# Are GSD's getting bigger??



## zeusy (Oct 25, 2013)

Are german shepherds getting bigger? Are breeders breeding for size only? Are we moving away from versatilty and workability? Recently i've seen ad's for stud's at 30" at the withers and weighing over 100 pounds. Ive heard of Sire's who where 125 pounds and Dams weighing close to 90 pounds.


----------



## MichaelE (Dec 15, 2012)

Probably BYB's who know nothing about the breed duping buyers who know even less.


----------



## DWP (Mar 31, 2011)

*I was wondering the same*

Growing up our GSDs were in the 60lb range for females and a little larger for the males. Our latest GSD female is 92lbs! She is a mix of European (sorry, can't remember if Austrian or German) working and show lines. When she was 2 and a half we went to our breeders for some training and they were surprised at her size. She was the largest GSD present, easily the largest of her litter. (no she is not overweight) Even so, all the females were easily 75lbs and the males 85 to 90lbs. 

I like the look of the size, but wonder if it is good for the breed.

No expert here though.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Most of the adult GSDs I see at UKC and SV shows are in the 45-80lb range and all of my purebred GSDs have been within that range as intact adults. I've seen people comment on how large some of the show dogs are but I wonder how accurate that is? Or maybe it's more of an AKC thing? In the SV ring, the judges seem to have gotten more picky with size and will definitely comment on a dog that is too large, too tall, or too heavy. I find a lot of WGSL dogs look larger than life. My own WGSL male is 70lbs and people typically guess he weighs 80-90lbs. You've got to put your hands on a dog to really critique the size and condition.


----------



## ndirishfan1975 (Jun 29, 2013)

My girl is about 60 pounds at 11 months. I think a lot of people over estimate the size and weight of their dogs....maybe its a complex


----------



## Sunflowers (Feb 17, 2012)

opcorn:


----------



## sarah1366 (Nov 3, 2013)

Gsds at one time was always weighing in as adults around 100 lbs and females slightly less it's only more recent years got whole lot smaller my female she's 2 and 28 inches at shoulder as big as my male and weighs Around 7 stone but she's slender big boned and long and tall I don't like little gsds not how there meant to be supposed be big powerfull beautifull but we'll muscled and fast 
Not overweight so always nice see breeder breed a good sized gsd seen alot of changes over 30 odd years of owning them not all been good changes 
Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## dpc134 (Jan 14, 2013)

I see alot of fat dogs waddling around. My brother always brags about the weight of his dog, but he is clearly overweight. I think its the old "bigger is better" complex.


----------



## Harry and Lola (Oct 26, 2013)

Yes I think you might be right, novices like size - they want big and I suspect some breeders are breeding for size because that is want the average pet owner wants. I have noticed size is being produced a lot. The Germans love them them thin and not tall.


----------



## belladonnalily (May 24, 2013)

My pup is huge but I didn't set out looking for a huge dog. My trainers male GSD is 70lbs and looks perfect and big enough. My pup's dad is 90 and mom is 70. Both big by GSD standards, but Tuck is going to be bigger than both, somehow. At 2 days shy of 8 mo he weighed in at 104.6. Not even slightly overweight. I'm praying he's an early bloomer and very close to being done, but I doubt it.

My next GSD will be smaller. I worry about Tucker and am taking every precaution in the book, but I don't mind his size for me. Its him I'm worried about. It does make me wonder...he was the last litter for the bitch...a litter of 2. 

Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

Humans are getting bigger due to better health and nutrition. I wonder if it is possible this is playing a factor in larger dogs as well? 

Getting Bigger All the Time: Why Humans Are Taller and Healthier Than Ever | Care2 Causes


----------



## Sansa's Mom (Dec 10, 2013)

shepherdmom said:


> Humans are getting bigger due to better health and nutrition. I wonder if it is possible this is playing a factor in larger


I think it is a combination of this + breeders deliberately breeding "extra large" german shepherds.


----------



## DaniFani (Jan 24, 2013)

sarah1366 said:


> Gsds at one time was always weighing in as adults around 100 lbs and females slightly less it's only more recent years got whole lot smaller my female she's 2 and 28 inches at shoulder as big as my male and weighs Around 7 stone but she's slender big boned and long and tall I don't like little gsds not how there meant to be supposed be big powerfull beautifull but we'll muscled and fast
> Not overweight so always nice see breeder breed a good sized gsd seen alot of changes over 30 odd years of owning them not all been good changes
> Sent from Petguide.com Free App


This is grossly inaccurate information. Here's some reading for you on what the creator of the breed thought about size and other things. 

Conifer Canine LLC: Max v. Stephanitz Quotesgerman shepherds for sale, dog obedience training,conifer canine, protection dog training, indiana

I personally like the following because it goes into detail on why, physiologically, size is a hinderance to life. Having nothing to do with what any one man thought of size, and only the biological/physiological effects of it....facts.

"Physical size exercises great influence on ability to move, for with increase of size, weight grows more in proportion than the strength available for movement, which depends on the density of the muscles, and thereby suffers not only in that particular part of its service which demands endurance, but also in the suppleness of the body, and the power of making quick and sharp turns, sudden stops, and the surmounting of obstacles. Increased weight exercises as well a strong pressure on the supporting frame of the skeleton which affects the bones themselves, as well as the ligaments and muscles .... *An excess of size is ... an unserviceable feature for breeding (because) his powers of endurance, his speed and the smartness of his movements suffer in all circumstances. Giants are never nimble.... Such dogs then use themselves up quickly when they are eager and full of ardor. They are, however, generally, lazy and easy-going and for that very reason are already unfit for service*."

OP, here are a few short (cough cough) threads regarding this subject. I find the Royalair one particularly interesting because it has people who bought from "large, over sized, gentle giants" breeders, who came back four years later sharing the multitude of health problems they are now dealing with with their beloved animals.

http://www.germanshepherds.com/forum/choosing-breeder/103016-anyone-have-dog-royalair.html

http://www.germanshepherds.com/forum/breed-standard/213578-oversized-gsds.html

http://www.germanshepherds.com/foru...oughts-oversized-german-shepherd-breeder.html


http://www.germanshepherds.com/forum/choosing-breeder/154103-oversized-breeder.html

http://www.germanshepherds.com/foru...9-looking-large-oversize-gsd-please-read.html

http://www.germanshepherds.com/forum/breeding-general/131936-old-fashioned-really.html


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

DaniFani said:


> This is grossly inaccurate information. Here's some reading for you on what the creator of the breed thought about size and other things.


You have oft quoted the creator of the breeds thoughts about size. I doubt there are few alive today who grew up way back then. Those of us who grew up in the 60's 70's and even into the 80's grew up with larger dogs. I know all the Shepherds I knew growing up were big. Easily 100#'s in their prime.


----------



## Saphire (Apr 1, 2005)

shepherdmom said:


> You have oft quoted the creator of the breeds thoughts about size. I doubt there are few alive today who grew up way back then. Those of us who grew up in the 60's 70's and even into the 80's grew up with larger dogs. I know all the Shepherds I knew growing up were big. Easily 100#'s in their prime.


wrong...wrong and wrong. Its no wonder the breed has fallen apart over the years.


----------



## Mrs.P (Nov 19, 2012)

Sunflowers said:


> opcorn:


Lol 


Sent from Petguide.com App


----------



## DaniFani (Jan 24, 2013)

shepherdmom said:


> You have oft quoted the creator of the breeds thoughts about size. I doubt there are few alive today who grew up way back then. Those of us who grew up in the 60's 70's and even into the 80's grew up with larger dogs. I know all the Shepherds I knew growing up were big. Easily 100#'s in their prime.


And once again you are using yours and others personal preference as a reason that these over-sized breeders should continue spewing this lie of "going back to the way the breed was supposed to be." You'll notice my quote had NOTHING to do with some person's (even if that person was the creator) preference, and everything to do with the PHYSIOLOGICAL (that means the way the body works) reasons that extreme size is inhibitive of workability. Over-standard sized organisms do not lead as long or as active of lives as those within the species of "average" size. Yeah...humans are getting bigger...that isn't a good thing either, considering most of the "big" is fat. Giants within the human species have much more health problems and live much shorter lives. I mean there was a poster recently looking at a kennel with a 140 pound sire...that's insane.

I still roll my eyes when people talk about how huge GSD's were when they were kids...yeah, I go places I thought were HUGE when I was 7 and then now think, "huh, I remember this being a lot bigger." Lol! I also think most people have NO idea how to guess a weight on a dog. I had people guessing my 65 pound shepherd was 80-85 ALL the time. Same with any dog I have, people always guess well over what they actually weigh.

Anywho, I'm done with this debate. Just thought I would add the facts, and TRUE breed history, so anyone reading this down the road doesn't think that larger is what the GSD is supposed to be, used to be, or should be. And just to clarify one more time so you can't take what you want out of my posts...I didn't quote the creator's preference for a reason....I quoted the *biological* and *physiological* reasons that over-sized is counterproductive to everything the GSD is supposed to be able to handle. Muscles, joints, bones, energy, etc....

Also, before you start giving me examples of large species that are active, I am talking about above standard within each species. Humans, elephants, dogs, cats, etc...the larger they are the harder it is...there's a reason a great dane lives to about 8 and my corgi (God willing) will live to 13-14+ years. Of course there are outliers in everything, but generally not only does bigger not equal better, it actually usually equals worse/health issues.

Saphire: I love your new avatar pic! Handsome guy! ;-)

Edit: Just as an example, Lies posted somewhere recently that her guy is 70/75 pounds (I think) and that she gets people all the time that think he's 90+ pounds. If you see a pic of him, he looks really big, I thought he was heavier than that! He isn't though, he's standard. Sorry for dragging you into this Lies, it just surprised me and reminded me how terrible most (including myself) are at gauging weight on dogs.

OP, I don't think we are moving toward big in the show and working world. In the pet world...absolutely....


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

Saphire said:


> wrong...wrong and wrong. Its no wonder the breed has fallen apart over the years.


My husband, in the 70's, had a male that was 125# his brother went #140 He pedigree was German lines, his hips were good and he was in very high demand. He was studded out at least 4 or 5 times a year for many years. This was the norm back then. Saphire were you even born then?


----------



## Saphire (Apr 1, 2005)

shepherdmom said:


> My husband, in the 70's, had a male that was 125# his brother went #140 He pedigree was German lines, his hips were good and he was in very high demand. He was studded out at least 4 or 5 times a year for many years. This was the norm back then. Saphire were you even born then?


yep sure was....


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I am sure there were over-sized dogs in the seventies, eighties, nineties, oughts, just like there are over-sized dogs now. The standard has not changed in that respect though, whichever standard you go by.

I think in AKC anyway, they were more concerned with balance than with a dog being over-sized. So, no doubt large dogs were shown and won regularly. It is not a disqualifying fault.

I think the problem is with people portraying these large dogs as being more correct because they are the way they used to be. When in fact, they weren't correct then, and they are not correct now. That doesn't mean that people do not love them and that they can't be wonderful pets.


----------



## NancyJ (Jun 15, 2003)

My first GSD male in 1985 was 69lbs. Never got above 72. He was American Showlines with the typical extreme linebreeding on Lance of Fran Jo.


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

selzer said:


> I am sure there were over-sized dogs in the seventies, eighties, nineties, oughts, just like there are over-sized dogs now. The standard has not changed in that respect though, whichever standard you go by.
> 
> I think in AKC anyway, they were more concerned with balance than with a dog being over-sized. So, no doubt large dogs were shown and won regularly. It is not a disqualifying fault.
> 
> I think the problem is with people portraying these large dogs as being more correct because they are the way they used to be. When in fact, they weren't correct then, and they are not correct now. That doesn't mean that people do not love them and that they can't be wonderful pets.


These were not show dogs though. They were working dogs with Schutzhund
titles. I'm not trying to argue that they were correct but those were what I think most people are remembering when they talk of the big shepherds back then. In fact I don't think I even saw a smaller shepherd until many years later. After we got married, my husband wanted to get a Shepherd I thought he was nuts I didn't want one of those big dogs but our mix was such a sweetheart she won me over and then I was hooked.


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

I always find it interesting that even with all the pictures and videos of GSD's from the past, people still think they were these 1000 pound dogs that people rode with a saddle. Is that where they got the saddle pattern from? My parents actually have a picture of me riding my childhood GSD. She was huge at 72 pounds. 

I also thoroughly enjoy the "bigger the dog, the more intimidating the dog" threads .


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

mycobraracr said:


> I always find it interesting that even with all the pictures and videos of GSD's from the past, people still think they were these 1000 pound dogs that people rode with a saddle. Is that where they got the saddle pattern from? My parents actually have a picture of me riding my childhood GSD. She was huge at 72 pounds.
> 
> I also thoroughly enjoy the "bigger the dog, the more intimidating the dog" threads .


I've got pictures of my kids ridding our dogs too, but I'd never post them here. Its not PC to let your kids ride dogs these days. I'm afraid I'd get ripped to shreds.


----------



## David Winners (Apr 30, 2012)

Welcome! To the next installment of....

What Does That Dog Weigh?

Same dog, 8 months between pictures. What do you think the weight is in each picture?

Closest without going over on both pictures gets a gold star 

Photo #1










Photo #2










David Winners


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

55 in the first picture, 64 in the second?


----------



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

1. 65#

2 75#


----------



## mycobraracr (Dec 4, 2011)

I'm guessing 55 and 62. I'm thinking around 23" at the withers.


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

David Winners said:


> Welcome! To the next installment of....
> 
> What Does That Dog Weigh?
> 
> ...



In photo 2 he looks smaller but more filled out than my little lab mix who is about 56#'s. 

Photo 1 he looks a little bigger to me maybe 60# or 65#s


----------



## bill (Nov 8, 2013)

60 68 24 inch

Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## ozzymama (Jan 17, 2005)

I think when you are only 3' tall a dog that is 24" is a big dog. Having said that I remember a K9 coming into our school for a show and tell type thing and not thinking the GSD was big. I don't remember him being anywhere as tall as our dobes and about the same body.
Look at all the people who say, "we used to get so much snow when we were kids", well your perception of time is different and if you are only 4' and you have a 6' snowbank, it seems a lot bigger than when you are 6' tall looking at a bank eye level.
I think it is perception and poor recollection which makes people remember GSD's so big, even the half-breed farm mixes were typically crossed with collies and not really that big.


----------



## wdkiser (May 7, 2013)

So what is the answer to the weights?


----------



## Mikelia (Aug 29, 2012)

I was not alive in the 70's but my aunt was breeding gsds then and still is now - some showline and some german imports. I grew up with these dogs descendants and studied the old dogs pictures all of my life. A few of them hit the 100lb mark but most were smaller, correct size. None were 140lb monsters. 
Grab any old GSD book (I have a few on my bookshelf) and look at the past greats. Maybe you can even find a nice book that has historical dogs categorized by country with nice pictures (also have a few books like this) and I can't say in any of them are huge german shepherds the norm - in any country.
There is also a wonderful webpage that lists all of the past german seigers and seigerins (sorry if my spelling is off), which someone maybe can post for everyone to see, that has pictures of all the winning dogs dating back to the 20s or 30s, and I cannot recall any of those dogs being huge monsters either.
My boy is big - 95lbs - but people often assume he is 140-150lbs. People have actually argued his weight with me, claiming their friends dog is smaller and weighes 150lbs. He is not that big. It's all in the perception. My friend claims to have a 120lb bulldogge, when I last took my scale over there the dog weighs 66lbs. A far cry from his 'proud' 120lbs. 
I think the good dogs are remaining correct size, some of the showlines are correct to largish, and some people are breeding for 'huge old style shepherds' that never really existed to please the pet market.


----------



## David Winners (Apr 30, 2012)

Photo 1 - 46 pounds, that's the day I got her out of the kennel. She's a spinner and had been in the kennel for a couple of months.

Photo 2 - 76-78 pounds, after 6 months of treadmill every morning, training every day including a lot of climbing and jumping, lots of tug, and missions in the mountains.

24" tall

Selzer was closest! 


I'm terrible at guessing the weight of a dog by looks. There are some big GSDs out there that weigh far less than they look to me. I grew up with large dogs (SBDs and Mastiffs) and tend to believe dogs with long coats appear heavier than they actually are.


----------



## David Winners (Apr 30, 2012)

Sunflowers said:


> David, please tell, how do you do treadmill?
> How long is each session, and do you have warmups and cooldowns on the treadmill?


Training a dog how to run on the treadmill is a topic for a thread on it's own.

As far as schedules go. I let the dog decide, but here are some good guidelines for a young adult GSD with no health problems.

1st week - 5 minutes 4.5 MPH walk / warm-up. 15 minutes 6-9 MPH trot (speed depends on the dog). 5 minutes 4 MPH cool-down. After the treadmill workout, we would go for a nice slow walk for about 10 minutes to slow respiration before getting a drink.

I add 5 minutes per week to the main work-out until I reach 60 minutes, while keeping the warm-up and cool-down the same.

After the dogs gets used to the treadmill and has some solid cardiovascular fitness, I change up the workout routines to include sprint intervals and hill drills twice a week. I came up with this routine because it's what works for me, and Fama and I usually did the same workout.











It's important to note that when I said everyday... there were days off sometimes. Unless we had a mission, we didn't leave the hooch on sundays except to use the bathroom.

It's also important to note that you need to make sure the dog poops before getting on the treadmill, unless you want to see what an 8 MPH manure spreader looks like in your living room.

Hope this helps!


----------



## Sunflowers (Feb 17, 2012)

Thank you so very much! It helps a lot.


----------



## SummerGSDLover (Oct 20, 2013)

LOL @ an eight MPH manure spreader in the livingroom. Haha

*-*Summer*-*


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

> OP, here are a few short (cough cough
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I certainly hope people actually read those threads you repeatedly refer to b/c you grossly misrepresent what the vast majority of people that own those dogs have experienced & how they feel about their dogs. Most have healthy, sound, long lived dogs with excellent temperaments. Overwhelmingly those dissing the dogs & the breeder have little to no experience with the breeder or her dogs. 

In another thread someone mentioned that it's silly when people recommend a breeder b/c they are soooo impressed with a recently acquired 10 wk old pup. I agree. I've had 3 Royalair dogs & none of em are close to being 10 wks old. Sam was over 13 when I finally had to decide to let her go. Djibouti is now 6 & has never been even mildly sick. Phoenix too is a mature adult, sound, healthy, always pleasant & a joy to live with. Most people who have dogs from this breeder cite similar experiences. Even the poster whose bitch had hip surgery loves her girl, speaks well of her temperament & personality, & expresses joy to have her. Another member is frankly not happy with the breeder & is distressed that her dog has sensitivities/allergies. Note, she has never faulted her Royalair dog's temperament & greatly prefers her Royalair shepherd over the disastrous GSD she later acquired from a breeder touted as being so much better. 

A board member has 2 bitches from a very well regarded breeder. One bitch has hd while the other has hd & mega-e. Another member returned a dog she considered dangerously aggressive to another highly regarded breeder. Yet another recommended breeder has had mutiple problems with premature deaths & temperament problems. Ditto yet another (& throw in some structural anomalies). You think you oughta present that info to lend a little balance??? Are these breeders 'good breeders'? Most here think so. I'd agree on 2 of them, disagree on the other 2. (There are others as well but that's sooo not the point).

Could you possibly express your disagreements concerning the over sized GSD without resorting to exaggerations, misrepresentations, innuendo & flat out bad information? That people seldom do indicates how truly weak the arguments are. 

Note that the absolute worst GSD I've met was a scary bad wl...unstable, inappropriately aggressive, unfocused, slooooow to learn, indifferent to his owner/handler & I suspect seriously unbalanced mentally. I suspect he was very poorly bred & would never extrapolate from him to other wl GSD. Just as breeders of wl or sl aren't all the same, neither are breeders of over sized GSDs. As with wl & sl, they range from good breeders consistently producing sound, healthy, long lived GSDs to breeders producing waaay too many unhealthy, unsound GSDs lacking intelligence, purpose or vigor.


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

It is obvious that some in hear need an indebt study of the history surrounding this breed. From the comments made, it is real apparent that many of the posters in this thread know absolutely nothing about the genetic makeup of this breed. There can be no absolutes in a breed that was created out of 4 unique and distinct dog groups. To generalize statements regarding size and health only confirms my conviction that some posters should refrain from exposing their limited knowledge in a public forum.


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

Doc, when I 1st joined the board a common complaint among those competing was that only very tall, over sized dogs _could_ win b/c the DQ for size was so widely ignored by judges...Clearly over sized GSDs were viewed favorably by more than just pet people. And of course the Capt himself put up a dog that was 28/29". A woman I know obtained several very tall & substantial GSD from East Germany after the wall fell. Nor was she the only one. It seems that it's really only in recent years that there's been a concerted push to eliminate over sized GSDs.

IMO, when the judges were putting 'em up they should have done the honest thing & developed a standard which recognized what so many in the show & working worlds clearly admired. Considerable variation in size s/b expected in working breeds, especially an all arounder like the GSD. Salukis are readily recognizable despite considerable variation in size, True of the American Bulldog as well.


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

This whole notion that a German shepherd should only be a certain size, color, etc. has lead to the downfall of this breed. The cookie cutter "typey" mindset has caused a great dis-service as to why this breed was created. It has also lead to genetic bottlenecks, encouraged the breeding of looks over genetics, and has driven a wedge between the show and SchH crowd; not to mention that the real working characteristics that was fundamental in the original German shepherds have been long forgotten and are becoming harder to find.
Are GSDs getting bigger? I would answer that the "bigger" is part of this breed and it has always been there much to the distain of the current spin doctors. Read the history;study the pedigrees; the answers are all there.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

Doc, there is nothing you wrote that I find untrue! But you are speaking from another perspective, this is a versatile breed in looks, temperament, and structure, always has been.....up until last thirty or forty years. Now cookie cutter dogs in looks and drives are in vogue, and cookie cutter experts drive the train.


----------



## robk (Jun 16, 2011)

I would say that a normal range that I see today for GSDs is 70-90lbs for males and 55-75lbs for females with American lines being taller in general than Euro lines. I see both larger and smaller working lines. Most German Show lines that I see tend to be very average looking (80ish lbs for males, 60ish lbs for females). 

On a side note, When I was a kid (early 80's) I do remember an extremley large Black and tan male that was tied up out side at junk yard. I was probably 12 years old at that time, and to me the dog looked to be about 150lbs. Not fat at all, very deep pigmented and very viscious acting. My friends and I would go upto the fence and tease him some just to see him explode in a rage of fury and dust. In hindsight, he probably was not as big as I remember but he made quite an impression on me as a very big dog.


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

cliffson1 said:


> Doc, there is nothing you wrote that I find untrue! But you are speaking from another perspective, this is a versatile breed in looks, temperament, and structure, always has been.....up until last thirty or forty years. Now cookie cutter dogs in looks and drives are in vogue, and cookie cutter experts drive the train.


I guess I need to retire to my wheelchair Clif and watch the train fly by. Let me know when you come across a German shepherd line like back in the good old days. I'm working on a new breeding program focusing on nerve and balance. Come to think of it, I've been working on that for years ... I forget it all luck and has nothing to do with yesterday's dogs. It will be in my book ...:wild:


----------



## Chip18 (Jan 11, 2014)

Hmm well my Rocky Blk GSD is from a BYB obviously no health testing was done because he has Ataxia. Sound temperament but he's a big boy and not fat! He weights in at 117 on the vet's scale.

I'm trying to trim him down a bit but there is no way he'd ever be a 90 lb dog. So the root of the "problem' is BYB. They breed them big because by and large that's what the public wants.

My friend has two GSD a White and a BLK and when I saw them I was horrified because they looked like Coyotes (In size) my guy looks like a (Wolf). 

I understand that his size would be a liability to the GSD being able to do the jobs that they were bred to do! But most folks getting a GSD aren't on this board and big dogs are what they are seeing in the Newspapers and Craigslist (god forbid!).


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

Several people I know prefer larger GSDs b/c of the jobs they need 'em for just as there are those that prefer a smaller GSD for other jobs. 

I don't know what Djibouti weighs. At a yr he was a lean 92/93 lbs. He weighs a bit more now. I like his size but given his temperament & personality he'd be my kinda guy if he weighed 1/2 as much.

Historically it wasn't just so called byb that bred 'em big. Several yrs back a common complaint was that the size DQ was routinely ignored & GSDs within the standard couldn't successfully compete.


----------



## HarleyTheGSD (Feb 13, 2012)

I'm sure some breeders breed for larger size (100+ lbs), but I wouldn't buy a GSD from one of these breeders. Harley, my 5 year old neutered male, is 90 lbs lean. Varick, my 17 month old intact male, is 80 lbs lean. I actually had a friend of mine say that she thought Harley was a smaller sized German Shepherd. I'm assuming it's because he is thin...


----------



## seirios (Jan 4, 2014)

when i picked up my pup he was the runt of the liter, his dad and mom both were massive though, which is why i wanted the littlest pup...he was 100lbs at 8 months!!! slightly overweight though, doc says ideal weight shouldnt exceed much over 90 still massive in my book, right? i dont mind though, hes very gentle and not aggressive towards anyone or any other animals.


----------



## Okin (Feb 27, 2013)

I know my girl is big. She is 72lbs at 13 months and has a tuck. She has got some good muscles though. 

People that know GSD's say man that is a big girl and people that don't ask why she is so small /shrug

People also overestimate the size a lot. My cousin who lives far away from me has a GSD and all I heard was there GSD is HUGE over 125lbs but I had never met the dog!! He showed me pictures and said yeah he was overweight and was almost 100 he is 90 now.


----------



## xsaysayx (Feb 14, 2010)

I agree that it is often people midjudging the size of their dogs... I met a female German Shepherd the other day who, while probably 5 pounds overweight, was definitely nowhere near the 100+ pounds her owner swears she is. I'd say more like 65. She was very short and not very broad.
I think most american lines are a lot taller than they should be - I know some breeders who produce males from 24 inches to 30 inches regularly, however, my experience with American lines is that they are very narrow. 
West lines, I think, are broader... I think they look a lot bigger than they really are, when you consider (most) are not taller than they should be.


----------



## Shaina (Apr 2, 2011)

My girls 60lbs at 3 years old, so I'd say it depends on the breeder (and she came from a nice one!)


----------



## khawk (Dec 26, 2008)

Ok, I swore I wasn't going to get sucked into posting on this forum again, but this thread has been driving me nuts. To answer your question I'll give you the answer Fred Lanting posited to this question in his book The Total German Shepherd Dog, c1990, no, today's dogs, on average, are not getting bigger, they are actually getting smaller. 

Some facts, for anyone interested, the breed standard says, "the correct or desired height for males is 24 to 26 inches and for females is 22 to 24 inches." It also adds that earlier dogs were often taller and/or leggier than modern dogs and states that judges may give precedence to dogs that are taller. That's from 1978, the last time the standard was revised. In fact, from 1929 thro 1943 and 1965, the matter of size remained pretty similar, with a range of sizes the accepted standard. In 1922, over three months time, 239 dogs were submitted for examination and 67 of those dogs were over 26 inches, with some (around 30) of them measuring 28 and 29 inches. 

Horand v Grafath, the SV's no 1 dog, was 24 and a half inches tall. Stephanitz always emphasized that half inch because the predjudice among people who worked their dogs on stock, for ambulance (tracking, search and rescue) work, herding and police work was strongly against small dogs and for the bigger dogs. (They excoriated early small Saxony dogs, Schafermadchen and Stopelhofer as 'fit only to herd geese'.) For most of these people, this was their livelihood. They didn't like Horand. At all. His low bite threshold, his lack of biddability (according to the Captain, he was untrainable) and his small size were all reprehensible to people who worked dogs for a living. Dogs they liked, Max and Jorg v d Krone (first Sieger, 1899) and Hektor v Schwaben (Sieger 1900 and 1901) were much bigger dogs, Hektor in the 27-28 inch range, with a big frame. In working condition, he would have weighed in 105-110 pounds, and Hektor was a working dog, with the HGH, meaning that he handled no less than 200 sheep at a time, and often many more. He was followed by many larger dogs, including some very big/tall girls, Elsa v Schwaben and Flora and Hella v d Kriminal Polizei and Frigga v Scharenstetten, Siegerins 1902, 1911-2, and 1913. Luchs v Kalsmunt-Wetzlar (Sieger 1908), Hettel Uckermark, HGH and Sieger 1909, Tell v d Kriminal Polizei, Sieger, 1910 and Arno v d Eichenburg, Sieger 1913 varied from 27-8 inches (Hettel) to 29 inches (Arno). 

The most popular sire of the early era, Horst v Boll, born 1909, (and putting Stephanitz' nose royally out of joint!) was 28-29 inches, would have weighed in the 105-110 range in working condition (muscle is heavier than fat!) because of his great trainability, strong nerve and wonderful working character. He sired herding dogs, ambulance dogs and police dogs and was highly regarded by everyone who worked dogs for a living. (Stephanitz never worked a dog in his life--or trained one either. When he had the equivalent of what we would call a 'titled' dog today, he bought the dog from someone else who had bred and trained him, usually Anton Eiselen of v d Krone, and changed the dog's name to v Grafath). 

The v d Kriminal Polizei were uniformly large, tall dogs, with Tell, Jung Tell (Holland's champion in 1913) and numerous others. After WWI, one of the most popular sires was Horst son, Nores v d Kriminal Polizei, at 29 inches (877 registered progeny!). Nores sired Harras v d Juch, the over 27 inch Sieger of 1921. (The story goes that in 1921 either a car backfired when the dogs were being judged, or someone shot off a gun--according to who tells it--and almost half the dogs presented for the Sieger judging decamped from the ring, leaving Harras v d Juch and a few others to be judged. Erich v Grafenwerth, Sieger 1920, who appears, according to Malcolm Willis, in the pedigree of every living German Shepherd dog today, was one of those who ran out of the ring.) Donor Overholzen, Sieger 1924, was also 27 inches plus. 

The smaller dogs of the breed which people remember from the past were the dogs developed by Hitler when he wrested control of the SV from Stephanitz in the1930s. In order to create dogs quick to bite without provocation, dogs who would bite women and children whenever ordered to do so, he crossed the lines of Nestor v Wiegerfelsen, a dog highly in-bred, particularly on Beowulf Sonnenberg and Dewet Barbarossa, with Cherusker v Burg Fasanental (a largely Saxony dog) to create the Meisterreiche dogs. Because he was essentially crossing Saxony and Thuringian dogs, the size of the dogs was lowered. Today's so-called 'working' line dogs were created from a mix of Lex v Preussenblut and Maja v OsnabruckerLand dogs and dogs who carried Nestor and Cherusker. (Just for example, Held v Ritterberg carried 31 lines to Lex and Maja and 31 lines to Nestor and Cherusker.) 

The German Shepherd dog is a mix of 4 different breed/types of early German dogs. The ancient breeds of Swabia/Wurttemberg (Swabia, old name, Wurttemberg, modern name) herding dogs and Saxony and Brunswick herding dogs, the Thuringian Yard dogs, and the Northern 'wolf' dogs and herding dogs (2 very different types). The Swabian and Northern dogs were uniformly large, big-boned, big-framed dogs. They had evolved such large sizes because they were used (at least in Swabia)as both guardian and herding dogs (Swabian dogs handled all kinds of livestock from pigs to horses with stops at sheep, goats, geese and cattle in between) and had to withstand severe cold (Northern Alps, Jura Mountains and Black Forest). Northern dogs also had to be large to withstand cold. (Larger body mass retains body heat better and longer than smaller body mass.) 

The Saxony and Brunswick dogs were often smaller. They came from the river valleys and ranged in size all over the map. These dogs handled sheep in flocks from 600 to 1000. They came in a wide range of colors as well. 

The Thuringian dogs were small, often stocky, and almost always dark. Their temprament ran from poor to awful, fear and fear aggression was commonplace, they were noisy and quick to bite and quite terrier like--they did not get along with other dogs and would just as soon bite a person as not. They were kept in stable yards mostly and used to hunt men. They were owned by wealthy landowners who often never laid eyes on them and usually worked by gamekeepers. In the beginning of the breed there was a strong protest against including them in the new breed but Stephanitz loved them and insisted on including them. Many of the health problems we have with our dogs today are traceable to the Thuringian Sparwasser dogs and it is from the Thuringian dogs that the fear issues come (thro Roland v Starkenburg, mostly).

High thresholds, good herding, public access, search and rescue nerve, high reliability, comes from the Swabian/Wurttemberger dogs. 

Low thresholds, high exciteability, feral levels of prey drive, sharpness to bite, lack of biddability, comes from the small, dark Thuringian dogs.

Today, for some reason people seem to want highly standardized dogs, all dark, or all black and tan, or all small or some combination of the above. That's how we get unhealthy dogs. The best option for the breed, if you want healthy dogs, is to welcome a wide range of colors and sizes and to celebrate all of them. And a last word--for those who insist that the German Shepherd dogs should all be small and lean they way they like them--according to the Purdue University statistical studies, the average German Shepherd dog that dies of bloat is 58 pounds with a 4 inch spring of ribs. In other words, small. khawk


----------



## bill (Nov 8, 2013)

khawk said:


> Ok, I swore I wasn't going to get sucked into posting on this forum again, but this thread has been driving me nuts. To answer your question I'll give you the answer Fred Lanting posited to this question in his book The Total German Shepherd Dog, c1990, no, today's dogs, on average, are not getting bigger, they are actually getting smaller.
> 
> Some facts, for anyone interested, the breed standard says, "the correct or desired height for males is 24 to 26 inches and for females is 22 to 24 inches." It also adds that earlier dogs were often taller and/or leggier than modern dogs and states that judges may give precedence to dogs that are taller. That's from 1978, the last time the standard was revised. In fact, from 1929 thro 1943 and 1965, the matter of size remained pretty similar, with a range of sizes the accepted standard. In 1922, over three months time, 239 dogs were submitted for examination and 67 of those dogs were over 26 inches, with some (around 30) of them measuring 28 and 29 inches.
> 
> ...


Nice post! Bill


----------



## Nirvaana (Jun 25, 2013)

khawk said:


> Ok, I swore I wasn't going to get sucked into posting on this forum again, but this thread has been driving me nuts. ....


and /salute. Thank you for the smack down.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

@khawk....praise The Lord and pass the biscuits ....great historical post based on something other than shallow opinions. When you understand the foundation of the breed, you can often connect the dots successfully. But many experts today have no real knowledge of foundation and very little application experience to temper their opinions. But they have become experts on what is correct in the breed....I know just how you feel Khawk ....because we see things out the same window.


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

khawk said:


> Ok, I swore I wasn't going to get sucked into posting on this forum again, but this thread has been driving me nuts. To answer your question I'll give you the answer Fred Lanting posited to this question in his book The Total German Shepherd Dog, c1990, no, today's dogs, on average, are not getting bigger, they are actually getting smaller.


Thank you for some real proof.  I knew that Shepherds were smaller today than they were when I was a young adult. But everyone kept saying that it was because I was small or that I was mis-remembering. Bull, I'm not that old and I wasn't that small. Thank you! I am so glad you posted!!


----------



## belladonnalily (May 24, 2013)

Thank you khawk. I read some confusing things related to this and your post clears it up. And my boy is very big, and the breeder's comments now make sense. But I've always been afraid to discuss them here (still am!). But I am one of those that remembers large GSDs from my childhood....

Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

A wish come true! Khawk posting. Cliff, too!

Killer post Khawk. Given the serious health & temperament problems plaguing GSDs it's amazing that people get in a froth over GSDs that are a few inches too tall even when they're solid, stable, healthy, active, long lived examples of the breed.

The misinformation alone would be mildly amusing but I've seen several people convinced to get GSDs that worked very poorly for them. Ooohh, they were the correct size, & came from titled stock, but in some very important ways these 'correct' GSDs lacked health & temperament.


----------



## Blanketback (Apr 27, 2012)

Thank you for your post, khawk. I wish you'd get sucked in more often


----------



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

Thanks khawk for the posts re the 4 lines.I was wondering where the traits of genetic obedience comes in? I don't want to hijack this thread but if someone can pm me re this I'd appreciate it. This is interesting and I appreciate fplks sharing their knowledge.


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

And the truth shall set you free. 



khawk said:


> Ok, I swore I wasn't going to get sucked into posting on this forum again, but this thread has been driving me nuts. To answer your question I'll give you the answer Fred Lanting posited to this question in his book The Total German Shepherd Dog, c1990, no, today's dogs, on average, are not getting bigger, they are actually getting smaller.
> 
> Some facts, for anyone interested, the breed standard says, "the correct or desired height for males is 24 to 26 inches and for females is 22 to 24 inches." It also adds that earlier dogs were often taller and/or leggier than modern dogs and states that judges may give precedence to dogs that are taller. That's from 1978, the last time the standard was revised. In fact, from 1929 thro 1943 and 1965, the matter of size remained pretty similar, with a range of sizes the accepted standard. In 1922, over three months time, 239 dogs were submitted for examination and 67 of those dogs were over 26 inches, with some (around 30) of them measuring 28 and 29 inches.
> 
> ...


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

> But everyone kept saying that it was because I was small or that I was mis-remembering. Bull, I'm not that old and I wasn't that small.


I'm old & I was tiny, but if it was true of GSDs, it should also have been true of Retrievers, Collies, Weims or Greyhounds, yet it's only the GSD that seemed larger when I was a child. Dad & Mom, who were adults, also remembered GSDs being a large to very large dog rather than the 'medium size' currently touted. 



> Thank you khawk. I read some confusing things related to this and your post clears it up. And my boy is very big, and the breeder's comments now make sense. But I've always been afraid to discuss them here (still am!). But I am one of those that remembers large GSDs from my childhood....


It's sad that you're afraid to discuss this here. Unfortunately, all too often people have left the board b/c they were so uncomfortable or simply disliked the abrasive tone these discussions descend into. Others continue to post but avoid any discussions of GSD standards, history or breeding. That shouldn't happen. It really shouldn't. 



> Thank you for your post, khawk. I wish you'd get sucked in more often


*Amen!*


----------



## Suka (Apr 9, 2004)

> And a last word--for those who insist that the German Shepherd dogs should all be small and lean they way they like them--according to the Purdue University statistical studies, the average German Shepherd dog that dies of bloat is 58 pounds with a 4 inch spring of ribs. In other words, small.


Will you please cite your source? I'm a little confused where this is from, since the Purdue University study did not include German Shepherds. http://www.instituteofcaninebiology.org/purdue-bloat-study.html


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

I just took a quick glance but it appears that GSD were used in at least some phase of the research.

purdue study report


----------



## bill (Nov 8, 2013)

28 shepherds Bill


----------



## crackem (Mar 29, 2006)

The scientist in me hopes this isnt actually the study used to draw conclusions about gsd size and bloat.


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

Unfortunately the info on bloat (in any breed) is sparse & uncertain.


----------



## Suka (Apr 9, 2004)

I still don't see any reference to size, like 58 lbs. I'm not on one side of the fence or another. What I am concerned with is facts. I don't want to believe just anything I read on the internet and this was an interesting and potentially informative read.


----------



## crackem (Mar 29, 2006)

I think someone was a little carefree in what they interpreted from that "study"


----------



## Germanshepherdlova (Apr 16, 2011)

Some people think that a big GSD is cool or intimidating-I get comments all the time when out walking my dog about how good he looks. My GSD is 128 lbs-he comes from a very big line. His agility is ok but not great. At six years old his hips are still holding up well, thank God for that.

My next GSD I will make sure to get from a breeder that is in compliance with the GSD standards. By no means is a bigger GSD better-it affects their agility.


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

Suka, I provided the link in response to your post stating no GSDs were included in the study. The Purdue bloat research project appears to have involved several stages & to have generated numerous papers. Khawk is an excellent source of info, who I've found to be accurate & well informed. Your concern for the facts is commendable but it appears at this point that the facts you submitted were incomplete & not accurate.

Crackem, conclusions from the study are all over the place. Many of us with at risk breeds found it to be more frustrating than informative. Large to giant dogs appear to be at a considerably elevated risk but I've never seen anything to suggest that oversized GSD are at greater risk than GSDs within the standard. This is true regarding the risk of hd as well, yet many who oppose the old fashioned over sized GSDs make glib & unsupported statements which imply there's a greater risk of hd, bloat or decreased longevity. Ironically, over weight dogs appear to be at less risk! (No, I don't plan on getting Djibouti fat).


----------



## crackem (Mar 29, 2006)

The study is still garbage, 14 GSD's with bloat when they ask questions of owners at specialty shows. Great sample size LOL

I still see nothing of size or weight with these GSD's in either link and if they did have it, it would still be garbage. Any inferences made from such shoddy data should be taken with a giant grain of salt.

Speaking of unsupported statements, if you don't like people making them, don't make some of your own to try and combat it. 

And what's with the "old world" arguments again. I doubt any of us were around in 1920 to have a flippin clue.


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

I never said the study proved much of anything. It was a huge disappointment to most of us. What do you mean 'unsupported statements' or 'old world arguments'?


----------



## Suka (Apr 9, 2004)

RubyTuesday said:


> Suka, I provided the link in response to your post stating no GSDs were included in the study. The Purdue bloat research project appears to have involved several stages & to have generated numerous papers. Khawk is an excellent source of info, who I've found to be accurate & well informed. Your concern for the facts is commendable but it appears at this point that the facts you submitted were incomplete & not accurate.
> 
> Crackem, conclusions from the study are all over the place. Many of us with at risk breeds found it to be more frustrating than informative. Large to giant dogs appear to be at a considerably elevated risk but I've never seen anything to suggest that oversized GSD are at greater risk than GSDs within the standard. This is true regarding the risk of hd as well, yet many who oppose the old fashioned over sized GSDs make glib & unsupported statements which imply there's a greater risk of hd, bloat or decreased longevity. Ironically, over weight dogs appear to be at less risk! (No, I don't plan on getting Djibouti fat).


I didn't submit any "facts". I submitted a link that showed the list of breeds included in the Purdue study. I also did not state any personal opinions so please stop being heated over this. What I want to see is the fact behind the quote from Khawk's initial write-up about GSDs having bloat at 58 lbs that I quoted in a previous post asking for the source behind that particular statement. I have not gone through and questioned everything in the write-up but I am particularly curious about that specific statement. Like I have said before, I found Khawk's write up interesting if not informative and I would like to check my sources before I go adding it into my conversations. I'm sure Khawk will be happy to provide when it's possible.


----------



## crackem (Mar 29, 2006)

RubyTuesday said:


> I never said the study proved much of anything. It was a huge disappointment to most of us. What do you mean 'unsupported statements' or 'old world arguments'?


well somebody comes on and copies a long text about how 100+lb dogs are good and smaller dogs are nervy, uncontrollable pieces of crap, at least historically speaking. Claims that the smaller dogs historically speaking, were also were all the health problems in the breed came from and then cites a relatively recent study to "prove" his assertion that smaller dogs are more unhealthy and uses this bloat study as an example.

Then everyone says, kudos, great write up, great find to which you then said something to the effect that those adhering to the standard of a "medium" dog aren't doing what was done before and people make too many claims about unsubstantiated stuff concerning the larger dogs. It appeared you were agreeing with the initial claims, which are still "unsubstantiated".

as for the rest, if people want to discredit the 'ol captain as being just one guys opinion, well the guy writing about him is an opinion as well, one written well after any of those early dogs were dead and gone, the people that bred them as well. 

None of us were around then, not much of it matters to me anymore. When I can find a 100lb dog to hold up and do what my much smaller, faster, more driven dogs that are completely stable in social and working conditions, then I'll start looking at those breeding "old world" gsd's as a potential dog. Until then, I'll stick with what I have. Up until know I"ve mostly seen words on a computer screen.


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

If you took the time to study the history of this breed, then you would see those sizes in them. How big were the Northern 'wolf' and herding dogs that help create this breed? Or the Swabian/wurttemberg dogs? 
Horand was a nervy, nasty, brat of a dog. It's recorded in several places. His saving grace was the fact that his bloodline was composed of the four differently distinct dogs that make up the German shepherd. He met his end chasing a train. It's all recorded history.
I'm sure there is a reference for the information about bloat. Khawk has no need to spin things.



crackem said:


> well somebody comes on and copies a long text about how 100+lb dogs are good and smaller dogs are nervy, uncontrollable pieces of crap, at least historically speaking. Claims that the smaller dogs historically speaking, were also were all the health problems in the breed came from and then cites a relatively recent study to "prove" his assertion that smaller dogs are more unhealthy and uses this bloat study as an example.
> 
> Then everyone says, kudos, great write up, great find to which you then said something to the effect that those adhering to the standard of a "medium" dog aren't doing what was done before and people make too many claims about unsubstantiated stuff concerning the larger dogs. It appeared you were agreeing with the initial claims, which are still "unsubstantiated".
> 
> ...


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

Crackem, people make way too many unsubstantiated claims about the larger GSD. What is particularly galling is how often these claims are made despite contrary information from those who have lived with these dogs for many years. Given how frequently & thickly such misinformation is spread I'm convinced it's a deliberate smear campaign. Sad that there are those who if they can't honestly discredit the dogs are willing to resort to rumours, innuendoes & lies. Just sad.

Khawk's breed history aligns with what Cliff, Carmen & Doc have posted elsewhere. They certainly believe that the smaller dogs, including the Thuringian dogs, made valuable contributions to the breed, & must be an integral part of the current GSD. I doubt Khawk would dispute that. She has simply shown that the larger GSDs were very much a part of the breed. They shouldn't be denied or discounted as they so often are on this board.

My preference is for the larger GSDs but what I'm adamant about is that stability you mention. I'm also keen on discerning dogs with impeccable judgment who are thinkers. Those qualities trump size any day. For example, my heart dog, the one I still miss almost a dozen yrs after he died, weighed b/w ~50/60 lbs. 

Suka, you're mistaken. My post wasn't intended to convey any 'heat'. I certainly understand the wish to check things out further & I'm glad I ventured a bit beyond the link you provided. I don't feel a need to look into it further b/c while bloat is associated with large/giant breeds nothing I've read suggests that a large/small example of any of the affected breeds is at more or less risk. It has been stated elsewhere that over sized GSDs are at greater risk for both bloat & hd to discourage people who are attracted to them. This errant nonsense is simply pulled from thin air b/c those making the arguments can't make a more compelling case. Again, that's just sad.


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

crackem said:


> Then everyone says, kudos, great write up, great find
> 
> Maybe you should look at who is saying kudos great find. There are many years of GSD experience behind those kudos. Including Doc and Cliff
> 
> None of us were around then, not much of it matters to me anymore. When I can find a 100lb dog to hold up and do what my much smaller, faster, more driven dogs that are completely stable in social and working conditions, then I'll start looking at those breeding "old world" gsd's as a potential dog. Until then, I'll stick with what I have. Up until know I"ve mostly seen words on a computer screen.


Your loss.


----------



## crackem (Mar 29, 2006)

I have a few years behind me too, most of which I learned by not spending time on a message board. No **** larger dogs were a part of the breed history, so were smaller ones. All used in hopes of creating a different breed of dog 

I doubt anybody posting in this thread as ever laid eyes upon living breathing Thuringian or Swabian dog. We have what we have today and what can your dog do?


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

crackem said:


> I have a few years behind me too, most of which I learned by not spending time on a message board. No **** larger dogs were a part of the breed history, so were smaller ones. All used in hopes of creating a different breed of dog
> 
> I doubt anybody posting in this thread as ever laid eyes upon living breathing Thuringian or Swabian dog. We have what we have today and what can your dog do?


Anyone that has read any of my posts knows that my dogs are the best in the whole world.  They sleep, eat and poop better than any other dog on the planet. :laugh:


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

The question isn't "what can your dog do"? The question is "what can't your dog do"?


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

I see the level of comprehension hasn't improved much recently......I don't see anyone saying all big dogs are good, the size of the breed should be enlarged, or that increased size equals better agility. What I DO hear is that large GS are as much a part of the breed as color, drive, big heads, angulation, and a host of other aspects. Many of these things people actively base their breeding programs on, to the detriment of the breed,(IMO); yet when large GS are bought up out comes vitriol against oversize dogs like this is the plague. I laugh at the lack of need for historical information like I do at those who feel that pedigrees/genetics are overrated. Most of the knowledge I have of the breed I learned 30 to forty years ago.....it's really amazing because back then they didn't have Internet or Internet warriors....lol, but we read historical stone tablets and telegraphed each other about dogs. In my life, I have owned sables, Black and Tan, black and red, black sable, large dogs, small dogs, big heads, narrow heads, angulated dogs, square dogs, skinny tall dogs, short stocky dogs, because the breed is capable of having good specimens with any of these types. 
Btw, Crackem, I would love to bring ANY of my different type of GS to your neck of the woods and see if they could do the type of training you do. :hug:.


----------



## Blanketback (Apr 27, 2012)

I gave kudos, because I thought it was very generous of khawk to post that history, for those that don't know the breed's origins. So? Is it Lanting's credibility that's in question? What about Willis? 

"In 1926 the German Sieger of two years previous came to Britain. This was Donar v Overstolzen... He was oversized (26 1/2 in) like Dullo although smaller than Dolf (27.2in)...the whole litter represented the older type of dog which was beginning to be in disfavour by the end of the decade and to be replaced by smaller, more compact animals."

M.B. Willis _The German Shepherd Dog Its History, Development and Genetics_ pg.89-90


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

Blanketback said:


> I gave kudos, because I thought it was very generous of khawk to post that history, for those that don't know the breed's origins. So? Is it Lanting's credibility that's in question? What about Willis?
> 
> "In 1926 the German Sieger of two years previous came to Britain. This was Donar v Overstolzen... He was oversized (26 1/2 in) like Dullo although smaller than Dolf (27.2in)...the whole litter represented the older type of dog which was beginning to be in disfavour by the end of the decade and to be replaced by smaller, more compact animals."
> 
> M.B. Willis _The German Shepherd Dog Its History, Development and Genetics_ pg.89-90


There is another thread on this forum talking about why certain people do not post much. I think it is very clear why. The "old guard" on this forum is always criticized and thrown under the bus when facts do not match up with the current philosophy that runs amock in the breed today.
To Cliff, Khawk, Vandel Ann, Carman, Huertahof, and select few others - thank you for keeping the dream alive.


----------



## Germanshepherdlova (Apr 16, 2011)

Doc said:


> There is another thread on this forum talking about why certain people do not post much. I think it is very clear why. The "old guard" on this forum is always criticized and thrown under the bus when facts do not match up with the current philosophy that runs amock in the breed today.
> To Cliff, Khawk, Vandel Ann, Carman, Huertahof, and select few others - thank you for keeping the dream alive.


Agreed


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

I don't think they are getting bigger or smaller, as always there is still a large range that is acceptable and everyone can get exactly what they want, just like colors, coat length, bone mass.... Even in sports like agility and flyball that people insist favor more compact dogs, I consistently see tall GSDs (as in, out of the standard....I'm not trying to imply any negative connotation here), even overweight ones. I have one of few GSDs doing U-FLI and at Nationals the other 3 GSDs competing were all larger/taller than him and he's average size. He is the fastest but I don't think that's a function of his size (the others had poor technique in the turn which slows a dog down). At SV type conformation shows, I've heard the judges point out dogs they believe are "absolute correct" size and sometimes critique dogs as being too large, too heavy, too tall but the latter never seems to have any bearing on the rating the dog receives (ie, they still get a V rating or KKL even being "too big"). UKC ring seems to trend toward dogs on the larger end of the standard but not huge ones. Can't speak toward AKC, don't participate. In Schutzhund I see GSDs ranging from 45lbs to 100lbs and everything in between, it doesn't seem like the bigger or the smaller are any more or less common. Everyone can get what they want and enjoy it for whatever reason matters to them.


----------



## Blanketback (Apr 27, 2012)

Doc, it could just be a sign of the times. Accuracy doesn't seem to mean much these days, no matter where you look.


----------



## alefranc (Dec 20, 2013)

When we asked about the size of her dogs, our breeder flat out told us she breeds to standard and doesn't breed "freaks".


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

alefranc said:


> When we asked about the size of her dogs, our breeder flat out told us she breeds to standard and doesn't breed "freaks".


Just shows how little your breeder really knows. Her so called "freaks" can be out of Standard sized parents. But genetics aren't important anymore. If it is a typey, standard-saddle red/black then it is a great dog. I've seen 120 pound dogs come out of standard parents. The funny thing is, those freaks once dominated the breed. So much so that Max stopped registering them in the stud book and therefore, they were not used for competition breeding. They were still bred but anything not in the stud book was viewed as suspect. Tobias Ott from the Blasienberg Kennel stopped competing when Max chose Klodo over his dog as Sieger. Most of the Blasienberg dogs went on to be foundational in the early Guide School development at Fortunate Fields.
Forgive me, this sort of information doesn't register to most in here.


----------



## crackem (Mar 29, 2006)

> I see the level of comprehension hasn't improved much recently......


 I scored a 34 on my ACT's a few decades ago, so at one point my reading comprehension was adequate 




> yet when large GS are bought up out comes vitriol against oversize dogs like this is the plague.


and usually it's in connection with a breeder that is breeding JUST for oversized dogs. They don't have drive, they don't have nerve, they don't have a history of anything that can be proven, just size. Maybe it's not my comprehension that's lacking 

I'm pretty sure if an outstanding example of the breed was slightly tall and 95 or 100lbs nobody would say too much. If you have a 100+lb'er that has done nothing yet you claim it's the cat's meow, well most will. There's a difference.



> Btw, Crackem, I would love to bring ANY of my different type of GS to your neck of the woods and see if they could do the type of training you do. .


Bring them on up, though I'm not quite sure what you want to accomplish. or is this supposed to be an internet pissing contest?

When I made the comment about "what can your dog do" it was said as I don't care what a dog did 30 years ago, what does the dog in front of you today do?



> I laugh at the lack of need for historical information like I do at those who feel that pedigrees/genetics are overrated.


I see what you did there LOL, I think you should try out that reading comprehension stuff you were talking about earlier. I do think history is important and I do think pedigrees can be important. I usually comment on pedigree stuff because the overwhelming majority of people I have come across over the years put way, way, way too much stock in their "pedigree" and not nearly enough consideration to the dog sitting right in front of them. I think anyone doing on honest assesment of the "usual" situation would agree with me on that. That's usually the point I am trying to make, but hey i'm just some guy on the internet, and not even part of the "old guard" LOL



> I gave kudos, because I thought it was very generous of khawk to post that history, for those that don't know the breed's origins. So? Is it Lanting's credibility that's in question? What about Willis?


 I don't know, how well do you know them? I"ve read Stephanitz, Willis, writings by Lanting (never a book) interviews with Heyne and spent countless hours talking with every SV judge we could fly over, breeders, guys giving seminars staying at my house etc. They all have opinions, I haven't met any yet that have all the answers.

My point was it was one man's opinion, and a mere snippet at that. It's so easy to steer any thought in a predetermined direction when you take such a narrow part of something meant for a much larger context. If that was enough to convince you, fair enough. I usually keep looking big picture.



> "In 1926 the German Sieger of two years previous came to Britain. This was Donar v Overstolzen... He was oversized (26 1/2 in) like Dullo although smaller than Dolf (27.2in)...the whole litter represented the older type of dog which was beginning to be in disfavour by the end of the decade and to be replaced by smaller, more compact animals."


and let's take this quote and then ask ourselves "Why?" why do you think this may have been the case? Could it be that it was still very early on in the breeds development? Could it be they were still trying to steer this new breed towards a more medium sized dog, you know the one they wrote the standard for? Could it be they had reason to want to breed away from larger dogs? maybe they had health concerns, longevity concerns, maybe they saw something in smaller dogs they really liked. Maybe they were just trying to get to that medium sized dog they envisioned? I don't know, I wasn't around, neither was anyone else. and besides 26.5 isn't exactly a "large" dog. Bigger yes, but not the behemoths over 30 we often see touted as "old world" today. 



> There is another thread on this forum talking about why certain people do not post much. I think it is very clear why. The "old guard" on this forum is always criticized and thrown under the bus when facts do not match up with the current philosophy that runs amock in the breed today.


whaaaaaaaa. I'm sure they have thicker skin than that. They post Plenty and I'm sure if they had something to say they would. I'd bet if we looked hard enough we'd find guards older than they are with a different opinion at times as well. There's a whole lot of experience out there that has never, and most likely will never, log onto germanshepherds.com to give their opinion based on their experience. 

and what facts? that larger dogs were bred in the past? you've got to be kidding me? seriously? LOL They still are.



> I don't think they are getting bigger or smaller, as always there is still a large range that is acceptable and everyone can get exactly what they want, just like colors, coat length, bone mass.... Even in sports like agility and flyball that people insist favor more compact dogs, I consistently see tall GSDs (as in, out of the standard....I'm not trying to imply any negative connotation here), even overweight ones. I have one of few GSDs doing U-FLI and at Nationals the other 3 GSDs competing were all larger/taller than him and he's average size. He is the fastest but I don't think that's a function of his size (the others had poor technique in the turn which slows a dog down). At SV type conformation shows, I've heard the judges point out dogs they believe are "absolute correct" size and sometimes critique dogs as being too large, too heavy, too tall but the latter never seems to have any bearing on the rating the dog receives (ie, they still get a V rating or KKL even being "too big"). UKC ring seems to trend toward dogs on the larger end of the standard but not huge ones. Can't speak toward AKC, don't participate. In Schutzhund I see GSDs ranging from 45lbs to 100lbs and everything in between, it doesn't seem like the bigger or the smaller are any more or less common. Everyone can get what they want and enjoy it for whatever reason matters to them.


exactly


----------



## Blanketback (Apr 27, 2012)

All I know is, I love this breed in all shapes and sizes. I haven't had the pleasure of knowing the major players as you have, crackem. It's too bad. All I have are old texts to refer to.


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

Crackem, the vitriol regarding over sized GSDs has a great deal to do with size & very little to do with anything else. In a thread where another poster listed multiple over sized GSDs working in LE, SAR, military, therapy or assistance jobs the dogs & what they were doing were picked apart, 2nd guessed, analyzed ad nauseum &/or dismissed. This simply isn't done when people post the accomplishments of their smaller GSDs. 

Nor was that unique. A poster started a warm & fuzzy 'look at my cute puppy' thread & people descended on her like rabid hyenas!

An admin REPEATEDLY warned people to quit nagging an informed poster who clearly stated she was seeking an over sized GSD & was looking for breeder suggestions but did NOT want to discuss (argue) her reasons for preferring the over sized GSDs. Despite numerous warnings people insisted on asking why & warning her against seeking what she clearly wanted. (Nor was size her only, or even her main, criterion in what she wanted). 

Dire warnings which are utterly without foundation are consistently muttered about over sized GSDs having abbreviated lives, health problems, poor temperament, hd & bloat. These bogus warnings are frequently made in the face of posters who have lived with well bred over sized GSDs for many years. Too many members of this board clearly have an agenda to shout over any voice that doesn't adhere to the party line regarding over sized GSDs, including the voices of actual experience with the breeders & dogs. Too many are willing to sacrifice truth & compromise integrity in this unholy (& truly silly) battle over inches & pounds.

My dogs have been structurally sound, extremely stable, physically healthy, easily trained, discerning & over all wonderful companions. Frankly, people s/b happy to have such solid ambassadors of this breed which is rife with fear biters, spooks & devastating health problems. I could easily point fingers at any number of well bred GSDs from favored breeders that have presented with serious, sometime multiple health, temperament & structural problems, but why?


----------



## crackem (Mar 29, 2006)

I see, only certain opinions matter 

I've met quite a few larger dogs that were pretty nice dogs. The full brother to my bitch is oversized and a **** fine dog. My bitch is less than 60 lbs. I'd take puppies out of either. That said, if I meet someone breeding specifically for oversized Gsd's and they have near the nerve, drive, or health I'm looking for it will be a first.


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

> I see, only certain opinions matter


Who said that? And where???


----------



## robk (Jun 16, 2011)

Its not the size of the dog in the fight but the size of the fight in the dog. Who cares how big it is. If it has the heart and courage to do the job, to me that is what matters. It needs to be big enough to get the job done. What job is that? What ever job you intend for it to do.


----------



## Blanketback (Apr 27, 2012)

crackem said:


> I see, only certain opinions matter


I think this was directed at me? I'm asking you nicely, in all sincerity, to please PM me a list of authors that you would consider to be an authority on GSDs. Because yes, only certain opinions _do_ matter to me. How else could it be? I can't weigh all opinions equally - does anyone? Unfortunately, I don't run in the right circles to meet the greats, and pick their brains. That's assuming they'd have the patience to put up with me, lol.


----------



## crackem (Mar 29, 2006)

no, it wasn't directed at you. I don't need to PM, I think all the ones listed so far are great resources. I'm not discrediting any of them, they have obviously done a lot of work for all of our benefit.

But one snippet without context doesn't hold a lot of weight with me. I know larger dogs existed and still exist. We do need to know where we came from, but it also matters quite a bit where we are right now.

anyway, it was in reference to a post above about posters asking for information, then not liking it when their public plea for information is met with opinions from that public that aren't what they want to hear. It's a message board, get used to it 

If one person can say how great all the oversized and "old world" dogs of today are, surely those of us that have a different opinion from those we've met can have a voice as well???

Like I said before, nothing against a larger dog. Have seen lots of them. I myself prefer a more medium sized dog and all else being equal in terms of temperament and drive and healthy, I'm taking a smaller dog before an oversized one. I see oversized in "normal" litters all the time and those same dogs still get ratings and breed.

What I haven't come across yet is a breeder that breeds and advertises mostly on "old world" and "oversized" that has consistently shown dogs that have what I want my dogs to have. Does my opinion matter? I don't really care if it doesn't, I'm still going to say it 

I don't think that a lot of the bred to standard dogs are bred to anything more than lipservice. Just because they're x cm's tall and y lbs doesn't make them ok in my book either. Never has. There's a lot more stuff that should be in a GSD than that.


----------



## Blanketback (Apr 27, 2012)

Darn it, I was looking forward to that list! 

I've had the pleasure of owning a massively oversized GSD. Lots of people asked me if he was a king shepherd, and I just said, "No, he's only above the standard." Lots pf people approach me when I'm with my within standard GSDs to tell me theirs are bigger, and I just say, "That's nice." If I'm shopping for a car or a house, then size will determine what I choose. With GSDs I don't care how big or small they are because anything within the standard or thereabouts is fine with me. It's not the size that attracts me to the breed.


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

Crackem, I am not interested in an Internet pissing match with you or anyone else...my comment pertaining to listing size along with color, drive, big heads,etc I think made it clear that I didn't think breeding on any of them things exclusively(except nerve) is positive for the breed. I have seen 100 plus lb dogs in LE on quite a few occaisions though more so in the past than today. I have also seen sixty lb males in LE that were effective. I would not specifically breed for either, but have seen them with excellent working aptitude. As for old guard, my dogs and I are in the here and now, but my feeling for the breed is based almost entirely on working traits. I TRULY believe the beauty of the breed is in it's performance.....whether it is 50 lbs or 100 lbs; having said that I acknowledge that moderate dogs in general have had a higher percent of having the working capability. I agree with you that there are infinite opinions and experts on this breed, so there is no reason to put anyone on pedestal,.....as for my comment about training, I merely am saying that I have a low prey drive old guard type dog right now and I would be interested if he could be successful at this driven training work many do today, or is the new drive plus dogs and training of TODAY just too much for those old types.
I have no problem with you or your views, I find them enlightening.


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

Crackem, it's not 'opinions' I'm objecting to. The blatant spread of misinformation (ie, lies) presented as 'FACTS' is simply wrong & (IMO) shows how weak the arguments really are.

In the thread I mentioned not only did the op politely decline to engage in a 'discussion' on why she was specifically seeking an over sized GSD the admin repeatedly told other participants to leave it alone & quit badgering her...Surely an admin's perogative. As you stated it's a message board. And a moderated message board at that, so get used to it


----------



## crackem (Mar 29, 2006)

cliffson1 said:


> Crackem, I am not interested in an Internet pissing match with you or anyone else...my comment pertaining to listing size along with color, drive, big heads,etc I think made it clear that I didn't think breeding on any of them things exclusively(except nerve) is positive for the breed. I have seen 100 plus lb dogs in LE on quite a few occaisions though more so in the past than today. I have also seen sixty lb males in LE that were effective. I would not specifically breed for either, but have seen them with excellent working aptitude. As for old guard, my dogs and I are in the here and now, but my feeling for the breed is based almost entirely on working traits. I TRULY believe the beauty of the breed is in it's performance.....whether it is 50 lbs or 100 lbs; having said that I acknowledge that moderate dogs in general have had a higher percent of having the working capability. I agree with you that there are infinite opinions and experts on this breed, so there is no reason to put anyone on pedestal,.....as for my comment about training, I merely am saying that I have a low prey drive old guard type dog right now and I would be interested if he could be successful at this driven training work many do today, or is the new drive plus dogs and training of TODAY just too much for those old types.
> I have no problem with you or your views, I find them enlightening.


well see, we mostly agree. I've always felt the standard was a range, a guide to keep things "breed like", but always the temperament and mental traits were most important. If a little small or a little big and exceptional in the mental catagory, breed 'em. I don't like it when any breeder uses the standard and breeds towards this mythical "ideal" dog for an interpretation that changes every so often. Breed for the range, breed for the temperament and breed for health. I think we'd all be better off in the long run.


----------



## Wanderer (Apr 9, 2011)

I've gotten through 2/3rd of the post and finally have to throw in my 2 cents.

Intrinsic in the breed has always been a wide variety of sizes. The GSD should be a 'do anything' dog, and from within the framework of the breed standard, you pick the type in size and temperament to best suit the task you have.

IMHO first should come soundness of mind to do a thousand tasks. Second should come soundness of body to do a thousand tasks. Third is to worry about fine points of conformation, and fourth the color of coat.

Now, there are some raw truths related to size you just can't get away from. Getting bigger means at some point reduction in agility, endurance, and speed. Exactly where this is can vary based on other body features (being longer in the legs vs not, quality of hips, etc). Don't get caught up on weight, get caught up in ability (or lack). It's reasonable to hear of a 125 lb dog and say 'I would fear his size may be impeding his ability' but it is wrong to say that it happens in all cases. Further, if my choices were between a 125 dog with a slight limitation on his overall agility and endurance but the dog had a stellar temperament vs a smaller more agile and faster dog who was a spook or fell into offering an aggressive exterior because every stranger was a perceived as a threat....I'd take the over-sized dog.

But the real problem is too many GSD owners who want one for a pet really want a golden retriever dressed up to look like a GSD. They want those stellar defense and working characteristics of a GSD just in case some day they'd need them, yet don't want to pay the price (and I am not talking currency) that comes with those abilities. This same group of buyers with their very superficial view also tend to think that bigger is better. And honestly for their needs, they may be right. They probably don't WANT a dog that is capable of really stopping an armed intruder, they want a dog that LOOKS like it could. Really, this is similar to the people who don't have the mindset nor willing to practice enough to be responsible gun owners, so instead they want a realistic fake gun in the hopes it would intimidate trouble away.

Note that this size increase isn't just limited to GSDs. It is frequently the case of whenever there are show lines vs field lines, the show lines are bigger. One area where I see it outside of show/field lines is in labs. True hard working field line breeders, the dogs that people who hunt a ton with, are staying the same size, the champion conformation dogs are something else entirely, but the majority of dogs are sold as pets outright or to occasional hunters who want a pet and a hunting dog. These people start heaping other tasks on the dog. Often it is wanting a great pet or a great pet occasional hunting help PLUS wanting a dog that can run off burglars and successfully tangle with 4 legged trouble as well. They don't really think about the oversized aspect hindering the dog's agility and endurance mainly because they are never in situations where they come close to maxing out the dog's ability. In that light, I can't say their decision is wrong. They are choosing the features that they most want and sacrifice the ability they don't really need (the endurance to hunt think cover for 12 hours straight and do 50 water retrieves).

Truth is most people don't need or want the kind of dog envisioned by Von Stephanitz. As mentioned before, they really want a golden retriever dressed up to look like a GSD...a big GSD. The invisible hand of the market will provide them what they want to buy. It's just the hard luck of 'real' GSD fanciers that the easiest source is to breed away from what VS GSDs are really about.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

cliffson1 said:


> I didn't think breeding on any of them things exclusively(except nerve) is positive for the breed. I have seen 100 plus lb dogs in LE on quite a few occaisions though more so in the past than today. I have also seen sixty lb males in LE that were effective. I would not specifically breed for either, but have seen them with excellent working aptitude. As for old guard, my dogs and I are in the here and now, but my feeling for the breed is based almost entirely on working traits. I TRULY believe the beauty of the breed is in it's performance.....whether it is 50 lbs or 100 lbs; having said that I acknowledge that moderate dogs in general have had a higher percent of having the working capability. I agree with you that there are infinite opinions and experts on this breed, so there is no reason to put anyone on pedestal,.....as for my comment about training, I merely am saying that *I have a low prey drive old guard type dog right now and I would be interested if he could be successful at this driven training work many do today, or is the new drive plus dogs and training of TODAY just too much for those old types.*


I prefer this type of dog, but know it is a challenge with training if you aren't training the dog in its natural drive and expecting something else. 
One thing I love about the GSD is that it isn't a cookie cutter looking dog, but diversified in the coat length, color and structure. Still the bottlenecking occurs. 
I have a dog in which everyone comments on his size. 
I don't see him being so big that it impeeds on his performance at all. He's very athletic and agile, shows power in his fight drive. He wasn't bred for size, he just ended up on the larger end of the spectrum. But then he isn't that large, just a tad over the standard.


----------



## Chip18 (Jan 11, 2014)

onyx'girl said:


> He wasn't bred for size, he just ended up on the larger end of the spectrum. But then he isn't that large, just a tad over the standard.


 Tad is a little vague? 

My guy was a rescue and I landed in the oversize world. 117 lbs, I thought that was normal till I saw my son in laws two GSD's one Blk and one White. I was shocked at how "small" they were.

I understand the logic but for me I just don't think I could have a smaller GSD, I'd get a Malonis instead. I've heard tales of 125 to 150 lbs GSD's is that real? And I don't mean obviously fat or over weight dogs.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

Chip18 said:


> *Tad is a little vague? *
> 
> My guy was a rescue and I landed in the oversize world. 117 lbs, I thought that was normal till I saw my son in laws two GSD's one Blk and one White. I was shocked at how "small" they were.
> 
> I understand the logic but for me I just don't think I could have a smaller GSD, I'd get a Malonis instead. I've heard tales of 125 to 150 lbs GSD's is that real? And I don't mean obviously fat or over weight dogs.


My male is 95# and 27"(I have a female almost the same size) She isn't as agile as he is/never has been.
















My pack/females are quite large for the standard as well:


----------



## Chip18 (Jan 11, 2014)

WOW!!! Holy crap and...case closed! I could live with a 95 lb GSD. And yeah a "tad" over.


----------



## Chip18 (Jan 11, 2014)

Oh and the 125 to 140 lb (non fat I'm assuming) are they real or is it the doggy equivalent of "Big Foot"
or "BevCoon" the face of a Beaver and the body of a Racoon? 

I Carly reference.


----------



## bill (Nov 8, 2013)

Very good looking dogs Onyx/ girl.Bill


----------



## Scout's Mama (Oct 30, 2013)

David Winners, the dog is absolutely gorgeous. Well done!


----------



## David Winners (Apr 30, 2012)

Scout's Mama said:


> David Winners, the dog is absolutely gorgeous. Well done!


Thanks!


----------



## Mary Beth (Apr 17, 2010)

I have read this thread with interest because I also "landed in the oversize world". My Sting is 130 lbs. and 30 inches tall - twice the size of his other littermates who matured at 75 lbs. average. I found this thread very informative as to the history and the lines that were used by Der Hauptmann. I am very happy that there are breeders like Doc who are continuing to breed the gsds from the large line.


----------

