaknesses which leads to improved selection in breeding stock.
They have used studs from other registries and are not afraid to go outside the breed to bring in certain traits. They even used Pitts at some point in some of their lines to bring tenacity and gameness.

Look what happened to the Dutch/Mal when structure and breed purity became a consideration in the breeding. Look at FCI Dutchies and Mals. More issues with workability nerves and health. There is a lesson there.

Inbreeding is a tool and a good one imo. It can also be misused like anything else.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

I agree there are some great KNPV dogs being bred. The Dutchies I've seen are impressive.


With the GSD there are also the genetic softer teeth, dogs that are missing teeth, sensitive gut issues, or allergies to certain proteins, I could go on and on. So many imperfection's that are overlooked yet carried on genetically.....


----------



## sparra (Jun 27, 2011)

lalachka said:


> Is it true that inbreeding caused all the problems in gsds? If not then what did?
> 
> I also hear that mutts are healthier. Is that a myth?
> 
> ...


The myth is that inbreeding "creates" health/temperament issues......it doesn't.......what it does do is "exaggerate" issues that are already there......both GOOD and bad.


----------



## Yoshi (May 12, 2014)

lalachka said:


> The perception is out there. I pay attention to any gsd I see outside. They're mostly sad looking.
> 
> I can't speak about the show ring, I've never watched a show. I do know that xeph from here has a beautiful show line dog with no slope and a beautiful gait. Sent from Petguide.com Free App


From what I have seen of show line German Shepherds they certainly do have a weird gait. I have seen them in that film also, but I have also seen them in real life as well. As far as I can tell almost all show line breeders in Australia breed for the curvy back and funny gait. VERY few do not - but how long will their lines last? 

I do think the show lines are striking, they have pretty faces and some of their colours are just divine. :wub: But they seem to be lacking in regards to temperament . . . 

A friend of a relative I know jut got a show line bitch to breed with and she's already planning who the sire is, from a top kennel in WA and this dog is considered one of the best and, he walks the funkiest in my eyes.  I really cannot see this dog doing any type of work. But what do I know? From seeing him run, he could NEVER heard sheep effectively and I do have some experience in this matter because that is what I do!! 



lalachka said:


> I thought it was about the show ring.
> 
> And I still stay with my opinion on pugs and most flat faced dogs. It was there before the film and just got reinforced.
> 
> Sent from Petguide.com Free App


I agree with this but this is just my personal opinion. I have always liked dogs that can run miles and are always happy to do what you ask of them. I've always liked the dogs that just look natural, no wrinkles, no extreme tininess or flat faces, wrinkles, roached backs, excessive curly or long fur, or dogs that snort, drool and have a hard time breathing or moving! 

I think I know where the breeders are coming from. There are always risks and no dogs are perfect, but deciding between the positive and negative outcomes is key. But people have different perspectives. Like an example possibly, should breeder breed for a prettier dog and risk losing working ability, or should breeding breed for an AWESOME working dog and risk health problems? Decisions, decisions. :crazy:


----------



## Xeph (Jun 19, 2005)

Since I was mentioned, I'll throw it out there that my bitch does have a sloping topline when stacked. She goes level in motion, though. She's a beautiful mover with a good mind and sound temperament 

She is at her most stunning when she is on sheep.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

She does, but she doesn't have that roached back with a huge slope and that's what I mean when I say slope. 

I'd post a pic but I don't want to offend anyone. Just my preference. 

Your dog is beautiful. 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Actually, Xeph, if what your dog has is called the slope then the slope is not what I'm talking about. 

Your dog, IMO, is perfect. I noticed her when I first came to the forum, just beautiful. 

I like it when a back goes down like that when stacked, in a straight line. But on a lot of breeders' websites that's not what I'm seeing. And sometimes it's breeders that are recommended by people here. 



Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Blitzkrieg1 said:


> Inbreeding for the wrong traits like color and structure is a contributor.
> 
> Look at how the Dutch knpv breeding program I think the best in the world right now for working dogs.
> 
> ...



Lol like the Ecollar?

Anyway, i don't know anything about knpv but why cull? Why not just not breed the 'bad' dogs?


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

sparra said:


> The myth is that inbreeding "creates" health/temperament issues......it doesn't.......what it does do is "exaggerate" issues that are already there......both GOOD and bad.



I just can't believe that inbreeding doesn't cause some issues. It does with people, health problems, mental problems, and so on. 
Is it not the same with dogs? 



Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Yoshi, yep)))) I also like dogs that look 'natural'. And I feel bad for the ones that don't))))


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

I believe what lalachka is talking about is not a sloping back but a really steep and short croup. Also, even as a WG show line person I agree with Yoschi that most of them do not interest me. I find many of them very "loose" in their movement which looks even more odd when their idea of "gaiting" is the dog walking or pacing while throwing their shoulders into the collar and pulling.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Liesje said:


> I believe what lalachka is talking about is not a sloping back but a really steep and short croup. Also, even as a WG show line person I agree with Yoschi that most of them do not interest me. I find many of them very "loose" in their movement which looks even more odd when their idea of "gaiting" is the dog walking or pacing while throwing their shoulders into the collar and pulling.



Yes!! And it usually has a roach as well but some don't. And then they almost have no butt. 


Since we are talking about this, quick unrelated question. My boy has a roach, about 5-6 back bones that roach and I can feel and see them. His back legs are also close together when he stands. 

What possible problems am I looking at? I was worried he might have dysplasia but I'm waiting to X-ray him, not sure about anesthesia just for that. He runs fine, no pain, no problems other than the way he looks and most people don't notice it so it's not that obvious. 

What kind of problems might he develop from this? Should I pm you?


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

I'm not sure what you mean by a roach you can feel. "Roach" means that at some point, the topline past the wither is actually higher than the wither. It doesn't really refer to a specific medical condition.

If you're worried about your dog and he's 7 months or older, you can get x-rays. Have them do the spine if you're worried about it. Lots of dogs have less than ideal toplines and are healthy. You don't need anaesthesia for x-rays. My vet uses a sedative that can be reversed, or is worn off by the time I pick up my dogs.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Yeah, the sedative))))
And they won't let me be in the room. I don't have a vet I like and trust, I'm on number 4 or 5. So nope, not leaving him there alone. 

It's like his spine is curved at some point. I can't get a good pic, he keeps wanting to sit if I ask him not to move. 






















Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Yoshi (May 12, 2014)

lalachka said:


> I just can't believe that inbreeding doesn't cause some issues. It does with people, health problems, mental problems, and so on.
> Is it not the same with dogs?
> Sent from Petguide.com Free App


Correct me if I am wrong, but I do believe that the whole German Shepherd breed was based on inbreeding with the founding German Shepherd dog. I think he was called Horand? Or Hektor? But are not all pedigreed dogs inbred to some extent? 

The extreme dogs of the West German show lines have a very funny mode of movement. Their bottoms seem to almost touch the ground. Just doesn't quite look natural and I wonder why it is considered beautiful? It certainly looks unique and I wonder how come it has changed so much compare to the founding dogs? Breeders, just wondering how a standard can change over time? 






EDIT: What is the slopes purpose anyway?


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

> Inbreeding for the wrong traits like color and structure is a contributor.
> Look at how the Dutch knpv breeding program I think the best in the world right now for working dogs.
> Lots of line breeding structure is not a consideration. Only health and if the dog can work. If the dog cant work he is culled. Training program that many consider harsh yet exposes weaknesses which leads to improved selection in breeding stock.
> They have used studs from other registries and are not afraid to go outside the breed to bring in certain traits. They even used Pitts at some point in some of their lines to bring tenacity and gameness.
> ...





lalachka said:


> Lol like the Ecollar?
> 
> Anyway, i don't know anything about knpv but why cull? Why not just not breed the 'bad' dogs?


There is a KNPV Dutch lines breeder near me and he is placing(for free) two young females he kept back for the breeding program,but they aren't what he wants for reproducing so is placing them. Sure he could sell them, or breed them. I think it is great that he is discriminating. 
His dogs generally aren't bred for pet or sport homes, but the LE world. 
BunkerDogs USA | Top of the line working dogs.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

The dog looks weird. Like he has this bulky middle. Not my thing. Sorry if I offend anyone, it's all taste


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

onyx'girl said:


> There is a KNPV Dutch lines breeder near me and he is placing(for free) two young females he kept back for the breeding program,but they aren't what he wants for reproducing so is placing them. Sure he could sell them, or breed them. I think it is great that he is discriminating.
> His dogs generally aren't bred for pet or sport homes, but the LE world.
> BunkerDogs USA | Top of the line working dogs.




OK so why can't everyone do that? Don't kill the pups, fix them if you're afraid they might get bred



Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

I think you need to move away from how a dog looks and focus more on a dog's temperament. I mean, I have my likes/dislikes in regards to look and color, but at the end of the day the working ability and drive is much more important to me and I think it should be much more important to anyone that wants to make a positive impact on the breed.

I'm not saying a dog shouldn't be "conforming" to the standard, but to focus on such small things that you might not like about a dog's look is kind of counter productive IMO. Unless the thing is debilitating or a health issue, it really shouldn't matter much.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

> OK so why can't everyone do that? Don't kill the pups, fix them if you're afraid they might get bred


Culling doesn't mean killing, it means removing from the breeding program.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

lalachka said:


> OK so why can't everyone do that? Don't kill the pups, fix them if you're afraid they might get bred
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from Petguide.com Free App


In theory...you reduce the amount of available homes then. I currently have a fixed female (I'm very happy about it), but I train and plan on trialing. I'm very close with the breeder, and if she were in tact, its not out of the question that if she did prove to be breedworthy she would've been used. So my home is very helpful to the breeder because I'm investing in the dog, and they could reap the benefit of that work.

But I'm a two dog household and we won't have anymore. So in the future, they know that I won't take another dog even if they want me to train/work it. So for 10 years, they've lost a home where they could place a dog and see if it worked out for breeding.

There are other circumstances surrounding why the female I have is fixed, but in theory if she were culled because as a puppy she wasn't showing the traits they wanted to see, I'd still have an open spot in my home for a potential breeding dog.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

onyx'girl said:


> Culling doesn't mean killing, it means removing from the breeding program.



Ohhh)))) OK then


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

martemchik said:


> In theory...you reduce the amount of available homes then. I currently have a fixed female (I'm very happy about it), but I train and plan on trialing. I'm very close with the breeder, and if she were in tact, its not out of the question that if she did prove to be breedworthy she would've been used. So my home is very helpful to the breeder because I'm investing in the dog, and they could reap the benefit of that work.
> 
> But I'm a two dog household and we won't have anymore. So in the future, they know that I won't take another dog even if they want me to train/work it. So for 10 years, they've lost a home where they could place a dog and see if it worked out for breeding.
> 
> There are other circumstances surrounding why the female I have is fixed, but in theory if she were culled because as a puppy she wasn't showing the traits they wanted to see, I'd still have an open spot in my home for a potential breeding dog.





OK so why not place 'culled' pups into straight pet homes?


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

martemchik said:


> I think you need to move away from how a dog looks and focus more on a dog's temperament. I mean, I have my likes/dislikes in regards to look and color, but at the end of the day the working ability and drive is much more important to me and I think it should be much more important to anyone that wants to make a positive impact on the breed.
> 
> I'm not saying a dog shouldn't be "conforming" to the standard, but to focus on such small things that you might not like about a dog's look is kind of counter productive IMO. Unless the thing is debilitating or a health issue, it really shouldn't matter much.



Lol why can't I have it all? Why can't I have a sound dog and enjoy the way he looks? 

I don't know whether my dog is my taste or whether he became my taste because he's my dog, but the fact that I love looking at him and love all the faces he makes and adore his look definitely brings many happy moments for me (and hopefully for him). 

Looks do matter, people can deny it all they want but for most pet people dogs are picked based on looks. 
I love the look of gsds, that's why I got one. So why can't I go a step further and choose the coloring and shape?


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

lalachka said:


> OK so why not place 'culled' pups into straight pet homes?
> 
> 
> Sent from Petguide.com Free App


A dog that is not a breeding prospect isn't necessarily a good pet.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

lalachka said:


> Lol why can't I have it all? Why can't I have a sound dog and enjoy the way he looks?
> 
> I don't know whether my dog is my taste or whether he became my taste because he's my dog, but the fact that I love looking at him and love all the faces he makes and adore his look definitely brings many happy moments for me (and hopefully for him).
> 
> ...


Mainly because there is technically only one standard and that's what you should be supporting. Unfortunately everyone has a different idea of how a dog can fit that standard. As someone so new to the breed...how can your opinion of the standard be trusted? Can't. So how can you guarantee yourself that you're even looking for something that's of the standard and not something special/different that you personally like?

Many of the posts you've made are knit picking at small things, that's what I'm kind of focusing on. You focus on little things in the dog that don't really affect the dog's ability to work or be a good dog. Those are the things that you should not worry about.

Like your last comment..."he has a bulky middle"...not quite sure if that matters in the long run. And your idea of bulky, is way different that someone else's who might actually call that dog skinny.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Liesje said:


> A dog that is not a breeding prospect isn't necessarily a good pet.



That sucks. So killing them is really the only option sometimes?


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

lalachka said:


> That sucks. So killing them is really the only option sometimes?
> 
> 
> Sent from Petguide.com Free App


No, its not. But if culling was practiced...you'd have a much better breed overall. Unfortunately, you can't spay/neuter at 8 weeks when people take dogs home. You can make people promise not to breed the dog, but they still can and will.

Culling guarantees not breeding. It also reduces the supply of dogs, and so makes sure that the best dogs in theory go to the best homes for those dogs.

You also have to understand that a shift has occurred in the last 100 years since the creation of the GSD. Many dogs back then still worked, did things around the farm, around the house, ect. Today...the majority of dogs are pets. Sad to say, but this breed was probably not intended to be a pet in the way that many people think of one. I've met plenty of people that have admitted that they can't handle a higher drive/working type GSD. That's why they searched out a breeder that can provide them with a calm, lazy, lay around the house dog that looks like a GSD. And those breeders have been successful because people just focus on the LOOK of the breed, and not the initial/standard temperament that it was meant to have.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

lalachka said:


> That sucks. So killing them is really the only option sometimes?
> 
> 
> Sent from Petguide.com Free App


WHO is killing dogs? Where did that come from in this conversation? I think culling by euthanization is VERY rare. It may have been done that way 50 years ago but I think you would find very few good breeders do that today.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

I haven't read all the posts so I don't know where killing came in. I'm just saying that a dog that was bred for LE type work, say a higher drive, sharp dog with a higher level of social aggression, if that dog has some issue preventing it from being a breeding prospect, that doesn't mean the dog is suited for a pet home. I have a GSD that is not a breeding prospect that would be an awful pet for a lot of people I know that have very mellow, laid back, low/no drive dogs with very few needs as far as physical exercise and mental stimulation.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

martemchik said:


> Mainly because there is technically only one standard and that's what you should be supporting. Unfortunately everyone has a different idea of how a dog can fit that standard. As someone so new to the breed...how can your opinion of the standard be trusted? Can't. So how can you guarantee yourself that you're even looking for something that's of the standard and not something special/different that you personally like?
> 
> Many of the posts you've made are knit picking at small things, that's what I'm kind of focusing on. You focus on little things in the dog that don't really affect the dog's ability to work or be a good dog. Those are the things that you should not worry about.



My opinion shouldn't be trusted, it doesn't affect anything, I'm not breeding. It affects it in the way that I might support a breeders (if I get another dog) that breeds what I like but that's what's happening already. 

I don't think a roached back is a small thing. To me it def isn't. 
The other things, like coloring and 'face' - yeah, i'd like to be able to choose since the variety is out there. 

I'm a pet home, I will never work my dog so to me nothing much besides temperament and health matters. So since I'm not so picky on the working ability I can afford to find a dog whose look I like. 

But just we are on the same page, what small things am I focusing on? Maybe to me they're not so small))))


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Jax08 said:


> WHO is killing dogs? Where did that come from in this conversation? I think culling by euthanization is VERY rare. It may have been done that way 50 years ago but I think you would find very few good breeders do that today.



I thought that's what culling means. Then it was explained that it doesn't mean killing. But then another example was given and I took that response to mean that sometimes killing is the only option


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

lalachka said:


> I don't think a roached back is a small thing. To me it def isn't.
> The other things, like coloring and 'face' - yeah, i'd like to be able to choose since the variety is out there.
> 
> I'm a pet home, I will never work my dog so to me nothing much besides temperament and health matters. So since I'm not so picky on the working ability I can afford to find a dog whose look I like.
> ...


Which is the core of the issue...

You don't care about working ability, so you go and support a breeder that doesn't produce the best/highest quality working dogs because in your mind you're probably not capable of taking care of such a dog. When you do that, you support that breeder's decision to breed that lesser type of dog. They keep doing it because they see that there is a demand for that type of dog. Slowly but surely the original standard gets lowered.

Not saying your one purchase makes that big of a difference on the breed as a whole. But it does have a part in it.

The coloring thing...yeah, pick away, doesn't matter. There are options so why not get the one you want. No worry there.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Also, martemchik, even if all dogs were exactly by the standard, they'd still not all be identical. So i'd still like some and others. It's all a matter of taste and there's nothing wrong with choosing a dog whose look you like. 

Or is there? How do you think dogs should be chosen for pet homes? Or they shouldn't go to pet homes?

What's a pet home? 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

Culling used to occur. It doesn't anymore. I believe in Max's book he wrote about how you should cull to make sure the best puppies also get more nutrients from the mother. There used to be pretty strong thoughts on the maximum amount of puppies that a single dam could support, and so anything over that would be killed.


----------



## Wolfgeist (Dec 4, 2010)

lalachka said:


> I'm a pet home, I will never work my dog so to me nothing much besides temperament and health matters. So since I'm not so picky on the working ability I can afford to find a dog whose look I like.


I think that is a big misconception. Working ability is absolutely vital to this breed, not just for preservation of the breed but also as a "pet". Have you ever tried to train a low drive, stubborn dog who doesn't really care about pleasing you? I have - many times while I was working with shelter dogs over a 5 year period.

That working drive and biddability we hope (wish?) is bred into every GSD is what makes training pet obedience easy, and makes the dog want to learn and work with you. Varying degrees of drive and energy for varying homes... a high drive, high energy working dog is no good for an inexperienced pet home. Most working litters have a pup or two that would make a great active companion.

So, working drive is important even for pet homes. To love the GSD, should be to love how they are meant to be - a stable and driven utilitarian working dog.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

lalachka said:


> Also, martemchik, even if all dogs were exactly by the standard, they'd still not all be identical. So i'd still like some and others. It's all a matter of taste and there's nothing wrong with choosing a dog whose look you like.
> 
> Or is there? How do you think dogs should be chosen for pet homes? Or they shouldn't go to pet homes?
> 
> ...


Lol...I'm talking in real theoretical terms.

Today...dogs should go to pet homes. I would never say a dog shouldn't go to a pet home. 95% of dogs are going to be pets today. If breeders stopped selling to pet homes...the breed would die off real fast.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Wild Wolf said:


> I think that is a big misconception. Working ability is absolutely vital to this breed, not just for preservation of the breed but also as a "pet". Have you ever tried to train a low drive, stubborn dog who doesn't really care about pleasing you? I have - many times while I was working with shelter dogs over a 5 year period.
> 
> That working drive and biddability we hope (wish?) is bred into every GSD is what makes training pet obedience easy, and makes the dog want to learn and work with you. Varying degrees of drive and energy for varying homes... a high drive, high energy working dog is no good for an inexperienced pet home. Most working litters have a pup or two that would make a great active companion.
> 
> So, working drive is important even for pet homes. To love the GSD, should be to love how they are meant to be - a stable and driven utilitarian working dog.




I think it's all language that's why I asked what a pet home is. I will never trial, compete, whatever it's called so that's what I mean by working. 

I do train and work with my dog so all those things do matter to me. They just don't matter to the extent that they would matter to someone who wants to do some serious sport. 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

martemchik said:


> Which is the core of the issue...
> 
> You don't care about working ability, so you go and support a breeder that doesn't produce the best/highest quality working dogs because in your mind you're probably not capable of taking care of such a dog. When you do that, you support that breeder's decision to breed that lesser type of dog. They keep doing it because they see that there is a demand for that type of dog. Slowly but surely the original standard gets lowered.
> 
> ...


 

Lol actually no. Me, personally, I will go and get that dog (if I can) and rise to the challenge of handling him. I'm saying if I can because most likely a breeder wouldn't sell that dog to me since I'm not into sport or real work. 

But what did you mean when you said I focus on small things. Like what? I'm interested to see what's a small thing to you and whether it's a small thing to me



Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

lalachka said:


> I think it's all language that's why I asked what a pet home is. I will never trial, compete, whatever it's called so that's what I mean by working.
> 
> I do train and work with my dog so all those things do matter to me. They just don't matter to the extent that they would matter to someone who wants to do some serious sport.
> 
> ...


And that's the common misconception. Why don't they matter to the extent they would to someone who wants to do something more serious? All GSD should be able to do anything the owner asks of them. Just because TODAY you don't want to do IPO, doesn't mean you won't want to try it tomorrow. And your dog should be able to do it. Your dog should also be just as happy with the training you're currently giving it and just being able to go home and relax.

But anytime you think that a dog should have "less working ability" because you're not going to be working it as hard as the local K9...that's wrong. It should have just as much working ability as that K9, and it should be willing to do everything you ask of it, even if you never ask.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

martemchik said:


> And that's the common misconception. Why don't they matter to the extent they would to someone who wants to do something more serious? All GSD should be able to do anything the owner asks of them. Just because TODAY you don't want to do IPO, doesn't mean you won't want to try it tomorrow. And your dog should be able to do it. Your dog should also be just as happy with the training you're currently giving it and just being able to go home and relax.
> 
> But anytime you think that a dog should have "less working ability" because you're not going to be working it as hard as the local K9...that's wrong. It should have just as much working ability as that K9, and it should be willing to do everything you ask of it, even if you never ask.



It should but this is the real world. I will never get that dog so I won't break my neck trying. I will settle for what I can get. 

The best dogs will go to working homes, that's just how it is. And I understand the breeders so I can't blame them. 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

lalachka said:


> Lol actually no. Me, personally, I will go and get that dog (if I can) and rise to the challenge of handling him. I'm saying if I can because most likely a breeder wouldn't sell that dog to me since I'm not into sport or real work.
> 
> But what did you mean when you said I focus on small things. Like what? I'm interested to see what's a small thing to you and whether it's a small thing to me
> 
> ...


You was a general you. It's great that you'll rise to the challenge. Most people won't. They'll look for a less driven dog, less energy, one that they don't have to deal with most of the time.

Small things like calling that dog bulky in the middle...like why does that matter? And is he really bulky or is that just your opinion? Someone else can call that dog skinny.

I don't care much about physical traits at all. I really focus on working ability. I do want them to be within the standard height/weight wise because I think its the perfect working size.

I have a large sable male. He's longer than he should be. He's within the standard though. Big chest, good head, nice ear set, straight tail.

My female is from better lines, but she wasn't with us as a puppy and was spayed early so is younger looking, has a floppy ear (never taped), and has a gay tail.

Both dogs are beautiful to me. Both dogs can work. I could care less that one might look more like a GSD than the other one.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

I don't understand this thread. I thought it was about breeding, but now we're saying "I'm just a pet home so other stuff doesn't matter to me." What is the question here?


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Ohh that. He doesn't look athletic, that's why I brought that up. 
Maybe him not being athletic gives that impression. 

Just looks like he's heavy. So to me that's a big thing. I enjoy watching my dog run. 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Liesje said:


> I don't understand this thread. I thought it was about breeding, but now we're saying "I'm just a pet home so other stuff doesn't matter to me." What is the question here?



I'm just learning things. Questions come up as things are written. 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

Here is my female...

Which one do you think came from a BYB and which one from a reputable breeder?


----------



## Wolfgeist (Dec 4, 2010)

Liesje said:


> I don't understand this thread. I thought it was about breeding, but now we're saying "I'm just a pet home so other stuff doesn't matter to me." What is the question here?


I think things are just moving with the natural flow of conversation, would love to get back on topic though... was a very interesting discussion earlier.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

martemchik said:


> Here is my female...
> 
> Which one do you think came from a BYB and which one from a reputable breeder?



Lol I know which one, you told me before)))))

But i'd never guess. Maybe by the tone of your question))))))

I like them both. I'm not THAT picky. 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

Wild Wolf said:


> I think things are just moving with the natural flow of conversation, would love to get back on topic though... was a very interesting discussion earlier.



Sorry, go ahead)))) I always get carried away. 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

We're not allowed to talk about breeding theory...we don't actually breed remember.


----------



## lalachka (Aug 13, 2013)

martemchik said:


> We're not allowed to talk about breeding theory...we don't actually breed remember.



Lol she didn't mean you)))) she said she didn't. 



Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

I think as a potential puppy buyer, you have to remember that you’re never the “final product” and in some way are a test subject for the breeder who has an end goal. I have yet to meet a breeder where a current litter is the end goal, and like others have stated, there is no such thing as a perfect dog, so breeders are constantly working to improve what they currently have.

So as a buyer, you should weigh the problems that are potentially in the pedigree, and in the sire/dam and if you’re willing to trust the breeder that they are minimizing the risk of that problem showing up in a puppy. Each person is going to have a different level of risk they’re willing to take in regards to the gamut of problems that are potentially in a pedigree.

For me, some things I won’t take a risk with, even if the breeding itself is solid, the breeder knows what they’re doing, and everything looks good. But there are so many other options out there that I personally feel I don’t need to take a risk on some things (listed them earlier). It’s impossible to breed dogs that don’t have some sort of issue, or are related to a dog with something wrong. So you can’t expect a breeder to breed only “perfect” dogs with no genetic or temperamental faults.


----------



## Yoshi (May 12, 2014)

Wild Wolf said:


> I think that is a big misconception. Working ability is absolutely vital to this breed, not just for preservation of the breed but also as a "pet". Have you ever tried to train a low drive, stubborn dog who doesn't really care about pleasing you? I have - many times while I was working with shelter dogs over a 5 year period.
> 
> That working drive and biddability we hope (wish?) is bred into every GSD is what makes training pet obedience easy, and makes the dog want to learn and work with you. Varying degrees of drive and energy for varying homes... a high drive, high energy working dog is no good for an inexperienced pet home. Most working litters have a pup or two that would make a great active companion.
> 
> So, working drive is important even for pet homes. To love the GSD, should be to love how they are meant to be - a stable and driven utilitarian working dog.


:thumbup: POW! That there! I agree with! Why water down such a great breed because some people cannot handle it? There are other breeds who would make fine lap dogs. That is what they are bred for. 

Working breed dogs make great pets as well. They are easily trained and they always want to please you.


----------

