# Large GSD Breeders in New England.



## Kevlar55

Are there any Large GSD breeders in the New England area.
I'm looking for a straight backed German shepard, not the show type.

Thanks, Kevin.


----------



## Lucy Dog

What do you mean large GSD breeders? Do you mean like a big commercial breeder or a breeder that breeds x-large dogs?

If you're talking about the size of the dog, personally, I'd never ever buy from a breeder who breeds specifically for a large size. Purposely breeding outside of the standard is a big no no.

So, you don't want a show line, that leaves the working lines. Any specific lines? DDR? West German? Czech?


----------



## Emoore

Lucy Dog said:


> What do you mean large GSD breeders? Do you mean like a big commercial breeder or a breeder that breeds x-large dogs?


Or a breeder who is a very large person?


----------



## Lucy Dog

Or a large breeder with a large breeding facility that breeds giant dogs. Does anyone know anyone like that?!?


----------



## Freestep

Kevin, modern German working lines generally have straight backs. Stay away from breeders who use terms like "old-fashioned large straight backed German Shepherds." These people are breeding dogs outside the standard. The upper end of the standard is about 90 lb. (for males). 

The old GSD from the beginnings of the breed were NOT large dogs. Anyone who says differently is either ignorant, or a liar. Niether of which you should buy a puppy from.

Health and temperament should be the most important thing, not size! Hopefully some folks here can direct you toward a reputable breeder in your area.


----------



## Doc

Freestep said:


> Kevin, modern German working lines generally have straight backs. Stay away from breeders who use terms like "old-fashioned large straight backed German Shepherds." These people are breeding dogs outside the standard. The upper end of the standard is about 90 lb. (for males).
> 
> The old GSD from the beginnings of the breed were NOT large dogs. Anyone who says differently is either ignorant, or a liar. Niether of which you should buy a puppy from.
> 
> Health and temperament should be the most important thing, not size! Hopefully some folks here can direct you toward a reputable breeder in your area.


You really need to trace back the history of all the dogs that make upthe foundation of this breed. You might be surprised to find large dogs in the genetics - particularly in the Swabian/Wurtemberger dogs.

Even today in some litters you will get get pups that grow up and are larger than the Standard. Gentics and how they combine has a great deal to do with size, weight, and structure.


----------



## Lucy Dog

Doc... breeding extra large dogs for the sole purpose to produce extra large puppies and using that as your marketing scheme vs. a larger than the standard dog popping in litters due to it's genetics are two completely different things. I have zero doubt you already knew that.

We've all had this discussion plenty of times before and I'm sure you've been part of them. Do we really need to do this again?


----------



## Doc

Lucy Dog said:


> Doc... breeding extra large dogs for the sole purpose to produce extra large puppies and using that as your marketing scheme vs. a larger than the standard dog popping in litters due to it's genetics are two completely different things. I have zero doubt you already knew that.
> 
> We've all had this discussion plenty of times before and I'm sure you've been part of them. Do we really need to do this again?


I only answered because of the editorial comment given in the post I quoted. I am sure that people who stick to the standard have produced over the Standard pups in their litters. It's genetics - not a marketing scheme any morre than someone making statements about the nerve, structure, color, etc. when they are trying to sell pups.

I submit if you keep restricting breeding to dogs that are within the Standard, you are contributing to the genetic bottle and health issues found in this breed. The same goes for eliminating certain dogs based on color, i.e. blue and liver. Afterall, those genes came from some German shepherd years ago.

It's funny that once someone asked for a larger than the standard German shepherd, the almighty German shepherd standard is the first thing thrown at the op. And heaven forbid if someone asked for a blue, white, or liver color.


----------



## Lucy Dog

Why even stick to GSD's if that's the case? Forget the almighty standard... forget color, size, temperament, and even breed. Let's start mixing breeds and calling them hybrids (which for some, already do).

Where do you think we should draw the line since we are all stuck in this genetic bottle?


----------



## Freestep

Doc said:


> It's funny that once someone asked for a larger than the standard German shepherd, the almighty German shepherd standard is the first thing thrown at the op.


Um, well... yeah? 

Did you make that comment seriously, or tongue in cheek?

If we didn't have a breed standard, we wouldn't have German Shepherds. 

Of course certain individuals will be larger than others. That doesn't mean we ought to take the biggest ones and breed them to each other, in order to create a line of oversized GSD. What is the point of that? 

When a breeder chooses size over health and temperament, that's exactly what they get. There are plenty of larger dog breeds out there if someone wants a giant dog. I think Shiloh and King Shepherds are breeds that were founded with oversize GSDs (along with other breeds) and those breeders will be proud to tell you how heavy their dogs are!


----------



## Doc

over-sized is anything that is taller or heavier than the Standard. So a 100 pound male German shepherd is over-sized just like a 140 pound one. If a breeder aims for the upper end of the Standard in his breeding program, then what are the chances that he/she produces male dogs that weigh over 90 pounds? And is taller than 26 inches? Then, because this "over-sized" dogs has Excellent hips, elbows, and the correct German shepherd temperment, you are going to disqualify him as a stud because he is over-sized?

You will discover that the "king" and Shilo" shepherds were crossed with other breeds to create a "different" breed. And just because you breed two "over-sized" dogs does not mean you will produce over-sized offspring. "Reputable" breeders who study bloodlines, pedigrees, and offspring of two dogs know to expect when they breed.

The Standard has ruined this breed over the past thirty years. It is not the same Standard that was first written by Setphanitz. It has been re-written by people who have an agenda - usually based on their breeding program and the dogs they produce. By doing so, they make sure that their kennel, dogs, pups, and future breeding rights end up in their pocket. So to judge every dog by the "Standard" is an excellent way to ruin to the breed. Common sense left the German shepherd judging decades ago. As a result, the breed is full of poor nerves, health issues, and greedy owners/breeders/judges. If you don't believe me, ask some of the "old timers" on this form and I know they will tell you today's German shepherd is nothing like they use to be; in part due to the bastardization of the Standard.


----------



## Doc

Lucy Dog said:


> Why even stick to GSD's if that's the case? Forget the almighty standard... forget color, size, temperament, and even breed. Let's start mixing breeds and calling them hybrids (which for some, already do).
> 
> Where do you think we should draw the line since we are all stuck in this genetic bottle?


You introduce dogs that are not part of the problem. Dogs that have not contributed to the genetic mess we are in today. And yes that may mean breeding a white or liver or a blue. It may mean going to the lowest depths of breeders (the dreaded BYB) and captilizing on the genetics that have been produciing healthy dogs for generations. There are wonderful German shepherds that have never seen an AKC show-ring or a participated in a sporting event. There are breeders producing healthy German shepherds that have never seen or dealt with SIBO, EPI, or all the other health issues we see in today's dogs. There are breeders that have been producing well balanced German shepherds from sires and dams that are not titled.

In order to correct the problems, we need to cast a broader net. Dogs that come from healthy lines - reguardless of color or lack of titles - need to find their way into the bloodlines. Without introducing "new" bloodlines/genetics, the issues will never be addressed. Unfortunately there comes a time when it is too late. I fear we are there now. And the dogs us "old timers" know as German shepherds will be lost like the mastadons.


----------



## Kevlar55

OK, maybe I should have said "Large boned"? I grew up with what seamed then like giant German Shepard's. I see them now and they look smaller and thinner. I don't need one for protection, I want a big dog that will spend a lot of time outside with my wife and I. Just a big teddy bear like the ones I grew up with. I was looking at the Southeast German Shepard rescue and saw some beautiful dogs, and was hoping to find something a little closer.

Thanks, Kevin.


----------



## Doc

Kenvin,
Check your pm.


----------



## Lucy Dog

OP - sorry for going so off track with this thread. Send Doc a private message, maybe he can point you in the right direction.

Doc - You say the GSD standard has changed so much because of certain agendas. I've read your posts before, I know you know your history of the breed. Could you go into specifics? Maybe a specific then and now?


----------



## onyx'girl

Kevlar55 said:


> OK, maybe I should have said "Large boned"? I grew up with what seamed then like giant German Shepard's. I see them now and they look smaller and thinner. I don't need one for protection, I want a big dog that will spend a lot of time outside with my wife and I. Just a big teddy bear like the ones I grew up with. I was looking at the Southeast German Shepard rescue and saw some beautiful dogs, and was hoping to find something a little closer.
> 
> Thanks, Kevin.


Kevin, on a GSD board, you must know the correct spelling of ShepHERD...it is a herding working breed after all! They are not teddy bears... maybe a large fuzzy mix breed would fit your lifestyle? Or get a rescue that is in need of a home if you really want a German Shepherd Dog.
Supporting oversized GSD breeders is detrimental to the breed. JMO


----------



## Lucy Dog

Yes... GSD's are definitely not big cuddly teddy bears. At least none that I've ever owned or been around.

Maybe a shiloh or king shepherd might suit you better than a german shepherd. Have you looked into those breeds?


----------



## Whiteshepherds

onyx'girl said:


> maybe a large fuzzy mix breed would fit your lifestyle? Or get a rescue that is in need of a home if you really want a German Shepherd Dog.
> Supporting oversized GSD breeders is detrimental to the breed. JMO


He didn't ask for oversized, he said large and then large boned . Maybe his frame of reference is a stockier plush or longstock. Even when they're shorter and weigh less they can look larger than a lean stock coat.
Cut the guy some slack, he wants a GSD not a mixed breed.


----------



## bocron

Doc said:


> Then, because this "over-sized" dogs has Excellent hips, elbows, and the correct German shepherd temperment, you are going to disqualify him as a stud because he is over-sized?


Yep, I would. Simply because I'm sure I can find excellent hips, elbows and correct temperament that isn't over sized, so why shouldn't I.
I also would disqualify a dog that is within size, has excellent hips and elbows but has so-so temperament. I consider all aspects of the standard as a part of the whole, but there are a few which I would consider deal breakers. Size and temperament would be at the top of the list since those 2 factors have a huge impact on many of the other attributes. 
Now, I also have a rare breed dog that is currently on the vulnerable list. Upon speaking to others who are hoping to preserve the breed, we have come to the conclusion that we must overlook some faults in order to expand the gene pool (things like tail curl, or tipped ears), but that health faults must be avoided. My male, who has great temperament, tests clear for the breeds known health issues and is overall a very nice example of the breed(correct coloration, proportioned within standard, strong, correct head and ear set) has a tail that curls a bit too much. I will use him in breeding at this point, but hopefully in a few generations will have more to choose from.
With the GSD there are many, many more to breed to, so I would absolutely be much more selective and strive toward the standard in all ways possible.


----------



## sitstay

Kevlar55 said:


> I was looking at the Southeast German Shepard rescue and saw some beautiful dogs, and was hoping to find something a little closer.
> 
> Thanks, Kevin.


Here you go! — Vermont German Shepherd Rescue — ADOPTIONS —*RescueMe.Org This link should help you pinpoint dogs in your region. Scroll to the bottom of the page and use the interactive map. You should be able to find a dog that totally fits your lifestyle in rescue.

Good luck!
Sheilah


----------



## onyx'girl

Whiteshepherds said:


> He didn't ask for oversized, he said large and then large boned . Maybe his frame of reference is a stockier plush or longstock. Even when they're shorter and weigh less they can look larger than a lean stock coat.
> Cut the guy some slack, he wants a GSD not a mixed breed.


Okay, a teddy bear...large boned dog. Does this describe a GSD? 
I think when we were young, all the big dogs looked bigger than they actually were. 
I do have a large boned, long coat GSD that could be described as a teddy bear inher look...she is a rescue and not conformation correct. Though she is not a teddybear in her personality.
I'm all for a long coat teddybear, but would go thru a rescue if I wanted it over again/not support a breeder who breeds for that "look"


----------



## katieliz

kevlar55 both rescues referenced here are reputable. thank you for considering adoption versus purchase. the need is so great, and rescue dogs are just the best (imho, lolol).


----------



## Doc

Rescue over a breeder who has been involved with the German shepherd breed most of their life just because the dogs are large? You people crack me up. Besides, all you working dog folk tell us all the time how great your dogs are with their on/off switch. The trouble is, no body ever says where that switch is located so a new owner can cut it on and off.

Kevin, good luck in your search for the type of dog you are looking for. They are out there, trust me.


----------



## Kevlar55

Onyx'girl, I will spell Shepherd the correct way from now on. 
As for not teddy bears, I could pull push grab ears with our Shepherd and he would just lick my face. Now I'm not saying thats OK, but that was his temperament. The kids are out of the house now and I dint have to worry about anyone doing that to any dog we get, but it's nice to know that if my Grandson comes over he wont be afraid of it.

Kevin.


----------



## Doc

onyx'girl said:


> Okay, a teddy bear...large boned dog. Does this describe a GSD?
> I think when we were young, all the big dogs looked bigger than they actually were.
> I do have a large boned, long coat GSD that could be described as a teddy bear inher look...she is a rescue and not conformation correct. Though she is not a teddybear in her personality.
> I'm all for a long coat teddybear, but would go thru a rescue if I wanted it over again/not support a breeder who breeds for that "look"


whether one breeds for it or not, "that look" can be found in litters of Standard pups. That's why a breeder should understand genetics and be able to decifer a pedigree. "That look" is genetically controlled - not created by a breeder. :wild:


----------



## onyx'girl

And that look is propegated by some breeders who market for the "look"...don't take my post personally, Doc! As was posted a few or several times, you can find that look in a rescue and not support a breeder who is genetically controlling it.


> As for not teddy bears, I could pull push grab ears with our Shepherd and he would just lick my face. Now I'm not saying thats OK, but that was his temperament. The kids are out of the house now and I dint have to worry about anyone doing that to any dog we get, but it's nice to know that if my Grandson comes over he wont be afraid of it.


You can get that personality in all lines, as long as you go with a responsible breeder. But do you want strangers to have that same response of your dog? I wouldn't subject my dogs to ear pulls from anyone, no matter the age, unless it is a medical necessity.

Doc may have the perfect pup for you!! I wish you luck in your search of your shep_herd_!!!


----------



## PaddyD

SIGH
Another **** who wants an over-sized so-called GSD.
Yet another vote to ignore the standard and go for SIZE SIZE SIZE.
Why don't they just change the standard to ANYTHING THAT LOOKS LIKE A GSD.
Ask me if it ****** me off.


----------



## jennyp

Kevin, since you have a certain personality in mind I think your best bet would be to go to a rescue and adopt a mature dog rather than going to a breeder. I say this because, as many people have repeated, not all GSD's are cuddly teddy bears. I'm sure there are many many out there that are but if you get a puppy, it's kind of a crap shoot. You don't know what the personality will be until the dog matures. My male isn't affectionate. He's goofy and fun, but definitely not a cuddler. Had I been specifically looking for that type I would have ended up a bit disappointed. Since you know the type of personality you're looking for, visit some local shelters or rescues and spend some time with the dogs there. That way you can see if the dog will be a good fit for you and your family whether it's a GSD or something totally unexpected.


----------



## Doc

propegated or propagated? The breeder doesn't control genetics in a dog - it's already there. Some breeders know which genetics are carried by the sire and dam and which one are usually passed on to the offspring. Health and temperament should always be the top two goals for breeders. If you study the breed history and the dogs that were used to create this breed, you find that 2 of the 4 foundation lines were larger, calmer, slow to anger, slow to bite, thick spring of rib, and a wide rear-end. I would encourage Kevin to look for a breeder that breeds this type of dog. These dogs are 180 degrees from the smaller, high wired, quick to anger, quick to bite "yard" dogs that were housed with the wealthy to protect their belongings. Stephanitz's idea was to combine these lines to create the happy medium. What has happened over the past thirty years is the undoing of what Max wanted to create. Before you shoot me, just think about it. Why in Sam Hills did Max pick Horand as the number 1 German shepherd? Horand was made up of all 4 bloodlines that represented the best shepherd dogs in Germany. And if you read a bit more, Max went to the Krone Kennel - in Wurtember - to find farmers who bred dogs to work in the fields to breed with Horand. The dogs in Wurttemberg were the larger, slow to anger, slow to bite, dogs that worked all day to earn his keep. And when at home, it was loyal and protective of his family.


----------



## sitstay

Doc said:


> Rescue over a breeder who has been involved with the German shepherd breed most of their life just because the dogs are large?


Being involved with rescue and being a breeder involved with the breed are not mutually exclusive. How sad that breeder should have that mind set.
Sheilah


----------



## Emoore

Doc said:


> Rescue over a breeder who has been involved with the German shepherd breed most of their life just because the dogs are large? You people crack me up. .


Just me personally, but I always refer folks who "just want a laid-back house pet" to rescue first. I have nothing against breeders and if someone wants to spend the money for a nicely-bred pup I'm all for it, but there are a lot of laid-back house pets who need good homes and plenty of people don't want to house-break a fuzzygator.


----------



## Freestep

Doc said:


> The dogs in Wurttemberg were the larger, slow to anger, slow to bite, dogs that worked all day to earn his keep. And when at home, it was loyal and protective of his family.


So you are equating these dogs of yore with the oversize GSDs today, just because they are bigger?

It sounds like you're going a long way trying to justify breeding oversize GSDs, Doc. I'd almost think you have something you want to sell.

And to say that it's the standard itself that's ruined the breed? :rofl: That reminds me of a time when a friend and I were arguing about the correct pronounciation of a word. To settle it, we looked it up in the dictionary. When I proved him to be wrong, he looked at it, threw down the dictionary, and proceeded to explain to me that the dictionary was wrong because it was "The Oxford American English" dictionary, not an *English* English dictionary, and he had a whole conspiracy theory to go along with it. 

So anyway, tell me--what changes were made to the GSD standard, and by whom, when, and for what reason, in your opinion? And how, in your opinion, has it changed the GSD for the worse? 

To the OP: The old East German (DDR) and Czech lines are often big boned, and the longhaired ones tend to appear larger than they actually are. When you were a kid, you were smaller, so your old GSD probably seemed huge to you at the time. They haven't gotten smaller, you've just gotten bigger.


----------



## cliffson1

Doc...leave it alone....sit back and learn!!! HNY!!!


----------



## holland

what does HNY mean?


----------



## CassandGunnar

holland said:


> what does HNY mean?


I'm guessing Happy New Year.


----------



## holland

thanks Happy New Year


----------



## Doc

cliffson1 said:


> Doc...leave it alone....sit back and learn!!! HNY!!!


Cliff, I'm getting too old to try to explain the roots of our breed and the foundation of which it was built upon. I never knew how dumb I was before I came here!

One day we will sit and discuss together our wonderful breed that is now turned into crap.

As a side note, there are numerous references documenting the change of the Standard since it was first written. And if you can't read, just take a long look at the pictures of the "champion dogs" from the begining to now. :help:


----------



## wolfstraum

so Model T's were preferable to a nice shiny Corvette????

The breed evolved and was refined to meet the ideal that was envisioned when it was developed. 

I agree that the standard is interpreted much much too loosely and has been perverted all too often into dogs who are both physically and mentally impaired... but to intentionally ignore and diss the standard and attempt to justify breeding out of the standard is hypocritical..those breeders who breed this way should just be honest and say their market is pet owners looking for large dogs and be done with it.

to the OP - many many of the West German Showline dogs are large and substantial. Many end up over the height/weight standard....buying a pup from one of those breeders for a companion dog should meet your needs. If these are out of your budget, then rather than buy from a BYB or commercial puppy factory and support these, I do agree that many companion homes can find rescue dogs that need a home.

Lee


----------



## ksotto333

Since this thread has been already hijacked..
"You introduce dogs that are not part of the problem. Dogs that have not contributed to the genetic mess we are in today. And yes that may mean breeding a white or liver or a blue. It may mean going to the lowest depths of breeders (the dreaded BYB) and captilizing on the genetics that have been produciing healthy dogs for generations. There are wonderful German shepherds that have never seen an AKC show-ring or a participated in a sporting event. There are breeders producing healthy German shepherds that have never seen or dealt with SIBO, EPI, or all the other health issues we see in today's dogs. There are breeders that have been producing well balanced German shepherds from sires and dams that are not titled." posted by Doc..
and then this ..
"The German Shepherd Dog has some major health problems, ranging from hip dysplasia, to elbow dysplasia, and some minor concerns such as Panosteitis, von Willebrand's Disease, progressive posterior paresis, skin allergies, malignant neoplasms, pannus cataract, dreaded gastric torsion, perianal fistulas, cardiomyopathy and occasionally seen Pancreatic enzyme insufficiency."http://www.dogbiz.com/dogs-grp7/germ-shep/german-shepherd-health-issues.html..
Although we purchased our GSD from what we considered a good breeder, after reading so much on this board I have come to realize that many on this forum would probably consider her a BYB. Her dogs (at least my dog's parents)aren't titled but there are many titles in the their pedigrees, and OFA's done. She has been breeding pups for over 30 years, and explained to us what she was looking for when deciding her breeding pairs. It made sense and our puppy has been what she told us she would be(so far). All 10 of her dogs were healthy & confident. They greeted us, and then moved on. I have been wondering about the many health issues that so many dogs seem to suffer from and the change in the look, especially the slanted or sloping back.


----------



## Wolfgeist

You should look into getting a Shiloh Shepherd if you are that concerned about size.


----------



## Freestep

Doc said:


> As a side note, there are numerous references documenting the change of the Standard since it was first written.


So you say! So, where are these references, and what do they say, and who are they attributed to? Since you are clearly an expert on the history of the GSD, I'd be really interested to learn from you! 

Maybe you missed my question, so I'll ask it again: What changes were made to the GSD standard, and by whom, when, and for what reason, in your opinion? And how, in your opinion, has it changed the GSD for the worse?


----------



## Doc

Freestep said:


> So you say! So, where are these references, and what do they say, and who are they attributed to? Since you are clearly an expert on the history of the GSD, I'd be really interested to learn from you!
> 
> Maybe you missed my question, so I'll ask it again: What changes were made to the GSD standard, and by whom, when, and for what reason, in your opinion? And how, in your opinion, has it changed the GSD for the worse?


You wouldn't believe me if I told you. Find a copy of the original Standard, then read the next 3 rewrites of the Standard. After reading them, look at pictures of the dogs during the following years after a "new" Standard was accepted.

I have nothing against the standard - it was created for the show-line world and describes the ideal German shepherds. I have problems with breeders who talk the Standard but have no concept of what a German shepherd was in the US during the 60s and 70s - the golden age of the German shepherd in the US or how/why the breed was created. If you listen to some breeders, they could care less about the historical aspects of the breed - all they want is the lastest and greatest version, which can not measure up to the dogs from years past.

If you are truely interested in the changes in the Standard, I would encourage you to read all the versions - starting with Stephanitz's original. And while you are at it, maybe some reading and searching the foundational roots of the breeders and dogs that were instrumental in the creation of the German shepherd dog.


----------



## msvette2u

Even back then it was a medium sized dog, not a 100lb. + beast. 

United Schutzhund Clubs of America - Breed Standard

**I guess I am confused a bit. Even the AKC standard does not call for the extreme angulation of the hind leg you are seeing more of these days. 
http://www.akc.org/breeds/german_shepherd_dog/

http://www.gsdca.org/Noframes/standard/IllStan1.htm And nowhere in the standard, even the original standard, does it say dogs should be 29-30" at the shoulder and weigh over 100lbs.

Anyone breeding for dogs those sizes is *not *breeding "dogs of old", they are breeding way outside any standard that exists. 

Doc I'm willing to view a standard, if you can find one (other than a Shiloh) that says a dog ought to be anything over 26" at the shoulder and weigh over 100lbs.


----------



## Lucy Dog

Doc said:


> You wouldn't believe me if I told you. Find a copy of the original Standard, then read the next 3 rewrites of the Standard. After reading them, look at pictures of the dogs during the following years after a "new" Standard was accepted.
> 
> I have nothing against the standard - it was created for the show-line world and describes the ideal German shepherds. I have problems with breeders who talk the Standard but have no concept of what a German shepherd was in the US during the 60s and 70s - the golden age of the German shepherd in the US or how/why the breed was created. If you listen to some breeders, they could care less about the historical aspects of the breed - all they want is the lastest and greatest version, which can not measure up to the dogs from years past.
> 
> If you are truely interested in the changes in the Standard, I would encourage you to read all the versions - starting with Stephanitz's original. And while you are at it, maybe some reading and searching the foundational roots of the breeders and dogs that were instrumental in the creation of the German shepherd dog.


Or you could just answer the specific question instead of a generic answer telling people to read a book, look at some pictures, and bash the show world....

Maybe some of us young'uns could learn from you old folk.


----------



## robinhuerta

I'm not going to get in a debate of "standard vs non standard" and I have never been one to "throw the baby out with the bathwater"......besides, it is and always will be a dead horse conversation....
BUT...the standard for "any" breed, is not created for the *show/conformation* people......it is created as a guide line for the specific breed in regards to *all* aspects of a breed. *structure*, only being a part of the equation......

JMO


----------



## PaddyD

robinhuerta said:


> I'm not going to get in a debate of "standard vs non standard" and I have never been one to "throw the baby out with the bathwater"......besides, it is and always will be a dead horse conversation....
> BUT...the standard for "any" breed, is not created for the *show/conformation* people......it is created as *a guide line for the specific breed in regards to *all* aspects of a breed.* *structure*, only being a part of the equation......
> 
> JMO


I like to think that any aspect of a GSD that is outside the 'guideline' is a mistake (pronounced OOOooops).
If the GSD is over-size, that is a mistake.
If the temperament is overly shy or aggressive, that is a mistake.
If the proportion is not 8.5 - 10, that is a mistake.
If the head does not fit the guideline, that is a mistake.
And the biggest mistake of all is to breed a GSD that possesses any aspects that are outside the guidelines (AKA standard).
JMVHO


----------



## robinhuerta

Since there is nothing in life that is absolute perfection.....we will all have and make mistakes.
*One person's mistake is another person's deliberate*......we all have our "ideals" on what is correct...


----------



## Doc

If the truth be know, over the Standard dogs enter shows all the time - just ask some of the show folks on this forum. A friend of mine entered a female at 27 inches - the judge measured and said "looks like a good 24 to me". The Standard is a guide, a blueprint. Of course the Standard doesn't address health issues such as SIBO, EPI, DM, hearts, etc. 

Breed and promote the German shepherd according to the Standard. It's all good to me. Bring those Standard roached backed, rump draggers to the party. And don't forget those German shepherds that can hardly walk too - but make sure they are within the Standard.

I'm done. Happy New Year.


----------



## Lucy Dog

That's weird... I must have missed the part of the standard that calls for a roached back and a dragging rump that can hardly walk.

Doc, I think you of all people know breeders do what they want with this breed by manipulating the standard for what people want in terms of aesthetics. Some show breeders might be breeding for certain angulation while others might be breeding for a large "old fashioned" dog like the "good old days". What makes one worse than the other?


----------



## msvette2u

I don't get what you're saying. You claimed that the "original" standard is proof that GSDs used to be humongous. Or you call them "old fashioned" yet can show us no standard that says they were humongous. The fact is, none of the standards ever stated they were to be over 100lbs. and over 28" at the shoulder.


----------



## msvette2u

Lucy Dog said:


> That's weird... *I must have missed the part of the standard that calls for a roached back and a dragging rump that can hardly walk.*
> 
> Doc, I think you of all people know breeders do what they want with this breed by manipulating the standard for what people want in terms of aesthetics. Some show breeders might be breeding for certain angulation while others might be breeding for a large "old fashioned" dog like the "good old days". What makes one worse than the other?


And none of the standards call for the opposite, the 100lb + monstrosities that some people call "old fashioned". Old Fashioned _what_? St. Bernards??


----------



## Lucy Dog

msvette2u said:


> And none of the standards call for the opposite, the 100lb + monstrosities that some people call "old fashioned". Old Fashioned _what_? St. Bernards??


I think his reasoning is that he doesn't give a what the standard says.


----------



## lrodptl

Kevlar55 said:


> OK, maybe I should have said "Large boned"? I grew up with what seamed then like giant German Shepard's. I see them now and they look smaller and thinner. I don't need one for protection, I want a big dog that will spend a lot of time outside with my wife and I. Just a big teddy bear like the ones I grew up with. I was looking at the Southeast German Shepard rescue and saw some beautiful dogs, and was hoping to find something a little closer.
> 
> Thanks, Kevin.


Stepped in **** on your third post!


----------



## msvette2u

Lucy Dog said:


> I think his reasoning is that he doesn't give a what the standard says.


Pages ago he claimed that the standard was re-written or revised to include the malformed dogs of today(???). 
I am asking for an original standard that shows 100lb.+ dogs since he feels that the only legit standard was one that includes "old fashioned" dogs that are closer to Shilohs. 

At least I think that's what he said. I'm a bit slow on the uptake at times


----------



## Whiteshepherds

This on here on the forum, but I can't get the link to work right. Copied and pasted from 10-14-2009:

The original American breed standard for the German Shepherd dog was codified in 1929 and the text of that standard is presented in Fred Lanting's book "The Total German Shepherd dog" along with the changes and modifications made in 1943, 1958, and 1978. The original standard for the breed written by Captain von Stephanitz in 1922 and translated to English and published in America in 1925 appears in chapter 4 of his work, 'The German Shepherd Dog in Word and Picture' with photographs, diagrams and skeletons to illustrate.

Dogs with over-long thighs of the sort so common among German 'High-line' dogs today were castigated by Stephanitz as 'over-built' and 'weak' and 'faulty'. All diagrams and photographs and skeletons given as examples of 'correct' conformation show dogs walking on their hind feet and only their hind feet, with metatarsal bones perpendicular to the ground. Over-angulated hocks of the sort so popular in American showlines today, Stephanitz denigrates, and the well-known in his time (1940-1960) American judge Milo Deinlinger agrees with him. Stephanitz merely says that dogs that are thus made cease to correspond to the racial type. He says that though they may look fine, they are no longer Shepherd dogs because the suitability for use is absent from their body build.

Deinlinger is more specific. He describes the over-angulated hock as resulting in weakness. He describes the correct conformation of the hind leg as the leg dropping 'vertically' from the hock to the foot. According to him, this formation gives the dog the maximum of leverage and propulsive power. He says it is of supreme importance. "The craze for excessive angulation. . . weakens the hock joint, an added tension upon the muscles." He adds that "They are spectacular and may fool the uninitiated, but they exemplify weakness rather than strength." From the Complete German Shepherd by Milo G Denlinger, c1952. 

Stephanitz states (1925) that the dog should be shown 'standing easily and naturally, never over-stretched nor unnaturally placed in a special position'. He decrees that the hind legs should fall naturally directly beneath the hindquarters and provide support for the body in a 'free and natural' condition. Denlinger, in 1952, concurs--'The dog should be permitted to stand normally during its examination.' 'The efforts on the part of some exhibitors to stretch the hindquarters. . . as far back as possible deceives nobody. Many judges rightly resent this artificial posing of the dog and in the effort to examine the dog in his normal position ask that the handler break the pose by moving the dog a step or two.' 

As for size, Stephanitz himself chose at the very least, 2 Siegers of at least 27 inches in height between 1910 and 1920 and uses Jung Tell of the Kriminalpolizei (Champion of Holland in 1913), another large dog, in a photograph as an example of a correct dog. The Boll lines, the Kriminalpolizei, and Secretainerie lines were all tall, large dogs, well known and well regarded in their time. In the early twenties, with dogs like Nores of the Kriminalpolizei (29 inches) being so heavily used, (180 litters were recorded from Nores alone) Stephanitz deliberately chose Klodo of Boxberg, a small, (24 inches) but very correct dog as Seiger in 1925, knowing that people would turn to him and that this would inevitably bring the dogs back to middle ground. Choosing the Klodo son Utz vom Haus Schutting in 1929 to follow merely solidified that modification. Stephanitz knew that he could depend upon people breeding heavily to whatever dog he chose as Sieger, and he was right, they did, but there is no doubt that historically, the early breeders of the German Shepherd preferred dogs of larger size to those of smaller stature. Early American breeders were no different, preferring dogs of larger size over those of smaller stature. 

The breed standard is not holy writ. It has been written and re-written through the years by influential show breeders who had no regard for temperament or working ability and according to whatever the fashion in dogs was in force at the time. It has been and is open to interpretation by judges and breeders whose only interest is in dog shows. 

Given Stephanitz' diagrams and photographs and skeletons, he would be appalled by the toplines of today. He considered roach backs seriously faulty and sloping backs completely improper and unfit for any real work. Stephanitz' over-arching concern was always that the dog be conformed in a manner to fit him for work, firstly as a herding dog and secondly as what he called an 'ambulance' dog and police dog. If you want a dog to do actual work in the real world it is perhaps beneficial to go back to the old arbiters of the breed, to Stephanitz and to others both before and after him who actually worked their dogs, for ideas as to how you want your dog to look. If, of course, you are only interested in a show animal, then by all means, choose your dog for his red and black color, roached back, grotesquely elongated thigh, or the Am-line black and gold show dog with their sloping back and severely over-angulated hock. A good working structure in a dog is not going to get a look in the show ring any more than a show ring dog will be effective on the job in the real world (as opposed to the artificial world of 'titles'). 

Fortunately for those of us still working dogs, the German Shepherd breed has expanded to include a wide variety of types of dogs, German and American show dogs, Schutzhund dogs, and the rare old-fashioned dogs who still do real work in the real world. It also includes dogs who are conglomerations of all these types. Some of these mixed type dogs have a structure that comes together pleasingly and looks very attractive. Some of them do not. They are all 'real' German Shepherd dogs and they all suit somebody. khawk 
__________________


----------



## Doc

History will tell you that after 1932, any German shepherd males that were over the Standard of that time, coulld not be registered in the SV Stud book. And yes, even Max upped his Standard height from his original. Therefore, any shepherds that were over the standard were marginalized.  Larger dogs were around and used for breeding working dogs by many people - mainly the farmers of Wurtemberg. And Max went to these breedrs often. I'm not making this up, its all recorded in the history of the breed. So in order to reduce the size of the German shepherd due to the fact that max wasn't in favor of the taller animals, he named the champion (Boxberg) because everyone would want to breed to the champion. Stephanitz also went outside of the breeding circles when he noticed the dogs were not balanced in all aspects. He often went back to the Swabian/Wurtemberg dogs to bring back the herding aspects and the search and rescue abilities of the German shepherd. Without such, the German shepherd would not be the dog Max wanted. Size was just one minor aspect of this breed - even in the begining. Thank goodness some breeders "do not throw out the baby with the bath water".
I will be happy to sign any copies of my book once they are printed and published. roflmao


----------



## msvette2u

> 2 Siegers of at least 27 inches in height between 1910 and 1920





> Stephanitz deliberately chose Klodo of Boxberg, a small, (24 inches) but very correct dog as Seiger in 1925


Regardless of whatever (oversized) stud was being used at that time, he again changed, rather quickly, to the smaller dog to bring the dog back to "middle ground". Unless you were alive in 1910, you never saw huge dogs that people called "standard".

Neither did the OP. And again, it's annoying to have people running around claiming that huge GSDs are "old fashioned" because they are simply not. They are human fashioned, but not "old fashioned".


----------



## JakodaCD OA

Doc you crack me up )) Can I keep the pen?


----------



## Doc

msvette2u said:


> I don't get what you're saying. You claimed that the "original" standard is proof that GSDs used to be humongous. Or you call them "old fashioned" yet can show us no standard that says they were humongous. The fact is, none of the standards ever stated they were to be over 100lbs. and over 28" at the shoulder.


If the Standard were 100 pounds and 28", then my dogs are not over-sized. And why can't the Standard include 28" dogs? Horand was 24.5" - not 26" You could expand the genetic base if you could include a broader range of animals.


----------



## Lucy Dog

Breeding for an extremely angulated dog is just as bad as breeding for an extreme size. JMHO



Doc said:


> If the Standard were 100 pounds and 28", then my dogs are not over-sized. And why can't the Standard include 28" dogs? Horand was 24.5" - not 26" You could expand the genetic base if you could include a broader range of animals.


You can expand the genetic base if you include other breeds too. Where is the line drawn?


----------



## msvette2u

The standard doesn't say that...and breeders who breed outside the standard and call them "old fashioned" are doing the breed a disservice, not to mention their customers.
It's deception based on ignorance and that's my problem with this practice. People think they are getting a 'more correct' dog, when in fact they are not. There is nothing honorable or respectable about that. 
You have some guy sitting here wanting a "huge" dog you can pull on it's ears. We're talking a Newfoundland, not a GSD. But it has to be marked like a GSD. 
And people are willing to take this guy's money and sell him a mutant GSD that's nothing like what the breed was meant to be.

On a Pit bull forum this type discussion would occur with people wanting 100lb. "bully" type "pit bulls" and the consensus seemed to be, get your 100lb. "American Bully", but don't call it a pit bull because pit bulls were never meant to be bloated up 100lb. caricatures that can barely breathe. They too are a working dog, designed to be a very tough, lithe dog who can _work._ 100lb. mutants cannot work like the breed was meant to. 

100+lb. mutant GSDs could not herd for very long, or they'd compromise their health.
If it's a working dog, it ought to be able to work. Herding is work.


----------



## Doc

JakodaCD OA said:


> Doc you crack me up )) Can I keep the pen?


Just for you, a free copy, the pen AND a picture of me with a big old-fashion German shepherds.


----------



## wolfstraum

Form follows function....and function dictates soundness. Use will wear and tear on an oversize dog more than on a mid sized. Standard sized dogs are going to be more agile and better able to perform various tasks and sports than larger....how many Great Danes, Mastiffs or St Bernards do you see doing Agility, flyball, and schutzhund? I have bred dogs who are dual titled in AKC and Schutzhund - dogs who do agility and flyball and are physically sound. A bigger heavier dog is at a higher risk for joint damage - just like some of these 18 hand warmbloods and TBxdraft cross horses - they are orthopedic nightmares and a vets best customer.

Lee


----------



## Franksmom

I just dont' understand why "oversized" is so much of a fault, and the angulation that I see in the show line dogs or the over the top aggression in working lines is not. 
Breeders should breed for health and temperament first, and I do know "old fashioned breeders that do. 
The GSD is an all around dog, one dog may not be able to do everything, but in the breed as a whole you should be able to find different dogs that can do so many different things. 
Too many times I feel like with the tug of war between the show lines and the working lines. We are loosing a part of the GSD the good service (seeing eye) dog, family farm dog that people did grow up with a Great dog. That part of the breed that makes it an all around dog not a dog to be banned by insurance companies, because of the reputation that the breed now has.


----------



## Doc

Gosh, all of you are getting a lot history for free today! I can not claim fame to the term "old-fashion" although I have been accused of arguing with Stephanitz in 1899. The term "old-fashion" has often been used by writers when refering to the German shepherd dogs BEFORE Boxberg was GIVEN the title the first time. Yes, Max called all the judges into a conference a few days before the trial to "discuss" who would be named Champion. And no, I wasn't in that meeting. Boxberg was probably the dreaded blue that is taboo now and had one yellow eye (another indication that he was a blue). But, he was within the height that Max wanted. And of course, the rest is history. All this clearly illustrates that the Standard for the German shepherd is an amorphus target.


----------



## msvette2u

That's no justification for breeding so far outside the standard.

Breeding closer to the standard doesn't make a bad temperament. It _is_ possible to pay attention to the whole package.


----------



## Doc

A 100 pound (10 pounds over the Standard) 28" male (2 inches over the Standard) with great health and temperament vs. a Standard male with nerves of wet noodles, hock walker that can't stand up straight with EPI and SIBO and a Title? You pick who you want to breed to with?


----------



## Lucy Dog

Doc said:


> A 100 pound (10 pounds over the Standard) 28" male (2 inches over the Standard) with great health and temperament vs. a Standard male with nerves of wet noodles, hock walker that can't stand up straight with EPI and SIBO and a Title? You pick who you want to breed to with?


Neither. Why do you have to breed either? 

Which dog would I rather own? Definitely the dog with health and temperament if it were one of the other.


----------



## msvette2u

Lucy Dog said:


> Neither. *Why do you have to breed either? *
> 
> Which dog would I rather own? Definitely the dog with health and temperament if it were one of the other.


Exactly. What happened to paying attention to the _whole package_??
Robin on here (huerta hof) seems to be able to. Amazing that with all the horrible tempered "skinny" GSDs out there, some folks are actually able to breed dogs who aren't mutant monsters and who have great temperaments, _and_ can work!
Amazing!


----------



## robinhuerta

Oh boy..I can't believe that I'm putting myself in this thread....*which BTW is completely become off topic*.
I would *never* omit a dog from breeding from or to...simply because it is *over the standard in size & weight*.....*never*.
If a dog brings *everything* to the table that *I need & want*....something as simple as "size" will not stop me from using the dog.
There are many excellent dogs that can be "larger OR smaller" than what the standard dictates as "desired" or acceptable....omitting such dogs with blind prejudice can be detrimental to the breed also.
_*Breeding should not be and is not so simple....as just putting two dogs together, because they theoretically "fit" the written standard....*...there are many other variables that should be considered...The *OVERALL* Standard being one._
Again...JMO


----------



## msvette2u

I'd never expect a good breeder to not use one over the standard, or even under...but that's a different story than breeding for 150lb. dogs and calling them "old style" or "old fashioned" and making thousands per dog because they are "so rare".


----------



## onyx'girl

Doc said:


> A 100 pound (10 pounds over the Standard) 28" male (2 inches over the Standard) with great health and temperament vs. a Standard male with nerves of wet noodles, hock walker that can't stand up straight with EPI and SIBO and a Title? You pick who you want to breed to with?


Makes no sense... There are plenty of stud dogs out there.


----------



## Dainerra

I think that people are arguing two VERY different points here.
On one side, Doc is saying that a good dog shouldn't be excluded just because he is over the standard. He also prefers a larger dog, so maybe his dogs do run towards the upper end of that or above. But, that is just one part of his equation. He breeds dogs that fit HIS interpretation of the standard, which is what every breeder does.

On the other side, you have people who are breeding for "large" or "Old-fashioned" or whatever buzzword is popular at the moment. I don't for a second believe that Doc is defending those breeders. For them, the only criteria is that the dog be big. They are simply fad breeders who want to supply a market.

I think we all need to see that we're all on the same side here. Just as you can't make "large" the only breeding requirement, you can't make "standard-size" the only requirement either. As Robin said earlier, there is no reason to throw the baby out with the bath water.


----------



## doggiedad

funny, funny, funny.



Lucy Dog said:


> What do you mean large GSD breeders?
> 
> 
> 
> Emoore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Or a breeder who is a very large person?
Click to expand...


----------



## msvette2u

Dainerra said:


> I think that people are arguing two VERY different points here.
> On one side, Doc is saying that a good dog shouldn't be excluded just because he is over the standard. He also prefers a larger dog, so maybe his dogs do run towards the upper end of that or above. But, that is just one part of his equation. He breeds dogs that fit HIS interpretation of the standard, which is what every breeder does.
> 
> On the other side, you have people who are breeding for "large" or "Old-fashioned" or whatever buzzword is popular at the moment. I don't for a second believe that Doc is defending those breeders. For them, the only criteria is that the dog be big. They are simply fad breeders who want to supply a market.
> 
> I think we all need to see that we're all on the same side here. Just as you can't make "large" the only breeding requirement, you can't make "standard-size" the only requirement either. As Robin said earlier, there is no reason to throw the baby out with the bath water.


I don't think anyone was saying, or even meant, that size ought to be the _only_ breeding requirement.
But I don't get why people think regular sized GSDs are nervy messes who shouldn't be bred regardless. Where is that mentality coming from?

And yes I do think Doc is defending breeding oversize "slow" dogs. At least I haven't seen him say it's a bad idea. I guess big furry drooling idiot dogs are preferable to working or even show lines :shrug:


----------



## onyx'girl

> And yes I do think Doc is defending breeding oversize "slow" dogs. At least I haven't seen him say it's a bad idea.


There _is_ a market for that.


----------



## Lucy Dog

Dainerra said:


> I don't for a second believe that Doc is defending those breeders. For them, the only criteria is that the dog be big. They are simply fad breeders who want to supply a market.


Historian or not, that's exactly what he's breeding for.


----------



## Doc

For the record, I have never in my life seen a 150 German shepherd or bred one that weighs that much.
My males are usually 100 pounds or less and 28" or less at the shoulder. I'm not sure what "slow" has to do with anything. Slower to anger, slower to bite, yes - it's in their genetics. My dogs would be like the old German shepherd Service Dog. Like the ones from the Blaisenberg kennel and Fortunate Fields. Of course, those types dogs are not in vogue anymore so I wouldn't expect people to appreciate them.

And heaven forbid I sell German shepherds to folks who want one. I encourage potential buyers to come for a visit; see the dogs; make sure they ae comfortable with what they see. I spend hours talking to them. And as far as I know, I have never talked to any of you who seem to know exactly what I breed and why I sell my dogs. 

I can't be sorry for my success. I am honest and am good at what I do.


----------



## Franksmom

msvette2u said:


> I don't think anyone was saying, or even meant, that size ought to be the _only_ breeding requirement.
> But I don't get why people think regular sized GSDs are nervy messes who shouldn't be bred regardless. Where is that mentality coming from?
> 
> And yes I do think Doc is defending breeding oversize "slow" dogs. At least I haven't seen him say it's a bad idea. I guess big furry drooling idiot dogs are preferable to working or even show lines :shrug:


I would not say all reg. sized GSD's are a nervy mess, but I would also not say that just because a dog is oversized it's a slow, drooling, idiot either.


----------



## Dainerra

onyx'girl said:


> Makes no sense... There are plenty of stud dogs out there.


But none of those dogs are perfect either, are they? 

And every breeder (and owner) has a slightly different visual interpretation of the standard. After all, it's just words. Look at all the posts in the "correct head" thread. There are as many different opinions of what is "correct" as there are posters sometimes. Look at the critiques in that section. Again, many different opinions. 

As long as the focus of the breeder is on the total dog, then I have no problem if their dogs are towards the larger size or over. I don't care if their dogs are show or working. Black, white, or sable.


----------



## Lucy Dog

Doc said:


> For the record, I have never in my life seen a 150 German shepherd or bred one that weighs that much.


What about over 120 pounds? Ever seen or bred one that big?


----------



## Dainerra

Lucy Dog said:


> Historian or not, that's exactly what he's breeding for.


I have never seen him say that is his only reason for choosing a dog? I HAVE seen him defend using a larger dog that has other good qualities to contribute to the litter. To me, those are two completely opposite things.


----------



## Lucy Dog

Dainerra said:


> I have never seen him say that is his only reason for choosing a dog? I HAVE seen him defend using a larger dog that has other good qualities to contribute to the litter. To me, those are two completely opposite things.


Ok, let me change that. I think breeding and marketing to the oversized dog market is exactly what he's breeding for. 

He may breed for health (ofa's), but look back a page or two at Lee's (wolfstraum) post regarding what size does to health. If that's breeding for health, what kind of health?

And for temperament, what kind of temperament? A low drive dog... sure that temperament. Exactly what the german shepherd should be... a low drive couch potato dog.



Doc said:


> I can't be sorry for my success. I am honest and am good at what I do.


What exactly are you equating success with? The amount of money you make and puppies you sell?


----------



## onyx'girl

Dainerra said:


> But none of those dogs are perfect either, are they?
> 
> And every breeder (and owner) has a slightly different visual interpretation of the standard. After all, it's just words. Look at all the posts in the "correct head" thread. There are as many different opinions of what is "correct" as there are posters sometimes. Look at the critiques in that section. Again, many different opinions.
> 
> As long as the focus of the breeder is on the total dog, then I have no problem if their dogs are towards the larger size or over. I don't care if their dogs are show or working. Black, white, or sable.


Why would someone choose between the two Doc suggested when there are plenty of good studs out there??
I don't care if they are larger either, but don't breed for it!! 
I have two dogs that are structurally larger than the standard, the breeders didn't set out to breed for size. And are not marketing weight with the description of their dogs. When I see a website that stresses the weight(usually over standard) then that tells me they think it is a great asset. Really??
I'm not sure how this thread turned into Doclovefest....anytime a thread suggesting "large" or "Old-Fashioned" pops up, so does Doc! Too bad he doesn't post in the training threads more often.


----------



## msvette2u

Lucy Dog said:


> Exactly what the german shepherd should be... a low drive couch potato dog.



And what thread of this nature would be complete with out a "Get a Newfoundland, then!" 



Sigh.


----------



## Doc

onyx'girl said:


> There _is_ a market for that.


And there is a market for Seeing Eye Dogs, Diabetic Alert Dogs, Service Dogs, and the list goes on and on.

I've given dogs to guide schools and sent one to a family where the child was autistic. I was told by the mother that when the dog arrived, it went straight to the child and sat at his feet. It was the first time in the childs life that a bond was established. So tell me all the bad stuff you think you know about me and my dogs - the proof is in the pudding.


----------



## Lucy Dog

msvette2u said:


> And what thread of this nature would be complete with out a "Get a Newfoundland, then!"
> 
> 
> 
> Sigh.


Isn't this thread fun... we can go in circles for days?! I think i've had enough though... i've got other things to do tonight and it's about time to leave.

Doc, all ... it's been fun. Happy New Year all.



onyx'girl said:


> I'm not sure how this thread turned into Doclovefest....anytime a thread suggesting "large" or "Old-Fashioned" pops up, so does Doc! Too bad he doesn't post in the training threads more often.


Yeah... i noticed that too! Weird. :thinking:


----------



## Doc

Lucy Dog said:


> What about over 120 pounds? Ever seen or bred one that big?


No, never bred a 120 pound dog. I'm not sure I've seen one at 120 in real life. I have read or been told by other breeders about German shepherds that size.

I've had 75-80 pound females and 100 pound males. That's about as over-sized as I get.


----------



## onyx'girl

Doc said:


> No, never bred a 120 pound dog. I'm not sure I've seen one at 120 in real life. I have read or been told by other breeders about German shepherds that size.
> 
> I've had 75-80 pound females and 100 pound males. That's about as over-sized as I get.


So Apollo and Judah won't be used as studs in your program? Apollo is gorgeous by the way!


----------



## msvette2u

So sad when breeders poo-pooh the standards because they feel _those_ dogs are the ones with problems.



> Judah is over 120 pounds


Wow. Well, that says about all I need to know.


I'm with you, Paul, though. Better things to do tonight! Happy new Year, All!


----------



## damaya

The OP was long gone by the 3rd page of this long drawn out battle of "experts and opinions". You guys have any idea what this looks like from the outside looking in? Somebody should have created another thread to take this to pages ago. He even tried to correct his description to more clearly get his question across. 
This has to be the ultimate hijack.


----------



## Doc

onyx'girl said:


> So Apollo and Judah won't be used as studs in your program? Apollo is gorgeous by the way!


"Judah is owned by Christy Forrest in California"; therefore he is not in my kennel and I'm not going to CA and find him.

Apollo is a great example of a German shepherd - he was 93 pounds at his last weigh in at the vets. I would use Apollo as a stud if the stars line up. Will have to discuss the possiblity with his owner.

PS I can feel the love from all my fans!


----------



## Jessiewessie99

My great grandmother passed away at 101 years old. She loved GSDs and I asked her if GSDs in her time(she lived in the 20's, 30's,40's, 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's and in the 00's) were large like some breeders put, she said no, but some were bulkier like DDR type, but not huge 100lb+ like Newfoundlands.


----------



## Emoore

In this thread: straw man fights straw man. Nobody wins.


----------



## PaddyD

damaya said:


> The OP was long gone by the 3rd page of this long drawn out battle of "experts and opinions". You guys have any idea what this looks like from the outside looking in? Somebody should have created another thread to take this to pages ago. He even tried to correct his description to more clearly get his question across.
> *This has to be the ultimate hijack.*


Ain't THAT the truth.


----------



## JakodaCD OA

really this is the ultimate hijack

Ya know, if the guy wants a BIG German Shepherd who cares? I think listing the pro's and cons can be educational for someone, but gosh, to basically tell the guy "if the dog you get isn't within standard you will be burned at the stake" is ridiculous.

And I would DEFINATELY take a 100 lb balanced/sound dog over a within standard nerve bag any ole day. 

One thing I'd like to point out, and maybe I missed it somewhere, but did the OP give HIS description of what a BIG gsd IS to him? I don't see him mention weight, nor mention height..

My 75#/ 26" female may be considered BIG by him..who knows?? 

I rather don't blame the OP for not posting, god forbid he picks the 'wrong' dog..

TO THE OP:
Good luck in your search, I think you said you weren't ruling out rescue,,hope you find what your looking for.. Maybe pm DOC, since everyone thinks he has these giant german shepherds running around (Maybe you'll even get a free book out of him


----------



## cliffson1

Good Post Diane, I agree with you....lotta breeding experts that have never bred a litter, lotta training experts that have never trained a dog, lotta historians that maybe have read two books and seen GS in the club they train.....crazy!!!!!!


----------



## FredD

JakodaCD OA said:


> really this is the ultimate hijack
> 
> Ya know, if the guy wants a BIG German Shepherd who cares? I think listing the pro's and cons can be educational for someone, but gosh, to basically tell the guy "if the dog you get isn't within standard you will be burned at the stake" is ridiculous.
> 
> And I would DEFINATELY take a 100 lb balanced/sound dog over a within standard nerve bag any ole day.
> 
> One thing I'd like to point out, and maybe I missed it somewhere, but did the OP give HIS description of what a BIG gsd IS to him? I don't see him mention weight, nor mention height..
> 
> My 75#/ 26" female may be considered BIG by him..who knows??
> 
> I rather don't blame the OP for not posting, god forbid he picks the 'wrong' dog..
> 
> TO THE OP:
> Good luck in your search, I think you said you weren't ruling out rescue,,hope you find what your looking for.. Maybe pm DOC, since everyone thinks he has these giant german shepherds running around (Maybe you'll even get a free book out of him


:thumbup:


----------



## Doc

Happy New Year to all; and may all your days be circus days ...

Books for sell on your way out.


----------



## NarysDad

IMO I have seen members come here and ask questions and it becomes like a 3 ring circus full of opinions and the member leaves with no answers at all. I have seen so many comments on this thread and think that the original poster has been long gone maybe thinking he/she was sorry for even asking questions and hoping to find out answers to what they were looking for. Did I see his questions get answered? Probably not. It just amazes me to see all these experts here in areas that one would think that one has no business even answering. But I guess this is what makes it so fun to come here and read


----------



## msvette2u

> And I would DEFINATELY take a 100 lb balanced/sound dog over a within standard nerve bag any ole day.


So basically all GSDs who are within the standard are nervous wrecks? That's what I keep hearing! The bigger the better, because then they are slow-witted, slow-to-anger, slow-to-bite dogs? Big furry sloths, that is?

I never knew!


----------



## holland

If anyone is having an H litter Hijack would be a great name-maybe the OP will get a dog from an H litter then this thread won't be a total loss


----------



## Dainerra

msvette2u said:


> So basically all GSDs who are within the standard are nervous wrecks? That's what I keep hearing! The bigger the better, because then they are slow-witted, slow-to-anger, slow-to-bite dogs? Big furry sloths, that is?
> 
> I never knew!


are all over-standard dogs slow-witted? No. And not all "in standard" dogs are nervous wrecks.
I do know that there was unhappiness when the head of the SV was super-strict on the height standard and many people felt that excellent dogs were being passed over in favor of lesser dogs who were a certain height. (Don't ask for names right now, brain is still a little fuzzy today)

But, as I said before and others have said here, the height/weight is only one aspect of the dog. Well, 2 if you want to be technical. Is it possible that a dog be so big that it can't work? Absolutely! Is it possible that a dog that is from a whole line of "in standard" dogs grow a little over-sized and still be a great dog and an asset to the breed? Absolutely!

No dog is perfect. They are living beings, afterall. You weigh each aspect of the dog and decide that way. For some dogs, being over-sized is just the final straw to say "no" to breeding. In others, the good factors will outweigh the size and the dog SHOULD be used. 

Of course, then you have the other side of this. If you are constantly breeding dogs at the lower end of the standard (to be sure you never go over-size!), how long before you start getting dogs that are SMALLER than the standard? Or should we just pick an arbitrary number in the middle and say that only dogs of THAT height/weight should be bred?


----------



## msvette2u

One should never disregard temperament...I've said maybe 5 x in this thread, why not look at the whole package? People in this thread are tending to generalize about smaller (standard) sized dogs, and I don't even understand that other than as justification for breeding way over the standards. And it's false, anyway. I can't imagine _every_ dog breed to be in the standard is a wreck, emotionally or mentally.


----------



## Dainerra

but I don't think that anyone is really saying that? Being a little overly-dramatic maybe. But that is what they are saying, *look at the total package.*
The "no over-standard" crowd are saying 'nope. absolutely never ever ever breed a dog that is over-size.' 

The rest of us are saying, look at the total package. Don't toss out a good dog just because it might be a little larger than standard. Weigh the pros and cons of each dog individually and decide if the size is a deal breaker.


----------



## onyx'girl

& what others are saying is that breeders who breed for the larger size is whats at issue. 
Not so much breeding a dog who may be over the standard, that should be no big deal as long as they know what they are doing pedigree-wise. 
But when the dogs are marketed and size is bragged about on the website, then there is a firestorm and the straw man will lose.


----------



## msvette2u

I never said don't breed a dog oversized.

My thing is - to deliberately breed for oversized dogs then claim they are "old fashioned" is false advertising and is the mark of a poor breeder. The OP stated he wanted "big" which presumably means bigger than he sees around town now, and the whole mess started by people saying to look out for BYBs pushing "old fashioned" or "oversized" dogs. 

Having a dog outside the standard that can add other great things to your program is one thing. Deliberately breeding, then crowing about 120 + # dogs as a sale tactic is typical BYB tricks.


----------



## msvette2u

Yes. She said it at the same time. LOL


----------



## JakodaCD OA

Where did I say that gsd's within standard are all a bunch of nerve bags?? I'd like to have you repost that for me.

The majority of the gsd's I've had were ALL within standard, as in the "whole package" yeah so my girls are on the BIG side, I didn't 'breed' them, they "grew" that way...what I said was,,and I'll make this simplier to understand my meaning

IF I HAD MY CHOICE,,,"I would take a 100 lb sound/balanced dog (that does include temperament in the sound/balance part) OVER a within standard nerve bag any ole day"


----------



## msvette2u

> IF I HAD MY CHOICE,,,"I would take a 100 lb sound/balanced dog (that does include temperament in the sound/balance part) OVER a within standard nerve bag any ole day"


Anyone would. 
But saying that seems as if you're implying that it's okay to breed them over 100lbs because standards _are_ nervebags.
I understand what you're saying...but the implication is still there, because of what Doc kept saying over and over, over the past 8-10 pages.


----------



## JakodaCD OA

I don't think I was "implying" anything, my statement was pretty straightforward and stands on it's own. If someone misconstrues it, well maybe they should read it a few times.

I have lived with a 32" 125lb gsd 'mutant', a fluke of nature, a fear biter, dumb as a rock, but I loved him anyway. Would I want another? No. You'll find nervebags in all shapes and sizes, and you'll find sound/balanced dogs in all shapes/ sizes. 

in the end,,and maybe cause I've been around dogs/breeders/rescues my entire life..(and I am NOT a breeder nor ever claimed to be) I've learned that to each his own. 

Someone wants to breed 150 lb beagles, I don't really care, it's their choice, their problem, I don't have to live with it. 

If someone wants a 150lb GSD, again, not my cup of tea, but their choice.

You can only educate so much, in the end people are going to do what they want to do, it does NOT affect ME nor my dogs nor my life..

Everyone has to learn from experience and to each his own


----------



## msvette2u

Agreed!

I think that these threads start with people hoping to assist others in avoiding mistakes, and buying from anyone who breeds for one trait (size, color, fur types) is a mistake and can be the start of great heartbreak.

On that I'm sure we all agree. Or most of us


----------



## Doc

The op asked a questiion about large germa shepherds - he/she probably has never read the standard. Lord knows - and everyone in this form knows - i brred dogs that are larger than the standard (not genetic mutant monsters). I answered the op and the then the flood gates opened.
The op knows what he wants - but the responses to him - even correcting his spelling - followed. The op and I have exchanged pm(s). I gave him sevceral names of people and kennels that could help him. Ioffered to help him find a pup - from several breeders and from dogs that are well trained; albeit over -the-standard. I'm sorry that many of you took the op to task. You made it a point to grill him, embarass him, and never answer his question. Your jabs at me are nothing new - I have come to expect them from several of you all. I own and breed large German shepherds but not 150 pound monsters.
If you don't like it , I really do not care. And Jane - I have a hard time listening to your advice since you own over-the-standard dogs and the breeder you bought the last one from has said she would breed the same two dogs even if they produce over-the-standard dogs. If you do not care for me or my dogs or my breeding - then leave it alone. Talk to your favorite breeder and listen to her; maybe you could learn something.


----------



## msvette2u

No, that's not how it went down. One only needs to look 4-5 posts down to see how things started. It was you correcting people that started the "flood gates". 

Try to rewrite it but it's there on page one for you to see.



> *Stay away from breeders who use terms like "old-fashioned large straight backed German Shepherds." These people are breeding dogs outside the standard. *


----------



## Freestep

Doc said:


> You wouldn't believe me if I told you. Find a copy of the original Standard, then read the next 3 rewrites of the Standard. After reading them, look at pictures of the dogs during the following years after a "new" Standard was accepted.
> 
> I have nothing against the standard - it was created for the show-line world and describes the ideal German shepherds. I have problems with breeders who talk the Standard but have no concept of what a German shepherd was in the US during the 60s and 70s - the golden age of the German shepherd in the US or how/why the breed was created. If you listen to some breeders, they could care less about the historical aspects of the breed - all they want is the lastest and greatest version, which can not measure up to the dogs from years past.
> 
> If you are truely interested in the changes in the Standard, I would encourage you to read all the versions - starting with Stephanitz's original. And while you are at it, maybe some reading and searching the foundational roots of the breeders and dogs that were instrumental in the creation of the German shepherd dog.


Yep, I had a feeling you wouldn't be able to answer my question!


----------



## onyx'girl

Kevlar55, I apologize for my comments on how to spell shepherd and the way your thread took a turn.
I have to address Docs last post that was directed at me...and I'm sorry to take up more of your thread space. 
I hope everyone will just help the OP find his new puppy!


Doc, several posts back you said you were done...but you keep on keepin' on!
You pop in on the threads that have the word 'large' in it always comes to these same conversations. Then the other boards posse comes in to back you up.

You never post in the training,health or other forums. Maybe your vast knowledge and experience could _help_ others instead of putting yourself with a condescending attitude above everyone with what you supposedly know. I would be grateful to learn from those with years and years of experience. You take the time to type, so maybe get that book on the market so we can all read it.

On the subject of my dogs;
The breeder that my male came from had no idea that Karlo(the only one that turned out larger @27" and 90#) would be the size he is. All the other pups have matured at 50-60's and the other male is probably in the 80's. Lucia could confirm Gryff's weight. You yourself know all of this, but choose to bring it up once again. And I would love to see Andy used again in her program. Too bad he is getting old. Every pup he's produced so far have not been a disappointment. And I think Chris did a great job in choosing him as stud for Della. One large male out of 8 puppies isn't breeding for over the standard GSD's, is it? 
Oh, and I saw how you corrected my spelling once, thank you for pointing it out


----------



## Lucy Dog

onyx'girl said:


> & what others are saying is that breeders who breed for the larger size is whats at issue.
> *Not so much breeding a dog who may be over the standard, that should be no big deal as long as they know what they are doing pedigree-wise. *
> But when the *dogs are marketed and size is bragged about on the website*, then there is a firestorm and the straw man will lose.


Bears repeating


----------



## Josie/Zeus

I agree with you a 100 percent Diane.

Koda is a big boy, he will get thrown out of any conformation show, he is 28 inches tall and weighs over 90 lbs. Only the people that's close to me and trains with me knows how much work I put in keeping him on the thin side. 

His breeder does not breed big shepherds, Koda's litter mate won VP2 at Nass, as far as I know his litter mates are standard size. You can't fight nature, big puppies WILL show up once in while. It is in their genes.

Yet, Koda is a very agile dog. He temperament is awesome. He is doing an amazing job at his PSA, he continues to surprise me at training, he has come so in just 4 months. I can't wait to see how well he'll do when we our herding test. 

To the OP, I hope you stick around. Goodluck with your search and I hope you find your big shepherd from a good reputable breeder. Happy new year to you. 





JakodaCD OA said:


> really this is the ultimate hijack
> 
> Ya know, if the guy wants a BIG German Shepherd who cares? I think listing the pro's and cons can be educational for someone, but gosh, to basically tell the guy "if the dog you get isn't within standard you will be burned at the stake" is ridiculous.
> 
> And I would DEFINATELY take a 100 lb balanced/sound dog over a within standard nerve bag any ole day.
> 
> One thing I'd like to point out, and maybe I missed it somewhere, but did the OP give HIS description of what a BIG gsd IS to him? I don't see him mention weight, nor mention height..
> 
> My 75#/ 26" female may be considered BIG by him..who knows??
> 
> I rather don't blame the OP for not posting, god forbid he picks the 'wrong' dog..
> 
> TO THE OP:
> Good luck in your search, I think you said you weren't ruling out rescue,,hope you find what your looking for.. Maybe pm DOC, since everyone thinks he has these giant german shepherds running around (Maybe you'll even get a free book out of him


----------



## NarysDad

Diane, what I said had nothing to what you commented on. It has been all about the other comments on this thread. 

Again I hope that the member that originally posted these questions had found their answers in all this chaos written down in this thread


----------



## JakodaCD OA

chuck, no problem, I actually wasn't posting on what you commented on either)))


----------



## onyx'girl

NarysDad said:


> IMO I have seen members come here and ask questions and it becomes like a 3 ring circus full of opinions and the member leaves with no answers at all. I have seen so many comments on this thread and think that the original poster has been long gone maybe thinking he/she was sorry for even asking questions and hoping to find out answers to what they were looking for. Did I see his questions get answered? Probably not. It just amazes me to see all these experts here in areas that one would think that one has no business even answering. But I guess this is what makes it so fun to come here and read


So maybe you could share some advice? You are a breeder, you could answer some of the questions of those asking for advice...instead of just reading for fun. I think many of us like to read, yet when we possibly comment we are taken to task on our input. It isn't a discussion forum without posts, I think boards die a slow death when they are so very slow and only have the same 5 or 6 people posting.


----------



## RubyTuesday

To the OP...I'm glad you're in contact with Doc. Excellent GSDs come in a range of sizes. Preferring 'em large is no crime but it's very important to have a clear idea of the other characteristics you're seeking. Regardless of size, any GSD s/b athletic, active, discerning, biddable & intelligent. The notion that over sized GSDs are invariably fat, lazy & lacking GSD temperament & intelligence is simply wrong...Just as it would be inaccurate to portray the smaller GSDs as generally excessively sharp, nervy & unstable.

There are suggestions you consider rescue. IF you do, please be certain that you aren't settling for something other than what you need/ want in your GSD. I looked into local rescues prior to getting Sam. The available GSD all had either health or temperament problems that made them unacceptable for my situation. Yeah, there were some larger GSDs, but apart from size they had nothing in common with the GSD I was seeking. 




> And I would DEFINATELY take a 100 lb balanced/sound dog over a within standard nerve bag any ole day.


I do like 'em big. I just do & I always have...I prefer the males as well. Despite that, I'd happily take a 20" 40 lb bitch that had the health, temperament, balance & intelligence that I want over a big guy that lacked the qualities which are indispensable.



> When a breeder chooses size over health and temperament, that's exactly what they get.


I don't see anyone advocating that. I see people too often assuming that those who prefer larger GSDs are concerned with nothing but size which is as faulty as assuming that those that want WL/SchH GSD are concerned with nothing but drives.

Changes in the standard? 27"-29" GSD were not only tolerated at one time but were chosen as Siegers by Stephanitz himself. Long stock coats were allowed, then not allowed & apparently are once again permissable. White was not always a disqualifying color. I think that's true of blues & livers, too, though I'm not sure. For years, the standard regarding size was largely ignored. In fact, a common complaint was that over sized GSDs were actually favored. Those seeking true working dogs have always been flexible regarding size, more concerned with abilities than inches & pounds.

Anatolians, Kuvaszok, Akbash, Malamutes, Tibetan Mastiffs, Boerboels, Rhodesian Ridgebacks...There are any number of working dogs that are large to very large in size. This s/b equally true of large GSDs that are in good condiion & at an appropriate (ie 'lean') weight.

Jane, in what way has this turned into a Doclovefest? For that matter, exactly why shouldn't Doc post where he prefers to as does every other member? I suspect he posts to these threads largely b/c of the misconceptions & bad information that abound within 'em.


----------



## cliffson1

Good Post RT, when people read posts like yours that contain information that is factual and knowledgable then everybody including the OP win. There is a reason I don't post in the Rally section or even the conformation section.I tend to give my opinion on things that I am familar and current on. Facts can be given by anyone because they are reality. Opinions are often based on misinformation, or more often a lack of knowledge. Many people read these boards to learn....I try to be careful about what I post that they are not mislead completely. I really only post in Breeding and sometimes Training, I guess I could post in other areas, but I don't see a need to comment on everything, especially if I really don't have an opinion that "I" know is educated or contemporary. This breed has a wide variance in it. Everyone who wants a GS and inquires on this board isn't planning to breed them and shouldn't be denied access to their preferences, or given a lecture about something they haven't brought up. Reminds me of people who learn a little bit and can't keep their mouth shut to show everyone the little they know, and the more they talk the more you see they don't know. Two or three people have told them something and now its gospel for everyone to hear. Agr!!!
Nobody believes in educating more than I do....but in order to educate you have to have a recieving pupil or audience. Sometimes we lose people with our approach, so what has been accomplished?????? This NY, I have resolved that I will post a lot less. I find myself often in disputes and then I look back and think about what my mother would say when arguing with a younger sibling. 
There are many different opinions out there based on everyone's experiences, and they all have value, I just hope that people that visit the board are helped in what they seek, and not presumed to be wanting to breed when inquiring about something as simple as a puppy. I live in the Phila area and I often see Philly sports fans justify their behavoir with the caveat that"they are passionate", well passionate is not an excuse for boorish behavoir or comments. The same applies to dogs. Off my soapbox and the best to everyone this year!


----------



## Konotashi

I think the big GSDs are bashed just as much as the dilute GSDs, not because of the dogs themselves, but because of the lack of ethics by their breeders. I've come across a few oversize GSD breeder websites. I don't recall ever seeing any kind of titles (SchH, agility, herding, etc). and health testing is almost always minimal. The same goes for the dilute colors. 
They're considered abominations because that is what the breeders have made them. Not only that, but they use fake/inaccurate terms. Old fashioned, straight backed, rare colors, etc. Many have little knowledge of the breed itself. 
Most of the out-of-standard GSD breeders want dogs that will be nothing but pets. Great with all people, great with everything, little to no drive, very mellow.... Which isn't what a GSD is supposed to be. 

I think that if these breeders could show that their stock is OFA'd (especially for the oversized dogs), cleared for DM, put titles on the dogs to show they can work, then maybe they would be more accepted. Unfortunately, many breeders drawn to the faulty or disqualifying traits of the GSD don't care about those things.


----------



## damaya

cliffson1 said:


> Everyone who wants a GS and inquires on this board isn't planning to breed them and shouldn't be denied access to their preferences, or given a lecture about something they haven't brought up. Reminds me of people who learn a little bit and can't keep their mouth shut to show everyone the little they know, and the more they talk the more you see they don't know. Two or three people have told them something and now its gospel for everyone to hear. Agr!!!


cliffson- that whole post was worth quoting, but I chose just the above. I lurked here for a while just reading trying to learn. There is some good knowledge to be gained here for any level of dog owner, breeder, rescuer, or whatever you may be.

You know just because somebody asks "what time is it?" does not mean they want to know how to build a watch.


----------



## msvette2u

Konotashi said:


> I think the big GSDs are bashed just as much as the dilute GSDs, not because of the dogs themselves, but because of *the lack of ethics by their breeders. *I've come across a few oversize GSD breeder websites. I don't recall ever seeing any kind of titles (SchH, agility, herding, etc). and health testing is almost always minimal. The same goes for the dilute colors.
> They're considered abominations because that is what the breeders have made them. *Not only that, but they use fake/inaccurate terms. Old fashioned, straight backed, rare colors, etc. Many have little knowledge of the breed itself. *
> Most of the out-of-standard GSD breeders want dogs that will be nothing but pets. Great with all people, great with everything, little to no drive, very mellow.... Which isn't what a GSD is supposed to be.
> 
> I think that if these breeders could show that their stock is OFA'd (especially for the oversized dogs), cleared for DM, put titles on the dogs to show they can work, then maybe they would be more accepted. *Unfortunately, many breeders drawn to the faulty or disqualifying traits of the GSD don't care about those things.*


All the above but especially the bolded parts.

This would be true with any breed. Not just "large GSD", or even normal sized GSD breeders. 
We'd say the same if someone came looking for miniature GSDs, or dwarf GSDs. 
Anyone deliberately breeding for faults in a GSD is not a responsible breeder. And again, that goes for any breed - anyone breeding _for_ things considered faults within that breed isn't responsible, and we should tell people that, because there are far more issues than how tall or short a dog is, that arise when breeding specifically _for_ those traits. 

It wasn't long ago that someone wanted a black and red, and was searching for breeders who bred specifically for those traits. This same type discussion ensued (responsible vs. irresponsible, etc.) but was less inflammatory because nobody on this board seems to be breeding for specifically color (alone). But mention size and the board goes wild. If people were not here that breed specifically for the "large old fashioned straight back" dogs, we'd have a much more tame discussion I am sure.


----------



## Doc

I will try to withhold my factual comments from this form this year.


----------



## NarysDad

cliffson1 said:


> Everyone who wants a GS and inquires on this board isn't planning to breed them and shouldn't be denied access to their preferences, or given a lecture about something they haven't brought up. Reminds me of people who learn a little bit and can't keep their mouth shut to show everyone the little they know, and the more they talk the more you see they don't know. Two or three people have told them something and now its gospel for everyone to hear. Agr!!!
> Nobody believes in educating more than I do....but in order to educate you have to have a recieving pupil or audience. Sometimes we lose people with our approach, so what has been accomplished?????? This NY, I have resolved that I will post a lot less. I find myself often in disputes and then I look back and think about what my mother would say when arguing with a younger sibling.
> There are many different opinions out there based on everyone's experiences, and they all have value, I just hope that people that visit the board are helped in what they seek, and not presumed to be wanting to breed when inquiring about something as simple as a puppy. I live in the Phila area and I often see Philly sports fans justify their behavoir with the caveat that"they are passionate", well passionate is not an excuse for boorish behavoir or comments. The same applies to dogs. Off my soapbox and the best to everyone this year!


Cliff very well said. There are members here that feel their expertise should be shoved down others throats whether or not they are looking for it. 
I may not agree with the type of dogs Doc breeds, but you don't see me shoveling crap at him because of it. Just like there maybe something I may not agree with that is posted here and I don't just jump to toss them under the first speeding bus. How do you think people learn when being attacked cause maybe they didn't express exactly what they had meant and it was interpreted differently. I see many leave here angry without answers. Keep this practice up and I will have a full forum soon with the ones that are truly looking for answers. 

Jane you are one of those that I'm talking about!! For someone that doesn't breed dog. you sure have a lot to tell others as to what they should do. You mentioned earlier in this thread about a straw man loosing, well I bet that same straw man doesn't have a fighting chance in your home. **** comment removed by Admin***


----------



## onyx'girl

I didn't start the fire, Chuck. I don't tell others what they should do, only suggested going with a rescue as others in this thread did. And your last comment was uncalled for, I think it is breaking the board rules, but I won't report you
Aren't you glad I'm not a breeder?


----------



## Freestep

Doc said:


> I will try to withhold my factual comments from this form this year.


You haven't been overloading us with factual comments thus far, so no worries. Still would love an answer to the question I posed, and I bet others would like to hear it as well, since many of us are here to learn, and I bet the OP would be particularly interested. 

But if you aren't willing to share your vast years of knowledge with us all, I guess we'll just have to settle with Stephanitz's own words, and other folks who know their stuff.


----------



## Lucy Dog

Maybe I'm misunderstanding here, but it seems like some people here think you can't have an opinion unless you're a breeder. So Jane, breed a couple dogs and maybe you won't have to hear that argument anymore. Would that make her arguments more credible?

It kind of reminds me of the professional sports world when an athlete doesn't agree with something the media writes or says about them - which is very common. The typical athletes response is that the writers don't play the game, so they don't know what they're talking about. Like the media doesn't have eyes, ears, and a brain. Like the only way to possibly have an opinion about anything is to be playing in the game. You can watch, study, and analyze without actually being out on that field. There are plenty of very good writers and coaches who never played one second of professional sports.


----------



## Doc

Freestep said:


> You haven't been overloading us with factual comments thus far, so no worries. Still would love an answer to the question I posed, and I bet others would like to hear it as well, since many of us are here to learn, and I bet the OP would be particularly interested.
> 
> But if you aren't willing to share your vast years of knowledge with us all, I guess we'll just have to settle with Stephanitz's own words, and other folks who know their stuff.


its very clear to me that you know everything so anything I may say wouldn't be of any importance to you. 

"In order to ask the question, you know the answer." Read Fred Lanting's book. May be you will belive him - but then again, probably not.


----------



## Freestep

Doc said:


> its very clear to me that you know everything so anything I may say wouldn't be of any importance to you.


Where did I say *I* knew everything? I'm here to learn, what about you?



> Read Fred Lanting's book. May be you will belive him - but then again, probably not.


Hmmm, perhaps we will have to re-read it and see if we can find out what you're so mysteriously alluding to. How about you be so kind as to give us a chapter or a page # for reference?


----------



## lhczth

Let's please remain civil. Even subtle attacks are still personal attacks. 

Thank you,

ADMIN LIsa.


----------



## Frankly I'm Frank

Lucy Dog said:


> Maybe I'm misunderstanding here, but it seems like some people here think you can't have an opinion unless you're a breeder. So Jane, breed a couple dogs and maybe you won't have to hear that argument anymore. Would that make her arguments more credible?
> 
> It kind of reminds me of the professional sports world when an athlete doesn't agree with something the media writes or says about them - which is very common. The typical athletes response is that the writers don't play the game, so they don't know what they're talking about. Like the media doesn't have eyes, ears, and a brain. Like the only way to possibly have an opinion about anything is to be playing in the game. You can watch, study, and analyze without actually being out on that field. There are plenty of very good writers and coaches who never played one second of professional sports.


This all too true across so many areas of performance. Some musicians think that you can't be a music critic or 'understand' music unless you are a musician. and that is just one example Many practitioners of specialties don't realize that observers are often better critics because they see an objective picture and, after all, they are the 'audience' for which the specialist is performing/producing his/her work.


----------



## cliffson1

There is a reason that most media people never become Coaches or General managers.....just sayin. And also a lot of former athletes become the best analytical announcers among the commentators. I think I remember saying ALL opinions have value, but differentiating between opinions and facts/ or reality. See how some people can devolve that into nobody but breeders should have opinions....pulease! I have noone but myself to blame....lol!!!


----------



## Lucy Dog

Cliff... if i was talking directly to you, i would have put you in quotes above my last post. I read exactly what you wrote... just like I do every time i see one of your posts.

And a lot of athletes make some of the worst GM's too... ie matt millen for example. Horrible, horrible GM, but actually a pretty good analytical guy. And some of the best coaches were never players... ie (and as much as it pains me to say it) bill belichick. Actually a lot of the games best gm's are actually number crunchers and not former players because of all the salary caps. But there are also plenty of great coaches who were former players too. 

Just like you said... many different opinions, and they all have value.


----------



## onyx'girl

Lucy Dog said:


> Maybe I'm misunderstanding here, but it seems like some people here think you can't have an opinion unless you're a breeder. So Jane, breed a couple dogs and maybe you won't have to hear that argument anymore. Would that make her arguments more credible?


Any help on what my kennel name should be? vom Firehaus?


----------



## Lucy Dog

vom standardhaus


----------



## Doc

Freestep said:


> Where did I say *I* knew everything? I'm here to learn, what about you?
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm, perhaps we will have to re-read it and see if we can find out what you're so mysteriously alluding to. How about you be so kind as to give us a chapter or a page # for reference?


Perhaps you could open the book and find it yourself. I guess you want me read it to you?

i do not have all the books i have read over the past century committed to memory.


----------



## RubyTuesday

Konatoshi, the information in your post is generally accurate, but it's both generalized & unfairly implied to be true of only breeders of over sized GSDs. Breeders of any type or line can neglect health screening, lack knowledge of the breed, ignore temperament or fail to thoroughly evaluate breeding stock. There are good, bad & mediocre breeders in WL, ASL, GSL, sport or companion lines.

Regardless of a posters preferences we should try to assist that person in making a decision s/he will be happy with & which will benefit both owner & dog.

Another unfair assumption is that over sized GSDs always lack working abilities & correct temperament. Kay, a previous poster here, has worked her over sized GSDs for years, both in livestock & assistance. Although not specifically trained in PP her dogs did appropriately protect her several times, including actively, seriously engaging an armed assailant. Doc has produced GSDs working as therapy, assistance & medical alert dogs. Sam's breeder has produced SAR, assistance, guide & therapy dogs. Over sized GSDs can have the intelligence, discernment & nerve strength needed to work just as WL can be exemplary companions.

Msvette2u, your post indicates there are multiple breeders of over sized GSDs participating in this discussion. Other than Doc, who are these breeders? IMO, those of us that prefer over sized GSDs, are not the source of the heat & acrimony these discussions invariably devolve into. Unforthnately, this has driven away numerous members. This includes Kay, who I mentioned previously, & who would have been an incredible asset to the board.


----------



## Liesje

The one thing that bugs me (not in this thread specifically but on some breeders' sites I have seen) is when people can't just say they breed what they like, they have to put others' breeding choices down as if to validate their own. If someone likes larger dogs, just say, hey guess what we like larger dogs. It's a free country, you can like what you want and breed or hold back the dogs that YOU want. Buyers get a pass on choosing their dog based on any number of characteristics, many of them physical and/or arbitrary but I don't see why a breeder has to always be all things to all people. I'd rather a breeder be proud of what they breed and be honest about what they like and have it be something I don't personally like than a breeder try to convince me that what they have is actually better that what I'm looking for when I have zero interest in what they are producing. I need a smaller GSD because that's better for me (for one, I want to be able to carry my dog if I ever had to) but if someone else needs a big dog as an assistance dog to help keep them stable and offer physical support, makes no difference to me really.


----------



## Emoore

You know, I really really really love soft-eared and floppy-eared GSDs. I have such a soft spot for them and hope to own another one, one day. Sometime I'm going to start a thread looking for breeders of floppy-eared GSDs and see what happens.


----------



## Germanshepherdlova

Kevlar55 said:


> Are there any Large GSD breeders in the New England area.
> I'm looking for a straight backed German shepard, not the show type.
> 
> Thanks, Kevin.


OP, if you are still reading this-I just want to tell you that you have a right to your preference and do not need to apologize or be made to feel that you are single-handedly assisting the down-fall of the GSD breed.They are after all-dogs, and you can find a breeder that does produce large GSD's. I have one myself and don't really give a flying crap what anybody here thinks about that. In a way you are assisting to conserve the breed by requesting a straight back instead of a slope back. I learned that the slope back was created by breeding dogs with a deformity-the deformity being the back legs being too short and that of course was never a great contribution to the original breed standard. I will see what I can find about Large GSD Breeders in your area and will PM you if I find anything.


----------



## Lucy Dog

Emoore said:


> You know, I really really really love soft-eared and floppy-eared GSDs. I have such a soft spot for them and hope to own another one, one day. Sometime I'm going to start a thread looking for breeders of floppy-eared GSDs and see what happens.


Well, it's not all that off topic from an already off topic thread, so let's discuss it...

In all honesty, would you ever buy a dog from a breeder who bred specifically for floppy eared german shepherds? A website full of bragging about how floppy each dogs ears are. This is our Fido and he's always had floppy ears just like a lab and he comes from 10 generations of dogs with floppy ears. His puppies can be yours for $2000.

As someone with a soft spot for GSD's with soft ears, would you ever buy from a breeder like that?


----------



## robinhuerta

....*sloped = short legs?*..omg....sorry...:hammer:....not true.:nono:
*I have WGSLs and *none* have shorter back legs.*

@OP...find a breeder that you like, connect with and trust.....find the kind of puppy/dog that *you* want....in the end (and what really matters)...we all have the right to have the dogs of our choice.
don'tcha think?


----------



## Lucy Dog

I'm thinking the OP's long gone by now...

And if they have any backbone at all, they probably will find the puppy that they want. We're all just randoms on the internet anyways. I'm sure she's a big girl, she can pick and choose which advice she wants to listen to and which to ignore. I'd hope we can all make decisions without having our hand held the entire time. 

And as an owner of a GSD with a straight back, I like the look of the WGSL's with a little "slope" to them too. Nothing too extreme. Not too sure how the angle of the spine would affect the size of the dogs legs (????). Just my preference.


----------



## Whiteshepherds

robinhuerta;[email protected] a breeder that you like said:


> you[/B] want....in the end (and what really matters)...we all have the right to have the dogs of our choice. don'tcha think?


:thumbup: So many good posts, but Robin summed it up perfectly.


----------



## Germanshepherdlova

robinhuerta said:


> ....*sloped = short legs?*..omg....sorry...:hammer:....not true.:nono:
> *I have WGSLs and *none* have shorter back legs.*
> 
> @OP...find a breeder that you like, connect with and trust.....find the kind of puppy/dog that *you* want....in the end (and what really matters)...we all have the right to have the dogs of our choice.
> don'tcha think?


lol-I know, I just wanted some of the commenters that are so critical of everyones personal preferences to sample what it feels like to have their preferred GSD insulted. I know it isn't the actual legs that are deformed but the spine isn't straight but sometimes it results in the dogs hind legs looking deformed. Here is a link to a GSD that took 1St place-a GSD that supposedly represents what a GSD should look like. Just click on the link and then go down to the herding group and click on the German Shepherd-those back legs have received wide criticism on the net-and I tend to agree. Not the look I'd want for my dog. Looks almost painful for the poor dog. American Kennel Club - 2009 AKC/Eukanuba National Championship


----------



## Lucy Dog

Germanshepherdlova said:


> lol-I know, I just wanted some of the commenters that are so critical of everyones personal preferences to sample what it feels like to have their preferred GSD insulted.


lol... you wanted to test this board and you chose to throw a curve ball at the american show lines? I wouldn't exactly call the american show lines this boards preferred line of german shepherd.


----------



## Germanshepherdlova

Lucy Dog said:


> lol... you wanted to test this board and you chose to throw a curve ball at the american show lines? I wouldn't exactly call the american show lines this boards preferred line of german shepherd.


The key words there are SOME OF THE COMMENTERS.


----------



## msvette2u

> but the spine isn't straight


There's a thread about this very issue and the spine IS straight. I have no idea why you think it is not.


----------



## katieliz

the american show lines girl posted with jimmy isn't even really very "extreme". unstraight spine and short legs has *nothing* to do with "extreme" rear angulation ("the slope", as it's often called). but i've recently seen some german dogs with the roach back, underdeveloped appearing rear, and cow hocks that positively wobbled when they moved. scarey.

nope, asl's are for sure not very popular on this board, but there are a few nice ones out there.


----------



## bianca

Emoore said:


> You know, I really really really love soft-eared and floppy-eared GSDs. I have such a soft spot for them and hope to own another one, one day. Sometime I'm going to start a thread looking for breeders of floppy-eared GSDs and see what happens.


Darn it, if only Molly hadn't been spayed...she could be someones foundation bitch :rofl: :wild:


----------



## Lucy Dog

Germanshepherdlova said:


> Just click on the link and then go down to the herding group and click on the German Shepherd-those back legs have received wide criticism on the net-and I tend to agree. Not the look I'd want for my dog. Looks almost painful for the poor dog.


Not too sure what you're talking about... exactly what about this looks painful? I'm not really a big fan of the ASL's, but I wouldn't consider the below dog (your example) to have extreme angulation.










And if you consider this painful... what exactly would you consider 120 pounds on a medium to large breeds frame? I'd think that would be a lot more painful for a dogs joints in the long run than what you're seeing above. Especially when that 120 pound dog gets up there in age.


----------



## Konotashi

I don't personally prefer ASL GSDs. Not only do I think they're aesthetically displeasing dogs, but they're not GSDs in temperament, given most breeders simply go for the most rear angulation and a flying trot. 

That male actually looks pretty good, compared to other ASL's I've seen. 

Here's a few dogs that I agree, in that it looks painful, not to mention downright ugly.


----------



## Doc

Konotashi said:


> I don't personally prefer ASL GSDs. Not only do I think they're aesthetically displeasing dogs, but they're not GSDs in temperament, given most breeders simply go for the most rear angulation and a flying trot.
> 
> That male actually looks pretty good, compared to other ASL's I've seen.
> 
> Here's a few dogs that I agree, in that it looks painful, not to mention downright ugly.




Is this what the Standard produces?


----------



## cliffson1




----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN

Doc said:


> Is this what the Standard produces?


Well, it's _someone's _interpretation of the standard, and if I read this thread right, that's okay?


----------



## Emoore

Lucy Dog said:


> Well, it's not all that off topic from an already off topic thread, so let's discuss it...
> 
> In all honesty, would you ever buy a dog from a breeder who bred specifically for floppy eared german shepherds? A website full of bragging about how floppy each dogs ears are. This is our Fido and he's always had floppy ears just like a lab and he comes from 10 generations of dogs with floppy ears. His puppies can be yours for $2000.
> 
> As someone with a soft spot for GSD's with soft ears, would you ever buy from a breeder like that?


Exactly. Kinda clarifies this whole thread, doesn't it? Substitute "oversized" with "floppy ears" or another fault that's not seen desirable by John Q Public like oversize is, and the whole thing starts to look ridiculous. 

And yet everything that's been said about oversized dogs, can be said about floppy ears. Floppy eared dogs are just as capable of doing everything the "standard" dogs are, just like oversized dogs. I'm sure there was a flop-eared specimen or two used back in 1899 at the foundation of the breed. Soft ears don't make them any more prone to health problems and would likely infuse some much-needed new blood into the genetic bottleneck.

I could easily start a breeding program selecting for health, temperament, and working ability and also make it a point to use soft- and floppy-eared breeding animals when all things are equal. I would very quickly end up with a bloodline of healthy, excellent temperament, strong-nerved, great working German Shepherds with floppy ears. Just like the responsible breeders of larger dogs do. 

So what's the difference? One is highly marketable, and one is not.


----------



## msvette2u

Konotashi said:


> I don't personally prefer ASL GSDs. Not only do I think they're aesthetically displeasing dogs, but they're not GSDs in temperament, given most breeders simply go for the most rear angulation and a flying trot.


But here's the thing - looking at the "old fashion", blahblahblah, huge GSD breeder sites, there is washed out pigment, horrible conformation, etc., and they claim that is fine, they are just "old fashion". 

But what I have noticed too, they claim their dogs are "nice housepets" or "family pets" because they are "calm", "safe" "stable", "low drive", etc., etc., implying that other "normal sized" dogs cannot be good companions, and they are the only ones out there breeding for the "calm" yet oversized, washed out dog. 
Couch potatoes, basically  Oh and don't forget, that little kids can pull on their ears and they'll just lay there happily taking it.


----------



## Doc

msvette2u said:


> But here's the thing - looking at the "old fashion", blahblahblah, huge GSD breeder sites, there is washed out pigment, horrible conformation, etc., and they claim that is fine, they are just "old fashion".
> 
> But what I have noticed too, they claim their dogs are "nice housepets" or "family pets" because they are "calm", "safe" "stable", "low drive", etc., etc., implying that other "normal sized" dogs cannot be good companions, and they are the only ones out there breeding for the "calm" yet oversized, washed out dog.
> Couch potatoes, basically  Oh and don't forget, that little kids can pull on their ears and they'll just lay there happily taking it.


Washed out pigment? Where are coming up with this stuff? Some of the greatest foundational dogs in the German shepherd breed were know as washed out and pasted on poor pigment to their offspring.


----------



## Doc

Warning! Picture of larger than Standard female German shepherd. Notice the lazy look and washed out pigment - and how well she looks lying on the couch.


----------



## Freestep

Doc said:


> Perhaps you could open the book and find it yourself. I guess you want me read it to you?
> 
> i do not have all the books i have read over the past century committed to memory.


That's what I thought... still dodging.

The OP probably doesn't own the book, so it's no help for them.


----------



## msvette2u

Oh there's other dogs with way less pigment (washed out) you could have shown for an example if you were going to put one up 
Just because the "dogs of old" _pasted on_ their washed out colors doesn't mean you have to use them for foundation studs.


----------



## Freestep

JeanKBBMMMAAN said:


> Well, it's _someone's _interpretation of the standard, and if I read this thread right, that's okay?


Well, no... Doc implies we ought to throw the standard out the window altogether, and breed whatever we want.


----------



## Freestep

Doc said:


>


Personally, I like to see a mask on a GSD, otherwise they just don't look like a GSD to me. I'm sure she's a very nice pet.


----------



## msvette2u

Freestep said:


> Personally, I like to see a mask on a GSD, otherwise they just don't look like a GSD to me. I'm sure she's a very nice pet.


There is no "trademark look" to any of these dogs, kind of interesting in a way.
You know how you can look at a dog and say "oh that dog came from X-Y-Z kennels, you can tell by it's looks".
Some look almost mixy, the dog posted has Husky markings.


----------



## msvette2u

Freestep said:


> Well, no... Doc implies we ought to throw the standard out the window altogether, and breed whatever we want.


Right, because AKC is for the birds, they've "wrecked" all the dogs, so why give a hoot about them or any standard?

I guess you could say that about any breed out there, or any breed you wanted to justify non-standard breeding with.


----------



## sitstay

Doc said:


> Warning! Picture of larger than Standard female German shepherd. Notice the lazy look and washed out pigment - and how well she looks lying on the couch.


I personally love the way she looks. Except for the bigger size and the coat, she is a dead ringer for the GSD I grew up with in the 60's.

But if you're going to post pictures of one of your dogs to make a point, shouldn't you share the whole website? Where people can see photos and read what you have to say about their weights and temperaments, and what kind of dog you breed for, and why? I know you don't want to start another forest fire like you did when you joined this forum the first time (and, yes, I have been here long enough to remember that), but without that context it just looks like a bunch of unusually cranky people fussing at each other. Explain what you're doing and why and let your dogs speak for themselves. 

I personally get so confused by the arguments here. One day it is necessary to breed super sharp dogs because the breed is supposed to be sharp and breeders are getting so far away from the real purpose of the breed that the GSD is no longer a GSD (blahblahblah) and then the next day all is good and anyone can breed dogs with soft, uber-stranger friendly temperaments and call them GSD because there is room for ALL types within the breed (blahblahblah). Gheesh, readers get whiplash from this stuff. And nobody learns anything. 
Sheilah


----------



## msvette2u

sit said:


> I personally love the way she looks. Except for the bigger size and the coat, she is a dead ringer for the GSD I grew up with in the 60's.
> 
> But if you're going to post pictures of one of your dogs to make a point, shouldn't you share the whole website? Where people can see photos and read what you have to say about their weights and temperaments, and what kind of dog you breed for, and why? I know you don't want to start another forest fire like you did when you joined this forum the first time (and, yes, I have been here long enough to remember that), but without that context it just looks like a bunch of unusually cranky people fussing at each other. *Explain what you're doing and why and let your dogs speak for themselves. *
> 
> I personally get so confused by the arguments here. One day it is necessary to breed super sharp dogs because the breed is supposed to be sharp and breeders are getting so far away from the real purpose of the breed that the GSD is no longer a GSD (blahblahblah) and then the next day all is good and anyone can breed dogs with soft, uber-stranger friendly temperaments and call them GSD because there is room for ALL types within the breed (blahblahblah). Gheesh, readers get whiplash from this stuff. And nobody learns anything.
> Sheilah


Good plan. 
To me...and I've been considering showing and working Dachshunds and eventually breeding them...to me, if you have no goal in mind other than to produce nice pets, there's no need for that, because there is nice pets already out there on the face of the earth, you find them all over in shelters and rescues.
So, yeah - if I was to ever get into breeding, it would be with the goal of bettering the breed, not just suiting my own ego.


----------



## Jax08

Doc said:


> Warning! Picture of larger than Standard female German shepherd. Notice the lazy look and washed out pigment - and how well she looks lying on the couch.



ok...she has nice pigment, along with a couple other of your dogs but not all do. It seems unfair that you choose to show one without showing them all. 

And your dogs are WAY oversize. I've seen pictures of the GSDs in early 1900s and none of them look well over 100 lbs to me, which most of your dogs seem to be according to your website. 

I don't know a single thing about confirmation, and can only really go by what I"ve been told and what I've read as far as color and size (where is post on this thread about knowing everything from being told 3 times? LOL) but they seem balanced from the pics. But to be quite honest, I have no idea what you are trying to breed for by looking at your dogs. They are all different. There doesn't seem to be any uniformity in their confirmation?


----------



## Debbieg

sit said:


> Gheesh, readers get whiplash from this stuff. And nobody learns anything.
> Sheilah


 
Ahh so thats whats wrong with my neck! I thought I was getting arthritis!


----------



## Lucy Dog

Doc said:


> Warning! Picture of larger than Standard female German shepherd. Notice the lazy look and washed out pigment - and how well she looks lying on the couch.


Those pasterns look very weak in the rear. Can't tell how the front are from the picture, but the rear ones are flat. Is that how he/she always is or is that just the picture?


----------



## Freestep

msvette2u said:


> Some look almost mixy, the dog posted has Husky markings.


Yeah, if I didn't know better, I'd guess she was a mix.


----------



## Doc

Freestep said:


> Yeah, if I didn't know better, I'd guess she was a mix.


That kind of statement shows how little you truly know about German shepherds. Keep talking, I am learning so much from you.

Breeders make choices when breeding. I happen to breed a German shepherd that is predominately Swabian bloodlines - something you rarely see anymore. There are tons of references that describe the Swabian dogs so don't ask me to site them if you are too lazy to find them yourself. This picture is out of Stephanitz's book.










It really doesn't matter what I post or what pictures I put up, I know two or three "experts" will not like it and make snide comments. I'll give you hint, I really don't care what you have to say about me or my dogs. I sell my "mutant, Husky-faced" animals all over the country, and have had inquiries from Japan, Australia, Scotland, England, and Germany.


----------



## msvette2u

I tried to find Swabian information but could not. 
Any information you could post (or mention the book) would be helpful.

I was trying to find where Max really concentrated on using huge dogs and can't seem to, either.
Cap Story page 2

Do you have information that as well?

And I hope you're not referring to me, I'm no expert and enjoy learning more about our beloved breed.


----------



## Germanshepherdlova

Lucy Dog said:


> Not too sure what you're talking about... exactly what about this looks painful? I'm not really a big fan of the ASL's, but I wouldn't consider the below dog (your example) to have extreme angulation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And if you consider this painful... what exactly would you consider 120 pounds on a medium to large breeds frame? I'd think that would be a lot more painful for a dogs joints in the long run than what you're seeing above. Especially when that 120 pound dog gets up there in age.


You think that looks fine but that is just your little opinion. The internet is full of people who feel the same way I do about this dog-I was led to this particular dog by people making fun of what the "breed" has become and referring to this dog right here. But to each it's own-just not something I'd prefer.


----------



## Lucy Dog

Doc... are the swabian dogs you mention actual GSD's or one of the few breeds used by stephanitz to create the GSD?



Germanshepherdlova said:


> You think that looks fine but that is just your little opinion. The internet is full of people who feel the same way I do about this dog-I was led to this particular dog by people making fun of what the "breed" has become and referring to this dog right here. But to each it's own-just not something I'd prefer.


Well, it's not my preferred look, but I wouldn't say it looks "painful for that poor dog". I've seen a lot more extreme... look at konotashi's examples. I'd think those being a better example of extreme angulation.

Again, a fat 120 pound dog and the arthritis caused by that in the long run is probably a lot more painful than the example you gave. The risk of arthritis is a fact in overweight dogs, you're just assuming this dog is in pain from something you've heard on the internet.


----------



## msvette2u

Germanshepherdlova said:


> You think that looks fine but that is just your little opinion. The internet is full of people who feel the same way I do about this dog-I was led to this particular dog by people making fun of what the "breed" has become and referring to this dog right here. But to each it's own-just not something I'd prefer.


At least you can tell what breed he is...


----------



## Jax08

Doc said:


> Breeders make choices when breeding. I happen to breed a German shepherd that is predominately Swabian bloodlines - something you rarely see anymore. There are tons of references that describe the Swabian dogs so don't ask me to site them if you are too lazy to find them yourself. This picture is out of Stephanitz's book.
> 
> ...
> 
> It really doesn't matter what I post or what pictures I put up, I know two or three "experts" will not like it and make snide comments. I'll give you hint, I really don't care what you have to say about me or my dogs. I sell my "mutant, Husky-faced" animals all over the country, and have had inquiries from Japan, Australia, Scotland, England, and Germany.



ummmm....since I asked directly about your dogs, is all this directed at me? Because I have absolutely no idea what you are ranting about regarding the mutant comments.

Second, I have googled and googled "Swabian" dogs and have never found anything other than a wikipedia blurb. Where else might one find more information regarding these "foundation" dogs?


----------



## Germanshepherdlova

Doc said:


> Warning! Picture of larger than Standard female German shepherd. Notice the lazy look and washed out pigment - and how well she looks lying on the couch.


She is very beautiful. TBH, you could be on this site for weeks with some people here who have that type of time and they will argue with you and put your dogs down-twist, make fun of, and insult your intelligence/knowledge the entire time. But ask yourself-who are they anyway's, and why do they matter-it's not like you know them anyways. Obviously they are not your potential customers so if I was you, I wouldn't worry about it.


----------



## Freestep

Doc said:


> That kind of statement shows how little you truly know about German shepherds. Keep talking, I am learning so much from you.


If someone posted that photo asking "is this a purebred GSD?" I'd guess that she wasn't. I know purebred GSDs come in all shapes, sizes, and colors, and the gene pool can pop up with all sorts of surprises from time to time. I'm sorry if you found my comments offensive, but since you don't care about the standard, it shouldn't matter to you whether your dogs look like GSDs or not.



> Breeders make choices when breeding. I happen to breed a German shepherd that is predominately Swabian bloodlines - something you rarely see anymore.


What bloodlines do you use that go back to Swabian bloodlines? I'm geniuinely interested and I bet others are too. Or are you just going to tell people to go read a book? You seem proud of your dogs, so you shouldn't be afraid to share their history and genetics, as well as your breeding goals. Many of us would be happy to learn and you might even change some minds if you were more forthcoming.


----------



## Germanshepherdlova

Lucy Dog said:


> Doc... are the swabian dogs you mention actual GSD's or one of the few breeds used by stephanitz to create the GSD?
> 
> 
> 
> Well, it's not my preferred look, but I wouldn't say it looks "painful for that poor dog". I've seen a lot more extreme... look at konotashi's examples. I'd think those being a better example of extreme angulation.
> 
> Again, a fat 120 pound dog and the arthritis caused by that in the long run is probably a lot more painful than the example you gave. The risk of arthritis is a fact in overweight dogs, *you're just assuming this dog is in pain from something you've heard on the internet.*


and the bent look of his back legs looks painful to me-and to others. So don't assume that you know why I feel that something looks painful-I know it is hard for some not to assume when they are so accustomed to doing so. 

And the reason why I used this particular dog (since somehow you missed this) is because he won 1st place-this dog represents the breed standard-you know, the breed standard that causes so many arguments. Also, why do you keep bringing up a fat 120 pound dog? The dog he posted a pic of doesn't look fat, so not sure why you are incorporating a fat 120 lb dog into this conversation. A dog with a big build could be 120-depending on body structure, height, etc. and not be fat.


----------



## msvette2u

I found a Prairie Shepherds who talk about Swabian bloodlines but their dogs are active little beauties (from what I saw) involved in sports and SAR. 
I can't find more info about Swabian dogs.


----------



## msvette2u

Germanshepherdlova said:


> and the bent look of his back legs looks painful to me-and to others. So don't assume that you know why I feel that something looks painful-I know it is hard for some not to assume when they are so accustomed to doing so.


Our GSD Yaeger had hocks that looked like that but he wasn't in pain. We didn't pose him thusly though.


----------



## Germanshepherdlova

msvette2u said:


> Our GSD Yaeger had hocks that looked like that but he wasn't in pain. We didn't pose him thusly though.


If you had posed him like that-he may have won 1st place! This now represents the breed standard.


----------



## Freestep

Jax08 said:


> Second, I have googled and googled "Swabian" dogs and have never found anything other than a wikipedia blurb. Where else might one find more information regarding these "foundation" dogs?


There is some information in the Stephanitz book. Go read it. I don't want to tell you anything.

Sorry, that was an impersonation. 

Seriously, I wish Carmen would pop in here, she knows more about Swabian bloodlines than anyone. I can try to post some quotes from the Stephanitz book after work, since Doc doesn't want to.


----------



## Doc

msvette2u said:


> I tried to find Swabian information but could not.
> Any information you could post (or mention the book) would be helpful.
> 
> I was trying to find where Max really concentrated on using huge dogs and can't seem to, either.
> Cap Story page 2
> 
> Do you have information that as well?
> 
> And I hope you're not referring to me, I'm no expert and enjoy learning more about our beloved breed.


I wish I could tell you the answer, but no one will believe it. I'll give you hint - Krone Kennels, et.al. Also, Max moved to Bavaria once he "left" the army (which is an interesting story in itself). Why? Just maybe to be closer to recognized breeders who happen to be working and breeding their dogs (ssshhhhhh bigger dogs) on their farms? Remember, location and climate plays a role in what the herding shepherds looked like. Max wasn't much of a breeder and his precious Horand was a "rascal". i.e not worth a darn at working. Since Horand was made up of equal parts of the four bloodlines comprising the breed - the thought was that you could breed to any of the types and depending on the genetics, certain traits would be emphasized in the offspring. Remember, first and foremost, Max fell in love with the herding shepherd - a larger, slow to anger, slow to bite, thicker coated dog. I really can't make all this up; unfortunately these aspects of the German shepherd are often over-looked.


----------



## sitstay

Doc said:


> It really doesn't matter what I post or what pictures I put up, I know two or three "experts" will not like it and make snide comments.


But it kind of does matter, if you're actually trying to make a valid point. If there are "two or three experts" who will make snide comments, ignore them and concentrate on sharing with those that want to learn.

For instance, my question regards the use of the Swabian bloodlines. Were these heavier dogs introduced to give slighter dogs more substance? Or did the founders decide that the Swabian sheepdogs were closer to what they wanted to produce and decided to focus on them? How big were the Swabian dogs? Were there other attributes they brought to the table that were also considered desirable, or was size/substance the only reason for their introduction?
Sheilah


----------



## Lucy Dog

Germanshepherdlova said:


> and the bent look of his back legs looks painful to me-and to others. So don't assume that you know why I feel that something looks painful-I know it is hard for some not to assume when they are so accustomed to doing so.


Yeah... i don't know why I "assumed" you were talking about the dogs back.....



Germanshepherdlova said:


> In a way you are assisting to conserve the breed by requesting a straight back instead of a slope back.





Germanshepherdlova said:


> I know it isn't the actual legs that are deformed but the spine isn't straight but sometimes it results in the dogs hind legs looking deformed.


What was I thinking assuming you were talking about the dog's back?! 

And assuming you are talking about legs... looking at the picture of the example you gave, it's the rear pasterns that appear to be bent in that stack. Have you looked at the rear pasterns on doc's dog? The same dog you called very beautiful. One is in extreme pain and the other is very beautiful... a bit contradictory, no?



Germanshepherdlova said:


> And the reason why I used this particular dog (since somehow you missed this) is because he won 1st place-this dog represents the breed standard-you know, the breed standard that causes so many arguments. Also, why do you keep bringing up a fat 120 pound dog? The dog he posted a pic of doesn't look fat, so not sure why you are incorporating a fat 120 lb dog into this conversation. A dog with a big build could be 120-depending on body structure, height, etc. and not be fat.


Just using an extreme example of weight vs extreme structure causing pain. Nothing specific to doc or his dogs.

And yes, I'd call a 120 pound GSD very extreme in weight.


----------



## Jax08

Freestep said:


> Seriously, I wish Carmen would pop in here, she knows more about Swabian bloodlines than anyone. .


I shall ask her! Thanks!


----------



## Germanshepherdlova

Lucy Dog said:


> Yeah... i don't know why I "assumed" you were talking about the dogs back.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What was I thinking assuming you were talking about the dog's back?!
> 
> And assuming you are talking about legs... looking at the picture of the example you gave, it's the rear pasterns that appear to be bent in that stack. Have you looked at the rear pasterns on doc's dog? The same dog you called very beautiful. One is in extreme pain and the other is very beautiful... a bit contradictory, no?
> 
> 
> 
> Just using an extreme example of weight vs extreme structure causing pain. Nothing specific to doc or his dogs.
> 
> *And yes, I'd call a 120 pound GSD very extreme in weight.*


Shows how much you know about the "oversized" dogs that you have been on here for over 24 hours arguing about.

And of course I was talking about the dogs rear legs- I guess I have to simplify this further for you-Yes, the rear legs of the dog-and the part you assumed is that I am mimicking others on the internet when I said that it looked painful. See that, you are assuming that I don't really think myself that it looks painful but am just saying that because of the many other on the internet who stated that, while in reality, I do think it looks painful. Perhaps and not assuming just suggesting, perhaps when one mimics others themselves all the time-one can get to thinking that is the normal pattern of behavior for others as well.


----------



## Freestep

Doc said:


> I wish I could tell you the answer, but no one will believe it. I'll give you hint - Krone Kennels, et.al.


Yes, but what are the modern bloodlines that carry a higher percentage of Krone et. al. (besides yours, of course)? Names that we could find on PDB that would lead back to the Swabian dogs?



> Max wasn't much of a breeder and his precious Horand was a "rascal". i.e not worth a darn at working.


You might want to check your copy of the book. He actually said the exact opposite of that. I don't have my book handy but he said something to the effect that Horand was at his best and happiest when working, but was a "rascal" when left without a job to do.


----------



## Lucy Dog

Germanshepherdlova said:


> Shows how much you know about the "oversized" dogs that you have been on here for over 24 hours arguing about.
> 
> And of course I was talking about the dogs rear legs- I guess I have to simplify this further for you-Yes, the rear legs of the dog-and the part you assumed is that I am mimicking others on the internet when I said that it looked painful. See that, you are assuming that I don't really think myself that it looks painful but am just saying that because of the many other on the internet who stated that, while in reality, I do think it looks painful. Perhaps and not assuming just suggesting, perhaps when one mimics others themselves all the time-one can get to thinking that is the normal pattern of behavior for others as well.


ok... you completely lost me. We'll agree to disagree with whatever it is you're trying to say.


----------



## Germanshepherdlova

Germanshepherdlova said:


> See that, *you are assuming that I don't really think myself that it looks painful but am just saying that because of the many other on the internet who stated that, **while in reality, I do think it looks painful.* Perhaps and not assuming just suggesting, perhaps when one mimics others themselves all the time-one can get to thinking that is the normal pattern of behavior for others as well.





Lucy Dog said:


> Again, a fat 120 pound dog and the arthritis caused by that in the long run is probably a lot more painful than the example you gave. The risk of arthritis is a fact in overweight dogs, *you're just assuming this dog is in pain from something you've heard on the internet.*


I thought I'd quote a portion of our conversation to refresh your memory concerning the comment you made that I was responding to.

Anyhow, time for my dogs now-I have spent too much time here already!


----------



## Emoore

I'm getting kind of tired of older breeders who have a lot of wisdom and who decry the fact that there are no good breeders anymore and nobody understands the GSD making statements like:

"I'll give you a hint. The information you seek is on the fourth shelf of my bookshelf, halfway down the hall on the left. Go find the book and read it." 

Good God people, give us the title of the book, a website we can look up, a breeder we can seek out, an oracle we can consult, or an astrology chart to look at. Not "Nyah nyah I read this book and breed these dogs and have all this information and you're an idiot because you don't know where to start."


----------



## Jax08

:rofl: Emily...it does come with a pirate map to find the hidden treasure so what's the problem? LOL And...he really isn't that old. I'd say early 40s at most. So not quite the ancient that he's portrayed to be.


----------



## Doc

Of course Max was going to say Horand was the best thing since butter! But the other side of the story is that the old farmers/breeders/ who helped Max organize the SV got fed up with Max and his overbearing attitude and went back to their farms to breed working shepherds. The other side of the story tells of Horand close to being "put down" by the farmer that Max got him from because he could work worth a tinkers dam. Horand never worked a day for Max - he was Max's pet and minded Max. He was quick to start fights, run off to spend time with certain female dogs to perpetuate the breed, and was an all around hyper rascal. 
I think Max realized that Horand needed some balance and he went to Audifax and Adalo von Grafrath (outcrosses who were not even registered) to introduce more balance in the offspring. Interesting that Audifax and Alado were"larger herding dogs". It's anybodies guess what "larger" meant back then. The trend does show that the "larger" (bigger than Horand) gained in popularity until Boxberg was given the Championship.

Part 2: Alex von der Deininghauserheide; Pfeffer von Bern; Odin vom Buesecker; Troll vom Richterback; Bernd & Bodo von Lierberg; Vol of Long Worth. There's more but my mind is slower than it once was.


----------



## Emoore

Jax08 said:


> :rofl: Emily...it does come with a pirate map to find the hidden treasure so what's the problem? LOL And...he really isn't that old. I'd say early 40s at most. So not quite the ancient that he's portrayed to be.


Oh, well, somewhere he said something about "books I've read in the last century." Figured the guy went to college with Stephanitz. Maybe he's an immortal vampire. aranoid:


----------



## Doc

Jax08 said:


> :rofl: Emily...it does come with a pirate map to find the hidden treasure so what's the problem? LOL And...he really isn't that old. I'd say early 40s at most. So not quite the ancient that he's portrayed to be.


Dam, I may end up liking you before it's all over. Early 40's? Put your glasses on. Where did you get that idea?

I'm writing a book. I will sell you all one if it is ever published. I can't find the references - I'm away from notes. Look at the Nova Scotia German Shepherd Club information. I think some information can be found there. I forgot the old fart that wrote about the research in Maine with German shepherds - I think he started the Guide School out in California. Read the classic text by Humpheries and his work at Fortunate Fields. There's more but I can't recall them off the top of my head.

No map, I can't read or fold them. Just old school searching, and asking a lot of questions of folks who know.


----------



## Jax08

Geesh...if you are older then it could be compliment...no need to be insulted. That isn't you in the video on your website? I'll have to watch it again. I'm sure that newscaster stated your name.


----------



## Doc

Jax08 said:


> Geesh...if you are older then it could be compliment...no need to be insulted. That isn't you in the video on your website? I'll have to watch it again. I'm sure that newscaster stated your name.


Video and web-site?  What are you talking about? You and Jane have the wrong link.

I knew Max's mom and Dad. :crazy:


----------



## Jax08

Jane who? Why are the dogs you post on that website if it's the wrong one? And why is the name from that person on the website on the photobucket account of the picture of Bella? But you don't know what I'm talking about? It doesn't take a genius to trace a url address.


----------



## RocketDog

Emoore said:


> I'm getting kind of tired of older breeders who have a lot of wisdom and who decry the fact that there are no good breeders anymore and nobody understands the GSD making statements like:
> 
> "I'll give you a hint. The information you seek is on the fourth shelf of my bookshelf, halfway down the hall on the left. Go find the book and read it."
> 
> *Good God people, give us the title of the book, a website we can look up, a breeder we can seek out, an oracle we can consult, or an astrology chart to look at. Not "Nyah nyah I read this book and breed these dogs and have all this information and you're an idiot because you don't know where to start."*


I once asked a forumite who was espousing all the dangers of altering your pet and how awful it was to provide some links or research sites in a speutering thread, because I was genuinely interested. I was taken to task in no uncertain terms and a very rude manner for "assuming" she was my "research assistant" and told basically to eff off and find my own research.


----------



## Lucy Dog

Doc said:


> Video and web-site? What are you talking about? You and Jane have the wrong link.
> 
> I knew Max's mom and Dad. :crazy:


I'm guessing this video from your website. I'd guess you to be in your early 40's too. If you're not, take that as a compliment.

Viral Player


----------



## Doc

Jax08 said:


> Jane who? Why are the dogs you post on that website if it's the wrong one? And why is the name from that person on the website on the photobucket account of the picture of Bella? But you don't know what I'm talking about? It doesn't take a genius to trace a url address.


Not hard when you build web-sites 

Besides, there are nuts out there - they will hunt you and your dogs down. I too old to have to run around in the middle of the night in my nite attire pulling savage dogs off an intruder. It wouldn't go over very well with the night shift at the home.


----------



## Jax08

I thought you bred the opposite of savage dogs? "slow to anger, slow to bite"? Listen...I'm not picking on you or your dogs, I was just asking some questions that I don't know the answers to in my previous post...I just think the way you portray yourself is a bit to cloak and dagger, Holmes.


----------



## Freestep

Doc said:


> Of course Max was going to say Horand was the best thing since butter! But the other side of the story is that the old farmers/breeders/ who helped Max organize the SV got fed up with Max and his overbearing attitude and went back to their farms to breed working shepherds. The other side of the story tells of Horand close to being "put down" by the farmer that Max got him from because he could work worth a tinkers dam.


And where is this information coming from?


----------



## Whiteshepherds

sit said:


> For instance, my question regards the use of the Swabian bloodlines. Were these heavier dogs introduced to give slighter dogs more substance? Or did the founders decide that the Swabian sheepdogs were closer to what they wanted to produce and decided to focus on them? How big were the Swabian dogs? Were there other attributes they brought to the table that were also considered desirable, or was size/substance the only reason for their introduction?
> Sheilah


I have no way of knowing if this is entirely accurate but it's pretty interesting. Pedigrees, explanations of why Max did some of the things he did, etc. (or why the writer thinks Max did the things he did...?) it doesnt talk much about the exact sizes of the dogs but it does talk about the dogs from the Swabia region of Germany and how they influenced the breed. It might answer some of your questions. 
It's about 400 pages - grab some coffee. 

http://www.grunfeldshepherds.com/articles/garrett/German Shepherd History Master.pdf


----------



## Freestep

Doc said:


> Not hard when you build web-sites
> 
> Besides, there are nuts out there - they will hunt you and your dogs down. I too old to have to run around in the middle of the night in my nite attire pulling savage dogs off an intruder. It wouldn't go over very well with the night shift at the home.


I'm totally lost now... Hunting you down? Someone is using pictures of your dogs to build a website that isn't yours? This is making less and less sense, unless you're posting from the looney bin. :crazy:


----------



## Debbieg

http://www.grunfeldshepherds.com/articles/garrett/German Shepherd History Master.pdf


http://www.grunfeldshepherds.com/ne...German Shepherd Dog-CHAPTER 3 OTHER LINES.pdf


----------



## Germanshepherdlova

Freestep said:


> I'm totally lost now... Hunting you down? Someone is using pictures of your dogs to build a website that isn't yours? This is making less and less sense, unless you're posting from the looney bin. :crazy:


lol, paranoid I guess.aranoid:


----------



## katieliz

axel not alex. i'm thinkin' that was just a typo. i did personally know lots of those old dogs. but time marches on and things change and humans do stuff for their own gain or pleasure. i would be so interested in knowing your background doc, how far back it goes, more about your dogs and your kennel. this is such an interesting discussion, and i know it's the internet so (justa bout) anything goes, but i feel like i might miss out on important points when i zone out and skip over the insulting or condescending parts of some posts. especially the insults to the dogs. nobody knows better than i what has happened to this breed, but i have always loved them, do love them, and will always love them. i think they're all beautiful. some i like better than others, we all have personal preferences, but they're all german shepherd dogs, the best dogs in the world. imho. 

doc could i ask you to pm me and share your background a bit more? or direct me to where i can get that info? thanks.


----------



## katieliz

wow, lots more posts in the time it took me to write mine. i mean you no harm doc, and have no ulterior motive for wanting to know more about you and your dogs. but how could you possibly have known max's mother and father. my grandfather was a collegue of max's and was one of the original 13, he died at age 90, in 1991. just over this holiday i learned the name and address of his last living daughter and hope to learn much more information about him and his role in bringing the german shepherd dog to this country. may i respectfully ask if you're just here to stir the pot or if you'd really like people to be able to learn from your knowledge? thanks again.


----------



## Emoore

katieliz said:


> wow, lots more posts in the time it took me to write mine. i mean you no harm doc, and have no ulterior motive for wanting to know more about you and your dogs. but how could you possibly have known max's mother and father.


Obviously Doc is a vampire.


----------



## sitstay

Doc said:


> I think Max realized that Horand needed some balance and he went to Audifax and Adalo von Grafrath (outcrosses who were not even registered) to introduce more balance in the offspring. Interesting that Audifax and Alado were"larger herding dogs". It's anybodies guess what "larger" meant back then.


I have been having a lot of fun researching this! I wish there were more pictures available of the Swabian dogs used, but there seems to be a lack in that area.

I have found this:
Diethelm vom Bayerland - German Shepherd Dog

This dog is a son of Adalo von Grafrath, and a great-great grandson of Horand. This does not look like an oversized dog to me.

I also found this dog:
http://www.gsdca.org/GSDReviewed/adogs/AribertGrafrath.htm

This dog is a son of Audifax. He doesn't look oversized either.
Sheilah


----------



## Doc

Freestep said:


> I'm totally lost now... Hunting you down? Someone is using pictures of your dogs to build a website that isn't yours? This is making less and less sense, unless you're posting from the looney bin. :crazy:


:smirk::smirk::smirk::smirk::smirk::smirk::smirk::smirk::smirk:


----------



## AbbyK9

Well... I've waded through all of the posts in this thread and have decided to add my two cents. (That's what a discussion forum is for, right?)

I think Doc has a clear idea what he wants in a shepherd and what he is breeding for. He is breeding the Swabian-type sheep herding dogs that were among the (many) local examples of sheep herding dogs that Von Stephanitz used when he created the German Shepherd breed. I think people would have less of an issue with his breeding program if Doc said, "I breed Swabian-type sheep herding dogs" and I breed them for the following traits, instead of saying that he breeds German Shepherds. 

And I think that goes back to the history and creation of the breed. Von Stephanitz created a new breed based on what he wanted to see in these dogs - the abilities, the appearance, the whole package. He used a lot of different dogs to create his vision, then worked on setting a standard for his new breed, then worked on improving it in the way he chose the Siegers. 

I think it's pretty clear from Von Stephanitz's writings what he envisioned the breed to be. He has always described them as a "medium" breed and specifically said that the dogs should not be overly large because "giants are never nimble". (His words - from "The German Shepherd in Word and Picture".) When he selected larger Siegers, people bred to them a lot ... and Von Stephanitz saw that the dogs were, as a whole, going toward the bigger end. Before long, he selected a smaller Sieger ... knowing people would breed to that dog ... to ensure the breed as a whole would not lean toward the over-sized dog and that the breed stayed what he envisioned for it. 

I think it's hard to refute, looking at the history, that Von Stephanitz didn't want them to be larger by his choice of dogs for his breeding stock, his choice of Siegers, and his writings.

Of course, others had and have their own interpretation of what Shepherds should look like within the standard, and have made changes to the standard. For example, they excluded long coated dogs and now included them again in Europe. They excluded whites based on faulty genetic knowledge (assuming that white caused dilution or health problems - when, in fact, it's a masking gene). There are accepted ideals that change with the fashions ... there's a current ideal of the German show line dogs and a current ideal of the American show line dog and current ideals of the Czech / East German working line dogs. But they're subjective. There are moderate individuals in each and there are extremes.

I don't think, for a minute, that striving for an extreme is ever a good thing, regardless of what that extreme is. Extreme size, extreme angulation, extreme drive. I don't think Von Stephanitz ever intended his breed to be one of extremes.

As for the dark-pigmented female shown earlier in this thread by Doc, I honestly have to agree with the other posters. If someone posted a photo of this dog, without any further information attached to her, in the forum and asked if the dog is purebred, I think a fair number (probably even the majority) would guess that this is not a German Shepherd even though she resembles the Swabian dog posted further on and Swabians were *among the types* used to create the German Shepherd breed.

Another thought is regarding the show lines. A lot of photos posted of showline (and even working line) dogs make them appear much more angled than they are because of how they are stacked to accentuate the extremes that do well under some judges in some of the rings. I think Eurosport K-9 is a good one to cite for this ... look at how some of their dogs are stacked to look "extreme" when, in fact, they really aren't.

Anyway. That's my two cents.


----------



## chicagojosh

Cody has his teddy bear moments


----------



## cliffson1

Abbyk9....great post with some excellent information. Maybe people who aren't familar with the Swabian, Thuringian or Wurttemberg types should get the Word in Picture book by Stephanitz and read it. As for the old timers that some people are tired of the way they deliver information, I can relate to the tired part....only its of people commenting on things that are assumed, or criticizing something you don't understand....just sayin....we all have perspectives!


----------



## AbbyK9

I will add that I do not think the translated version of "The German Shepherd Dog in Word and Picture" is an easy read for English speakers. It's a very literal translation and may be confusing for people. As an example, the German "Rasse" is translated consistently as "race" instead of "breed". It's things like that which make the book difficult to follow for a lot of people.


----------



## onyx'girl

Doc said:


> Video and web-site? What are you talking about? You and Jane have the wrong link.
> 
> I knew Max's mom and Dad. :crazy:


Lewie, why do you try to portray yourself differently than who you are? Your website gives your name, you went by it here before you changed it to Doc(how you finagled that when no one else can is another mystery)you go by your name on Chucks forum. Be proud of who you are, and what you breed! And that you really aren't 100...unless you age differently from me, because I think we are about the same age. 

I do have a question. Several pages back you said that the bottlenecking of genetics is a downfall, yet you don't bring in new blood if you are staying with the elusive Swabian lines...or am I misunderstanding?


----------



## onyx'girl

Chris(AbbyK9) thanks for that post. I think you explained Docs program very well.


----------



## Doc

This is the grandsire of the dog posted.

Ecco von der Schwarzen Natter - German Shepherd Dog

He is not Swabian blood. my dam bloodline is Swabian. I outcrossing when needed.

And her granddad is from Scotland. Two difference sources of new blood with out losing my foundation. The term prepotency is not used often but a knowledgable breeder understands the term and what it can contribute in a breeding.


----------



## msvette2u

AbbyK9 said:


> Well... I've waded through all of the posts in this thread and have decided to add my two cents. (That's what a discussion forum is for, right?)
> 
> I think Doc has a clear idea what he wants in a shepherd and what he is breeding for. He is breeding the Swabian-type sheep herding dogs that were among the (many) local examples of sheep herding dogs that Von Stephanitz used when he created the German Shepherd breed. I think people would have less of an issue with his breeding program if Doc said, "I breed Swabian-type sheep herding dogs" and I breed them for the following traits, instead of saying that he breeds German Shepherds.
> 
> And I think that goes back to the history and creation of the breed. Von Stephanitz created a new breed based on what he wanted to see in these dogs - the abilities, the appearance, the whole package. He used a lot of different dogs to create his vision, then worked on setting a standard for his new breed, then worked on improving it in the way he chose the Siegers.
> 
> I think it's pretty clear from Von Stephanitz's writings what he envisioned the breed to be. He has always described them as a "medium" breed and specifically said that the dogs should not be overly large because "giants are never nimble". (His words - from "The German Shepherd in Word and Picture".) When he selected larger Siegers, people bred to them a lot ... and Von Stephanitz saw that the dogs were, as a whole, going toward the bigger end. Before long, he selected a smaller Sieger ... knowing people would breed to that dog ... to ensure the breed as a whole would not lean toward the over-sized dog and that the breed stayed what he envisioned for it.
> 
> I think it's hard to refute, looking at the history, that Von Stephanitz didn't want them to be larger by his choice of dogs for his breeding stock, his choice of Siegers, and his writings.
> 
> Of course, others had and have their own interpretation of what Shepherds should look like within the standard, and have made changes to the standard. For example, they excluded long coated dogs and now included them again in Europe. They excluded whites based on faulty genetic knowledge (assuming that white caused dilution or health problems - when, in fact, it's a masking gene). There are accepted ideals that change with the fashions ... there's a current ideal of the German show line dogs and a current ideal of the American show line dog and current ideals of the Czech / East German working line dogs. But they're subjective. There are moderate individuals in each and there are extremes.
> 
> I don't think, for a minute, that striving for an extreme is ever a good thing, regardless of what that extreme is. Extreme size, extreme angulation, extreme drive. I don't think Von Stephanitz ever intended his breed to be one of extremes.
> 
> As for the dark-pigmented female shown earlier in this thread by Doc, I honestly have to agree with the other posters. If someone posted a photo of this dog, without any further information attached to her, in the forum and asked if the dog is purebred, I think a fair number (probably even the majority) would guess that this is not a German Shepherd even though she resembles the Swabian dog posted further on and Swabians were *among the types* used to create the German Shepherd breed.
> 
> Another thought is regarding the show lines. A lot of photos posted of showline (and even working line) dogs make them appear much more angled than they are because of how they are stacked to accentuate the extremes that do well under some judges in some of the rings. I think Eurosport K-9 is a good one to cite for this ... look at how some of their dogs are stacked to look "extreme" when, in fact, they really aren't.
> 
> Anyway. That's my two cents.



Great post!!! 
And


> *I think people would have less of an issue with his breeding program if Doc said, "I breed Swabian-type sheep herding dogs" and I breed them for the following traits, instead of saying that he breeds German Shepherds.*


 is completely true at least for me.
The fact you're selling them based on (fairly) false pretenses, that's what I have an issue with. Call them purple toed wingbats or whatever, but there's not a whole lot of evidence that they are "old style" GSDs.


----------



## Freestep

abbyk9 said:


> i think people would have less of an issue with his breeding program if doc said, "i breed swabian-type sheep herding dogs" and i breed them for the following traits, instead of saying that he breeds german shepherds.


b i n g o !


----------



## msvette2u

Doc said:


> The term prepotency is not used often but a knowledgable breeder understands the term and what it can contribute in a breeding.


There you go again being all mysterious.
Why not just explain it??


Dominant Cross Breeding



> A prepotent sire or dam has the genetic dominance to produce offspring of similar characteristics no matter what the genetic disposition of the other parent.


----------



## Emoore

cliffson1 said:


> As for the old timers that some people are tired of the way they deliver information, I can relate to the tired part....only its of people commenting on things that are assumed, or criticizing something you don't understand....just sayin....we all have perspectives!


But how can we understand when the folks who have the information are about as clear as a Magic 8 Ball?


----------



## AbbyK9

> As for the old timers that some people are tired of the way they deliver information, I can relate to the tired part....only its of people commenting on things that are assumed, or criticizing something you don't understand....just sayin....we all have perspectives!


I think it's important to be able to communicate effectively online when attempting to pass on information. It makes a lot more sense to say, "X says the following in his book Y" and give a paraphrase of the statement you're using the book to support. That's a lot better than saying "Look it up in Y" without telling anyone what they're actually supposed to be looking up.

Any time we cite a source ... whether it's for an article or for a term paper or to answer someone's question ... it really helps if you give people a quote or at least something that helps them to figure out what it is you're actually saying ... PLUS what book or magazine or website it's found it. Doesn't have to be a page number and paragraph, but a general idea of the book and the point you're trying to make would help.

I don't like it when people are vague about their answers. That's like saying, "the minimum accepted standard is that service dogs must do three tasks." A better way of saying it would be, "existing case law has shown that courts want to see at least three tasks in order to consider an owner/handler trained dog a Service Dog." With a link to the law would be ideal, but isn't always an option.

Not that I'm always citing ... sometimes it's hard when you're in the middle of a post and you don't have the time to look it up ... but I try to make an effort, at least. I think especially when we're talking about something that goes beyond personal experience and into the realm of historic fact, citing is important. If I ask about training ... sure, let's hear anecdotal evidence from individuals. History .. maybe citing is a better option if you're making a point.


----------



## Jax08

Emoore said:


> But how can we understand when the folks who have the information are about as clear as a Magic 8 Ball?



Exactly! 

I went to his website, looked at his dogs, asked a couple of questions and the answer was "that's not me...I'm incognito" instead of answering the questions on the confirmation being balanced, and what he was trying to accomplish. I plainly stated that I didn't know and didn't understand. So if someone won't answer an honest question with an honest answer then it's hard to take him seriously.


----------



## msvette2u

> History .. maybe citing is a better option if you're making a point.


Well and history doesn't change, it cannot change. 
So it's out there, just _tell us_ where to look! A hint would help


----------



## onyx'girl

Breeders who wish to remain anonymous have always puzzled me. So therefore, I dig deeper to find out who they are. If they'd be transparent from the get-go, then the curiosity wouldn't be so strong. 

But we all know what curiosity did to the cat. If I have another kitten, his name will be google.

I guess if I were a breeder(my kennel name vom Standardhaus I would not be incognito or hide, I'd be proud of what I bred or wouldn't put puppies on this earth to be responsible for their whole lifetime.
I do give kudo's to all the responsible breeders...what you do for us fanatics, and what you put up with :toasting:


----------



## Doc

As a breeder, I look for certain traits in the dam, looks not being high on the list. As a brood bitch the dam has to have impeccable mothering skills - how well do they conceive, how do they whelp, are they instinctive when a pup is born, do they produce milk, how do they raise the pups, etc. are more important to me in my dams. my dam line has been developed over many years of selecting, picking, rejecting hundreds of pups. After numerous selections and litters, you can develope a prepotent dams.
The you spend years studying pedigrees, watching litters grow up, evaluate temperament, health, and structure to find a potential male to breed with.
My dams are prepotent for the most part. Coats will be either standard or long standard. If you linebreed/inbreed to often on the Swabian bloodline, the dogs can become "soft". That is one reason an outcrossing is used. And that is probably why my dogs don't have that cookie cutter look. 
Rest assured that my dogs are 100 per cent AKC Registered German shepherds - going all the way back to Horand - I have the pedigrees. I am sorry many of you haven't ever seen a German shepherd like mine - but to imply it's a mixy look is really unfounded. It is not a Swabian herding shepherd. Like I said, my dogs are predominately Swabian bloodiness but they are not Swabian herding shepherds. They are as much of your German shepherd as your dogs.


----------



## Freestep

AbbyK9 said:


> I think it's important to be able to communicate effectively online when attempting to pass on information. It makes a lot more sense to say, "X says the following in his book Y" and give a paraphrase of the statement you're using the book to support. That's a lot better than saying "Look it up in Y" without telling anyone what they're actually supposed to be looking up.
> 
> Any time we cite a source ... whether it's for an article or for a term paper or to answer someone's question ... it really helps if you give people a quote or at least something that helps them to figure out what it is you're actually saying ... PLUS what book or magazine or website it's found it. Doesn't have to be a page number and paragraph, but a general idea of the book and the point you're trying to make would help.
> 
> I don't like it when people are vague about their answers. That's like saying, "the minimum accepted standard is that service dogs must do three tasks." A better way of saying it would be, "existing case law has shown that courts want to see at least three tasks in order to consider an owner/handler trained dog a Service Dog." With a link to the law would be ideal, but isn't always an option.
> 
> Not that I'm always citing ... sometimes it's hard when you're in the middle of a post and you don't have the time to look it up ... but I try to make an effort, at least. I think especially when we're talking about something that goes beyond personal experience and into the realm of historic fact, citing is important. If I ask about training ... sure, let's hear anecdotal evidence from individuals. History .. maybe citing is a better option if you're making a point.


Agreed on all points. Thank you, this is exactly what I had been trying to say, but you said it better!


----------



## Doc

onyx'girl said:


> Breeders who wish to remain anonymous have always puzzled me. So therefore, I dig deeper to find out who they are. If they'd be transparent from the get-go, then the curiosity wouldn't be so strong.
> 
> But we all know what curiosity did to the cat. If I have another kitten, his name will be google.
> 
> I guess if I were a breeder(my kennel name vom Standardhaus I would not be incognito or hide, I'd be proud of what I bred or wouldn't put puppies on this earth to be responsible for their whole lifetime.
> I do give kudo's to all the responsible breeders...what you do for us fanatics, and what you put up with :toasting:


 Well why not hide from you vultures? I had a horrible welcome into this form and you led the way Jane. So playing a hide and seek game is/wqs done to advoid confronting all these know-it-alls in a word contest. And of course we all know that this forum is dominated by the sport crowd; which was clearly illustrated with the OP. Most who have posted in this thread do not have the desire to really study and learn history - which is very clear by the comments related in this thread. They just want to be spoon fed and argue. if you were really interested in the German shepherd, study the history. I am surprised your large dogs were allowed in your house. You are so attached to a standard that really isn't anything but a blueprint. even the almighty judges do what ever they are paid to do or "encouraged" to see. They even enter their own dogs in shows. My god, even Stephanitz quit entering his dogs when he was a judge.
I can not give a reference to that post - except to quote myself.


----------



## katieliz

also maybe better to say, ihmo, i feel that, i think, my opinion is, etc. and i feel that nobody owns the rights to the german shepherd dog, my opinion is that we all love our dog(s) and are can be hurt when someone disrespects them, and imho lots of respect can be earned by not yanking people's chains.

edited last line out, since it could have been interpreted as disrespectful...thanks. i've had to learn some things about internet forums since i joined this one too.


----------



## Freestep

Doc said:


> Rest assured that my dogs are 100 per cent AKC Registered German shepherds - going all the way back to Horand - I have the pedigrees.


Mind showing us some?


----------



## sitstay

AbbyK9 said:


> Anyway. That's my two cents.


Well said and worth more than two cents!
Sheilah


----------



## Jax08

:thinking: Did anyone learn anything from this thread?


----------



## Lucy Dog

Freestep said:


> Mind showing us some?


I'd definitely like to see a few. I've looked on the database in the past and have never been able to find much. A couple incompletes, but not much. 

For someone that's so interested in the history of the breed, there isn't much history there...

Black Magic's Good Karma - German Shepherd Dog

Black Magic's Romeo - German Shepherd Dog

Black Magic's Sunday Sugar - German Shepherd Dog

I'd definitely be interested in seeing the pedigree of the dog you posted about 5 pages back.


----------



## msvette2u

I learned a whole ton of stuff but nothing useful. 
:rofl:


----------



## Freestep

Doc said:


> even the almighty judges do what ever they are paid to do or "encouraged" to see. They even enter their own dogs in shows.


Now how is that the fault of the standard itself? The standard, as you said, is a blueprint for the breed. If judges are paid or "encouraged" to put up certain dogs, what does that have to do with the blueprint?


----------



## msvette2u

Lucy Dog said:


> I'd definitely like to see a few. I've looked on the database in the past and have never been able to find much. A couple incompletes, but not much.
> 
> For someone that's so interested in the history of the breed, there isn't much history there...
> 
> Black Magic's Good Karma - German Shepherd Dog
> 
> Black Magic's Romeo - German Shepherd Dog
> 
> Black Magic's Sunday Sugar - German Shepherd Dog
> 
> I'd definitely be interested in seeing the pedigree of the dog you posted about 5 pages back.


I'd like to see one for the one Billy Ray Cyrus bought!


----------



## Jack's Dad

There have been several of these threads since I've been a member, as a matter of fact I started one "when is a GSD not a GSD"

I've concluded that Doc is right the standard is a blueprint.

Breeders interpret it either to fit what they want to breed or ignore it entirely.

Working line, Showline, White, Large, Straight back, Roached, certain colors.

It doesn't matter because the Market rules. 

When there are enough buyers for all of the above and then some, you will have breeders who will produce them.

I know what I like and can get that in a GSD so I really don't care about trying to make the breed standard the end all anymore.

The Op got jumped on so quick it's hard to know exactly what they meant by "large". 

But if they in fact do want a oversize (to the standard) dog, then why not try to find them a responsible breeder to give them that. By responsible I mean one who has dogs with good nerve, temperament, health.

Arguing the breed standard is like arguing religion and politics. People view them differently.


----------



## Doc

Lucy Dog said:


> I'd definitely like to see a few. I've looked on the database in the past and have never been able to find much. A couple incompletes, but not much.
> 
> For someone that's so interested in the history of the breed, there isn't much history there...
> 
> Black Magic's Good Karma - German Shepherd Dog
> 
> Black Magic's Romeo - German Shepherd Dog
> 
> Black Magic's Sunday Sugar - German Shepherd Dog
> 
> I'd definitely be interested in seeing the pedigree of the dog you posted about 5 pages back.


Unfortunately, people delete and alter pedigrees on the pedigree data base. Of course the history of these dogs wouldn't be of interest to anyone; only fodder for the critics. 
I also have an interest in the old Bauerhoffen lines but those pedigrees have been deleted as well. You can trace Ecco on the database. It's a start. I do not plan to post on the data base - I really don't see any need to.


----------



## cliffson1

Nice post Jack....really that's it in a nutshell...
Also, I have gone the indepth explanation route as much as anybody on this forum, but when you find constant criticism and negative assumptions made by people who barely know the breed themself....it gets tiresome to continue to explain in depth. Some people act like they are entitled to be spoonfed instead of appreciating that people take their time and mind to help. Any wonder why many of the very knowledgable breeders on this forum don't EVEN get involved in these explanations. Its not that they don't know.....maybe its because.....no, no, no, it can't be that. Anyway, there is a reason that SOME people have expressed that as long as this thread is....not much have they learned....wonder why?


----------



## onyx'girl

> Well why not hide from you vultures? I had a horrible welcome into this form and you led the way Jane.


Doc, I neverposted on any threads when you were Lewie. I think you started our 'sparring' or whatever you want to call it. You pm'd me about Karlo's size as a dig. I don't confront unless someone starts with me and even then I try to be respectful. Lets call a truce already...


----------



## katieliz

andy this is the second time you and i are agreement :shocked:. 

there are so many different lines of german shepherd dogs now. they are all quite different. my feeling is that the "standard" hasn't been adhered to for an awfully long time in a majority of those representing most of the lines. 

also want to correct a mistake i posted, it was my dad who died in the 90's, my grandfather died in 1981, at the age of 90+. here is the dog who was his house dog and as i remember, his favorite...this would have been 1952-55 maybe, as best i can remember i was between 6 and 9 years old at the time. 










this is one of the last dogs my father bred, german on his dam's side, uncus of longworth grandson...have a body shot somewhere, he was probably oversize, but is what i think of as the quintessential shepherd from "back in the day".










and here's my mom with a bill v. kleistweg son...










thanks for indulging my walk down memory lane...now what was the original post on this thread about, lol...peace to all shepherd owners of every line everywhere. they are simply wonderful dogs.


----------



## Lesley1905

opcorn:


----------



## Doc

onyx'girl said:


> Doc, I neverposted on any threads when you were Lewie. I think you started our 'sparring' or whatever you want to call it. You pm'd me about Karlo's size as a dig. I don't confront unless someone starts with me and even then I try to be respectful. Lets call a truce already...


Tell me how I posted under two different names. And if you call your posts respectful, I better look up that definition in the dictionary.
Jane, I am convienced we will never be in concert on any aspect of this breed. I am trying to refrain from posting as much on this forum. 
I've tried to offer many years of studing this breed and thoughts about breeding. And anytime I say something, the peanut gallery - the ones that have never bred a dog, studied pedigrees, matched sires to dams years before a breeding, make statements that the history isn't important, and genetics aren't important - jump in head first and make some stupid comments and expose such lack of knowledge about this breed it is overwhelming. When I learned this stuff, there were no computers, no chat, no forums. You listened to those who knew the history, you spent hours trying to trace down books, you wrote letters to breeders hoping they would share information with you. 
Re-read Cliff's comments.


----------



## Debbieg

Wonderful pictures KatieLiz. They remind me of the GSD I had when I was 14. My dad just looked for breeders in the newspaper and got him.
I have no pictures, except in my heart but here is his litter mate and his sire 

CH Imperial v Celler Schloss - German Shepherd Dog

CH (US) Falko von Celler Schloss - German Shepherd Dog

King was large, but no couch potato!. He lived to be 14. I think he had some of those Swabian lines.

I think those of us relatively new to the breed. ( In 1998 I was unaware there was a split and thought all pure bred GSD's would be like my first so I , like my dad, looked in the paper and learned my lesson. I am so thankful for Doc Lewie, Carmen, Anne, Lee, Chris, Cliff and those take the time to educate us. They do it for the love of the breed and we do not make it easy.


----------



## RocketDog

Katieliz, I have to say, the first pic, the body shot in black and white, totally reminds me of the GSD's I grew up with on the block. Two, to be exact, and as a child from the earliest memories Schatzy and Gretchen (I'm not sure how Schatzy was spelled, I can't remember) were our block pals, until one day Schatzy got hit by a car at the age of 12, and Gretchen's hips took her down at the age of 9.  

They both looked exactly like that. This would've been in the '70's, with them dying around '81-82. 

Great--I'm dating myself.


----------



## Emoore




----------



## Liesje

Of the pedigrees that were posted a page or so back, the one that could be followed looked very similar to one of my dogs' pedigrees after the first 3-4 generations. Uran, Canto, Quanto...etc. This is not a dig on Doc or anyone but honestly many of us here have dogs very similar after the first few generations, being such a new breed.


----------



## sitstay

Jax08 said:


> :thinking: Did anyone learn anything from this thread?


I did. I knew that there were certain types of dogs that went into the foundation stock of the breed. Kind of like a cook adding a pinch of this or a squirt of that as they go, refining whatever it is to their taste. I knew that and I knew the basic back story of how, who and when the breed originated.

But I don't think I have ever gone searching specifically for those dogs that came within 2 or 3 generations of Horand. I wish I could find more pictures for some of these dogs/types. I like watching the progression.

You know what was fascinating? How quickly breed type was set. At least, that is something that I found really interesting. I guess a lot of that goes back to the rigorous culling that took place. 
Sheilah


----------



## onyx'girl

Doc said:


> Tell me how I posted under two different names. And if you call your posts respectful, I better look up that definition in the dictionary.
> Jane, I am convienced we will never be in concert on any aspect of this breed. I am trying to refrain from posting as much on this forum.


 I was taught that respect is earned....


----------



## Jax08

Me too Sheilah! I have the one very large pdf bookmarked to finish reading it. I've never been able to find anything on Swabian dogs in a google search before but those search engines are also 'customized' so you don't always get the best results.  I don't usually pay attention to these threads because they are so far over my head but some of these links have great information.


----------



## Jax08

Jack's Dad said:


> I know what I like and can get that in a GSD so I really don't care about trying to make the breed standard the end all anymore.
> 
> The Op got jumped on so quick it's hard to know exactly what they meant by "large".
> 
> But if they in fact do want a oversize (to the standard) dog, then why not try to find them a responsible breeder to give them that. By responsible I mean one who has dogs with good nerve, temperament, health.


I have to say...the one dog that I've pulled from a shelter for rescue that I cried when he left and I still want back...was 31" tall at his withers, flat backed and 105lbs (and skinny). So, not arguing for or against over standard dogs, there are some out there that make you want to find the same over and over.


----------



## Doc

onyx'girl said:


> I was taught that respect is earned....


yes indeed. it's a two way street and your initiation of me was uncalled for and wasn't a good way to start. and things haven't been any better since ...

It's hard to respect someone when the first encounter is horrible. I'm sure that should be quoted with a reference attached to it. :wild::wild:

Do you want to talk german shepherds or have a professional session on earning respect? Doc just isn't nick name you know. I earned it.


----------



## onyx'girl

Doc said:


> yes indeed. it's a two way street and your initiation of me was uncalled for and wasn't a good way to start. and things haven't been any better since ...
> 
> It's hard to respect someone when the first encounter is horrible. I'm sure that should be quoted with a reference attached to it. :wild::wild:


I almost added it is a two way street. I truly do not remember your first post that I supposedly ruined our relationship with...can you find it for prosperity sake? :wub:


----------



## msvette2u

Emoore said:


>


:Rofl:


----------



## Chris Wild

This is getting ridiculous. The thread has become completely derailed from the OP's question and while there truly are some great gems of information here in this thread, there's a whole lot of junk and snarking to sort through to find them. And now several members are getting well into the realm of personal attacks so it's time to close it down.

-Admin


----------

