# Old fashioned? REALLY???



## Mrs.K

Can somebody tell me what is so old-fashioned about superlarge and oversized German Shepherds?

*Link removed by Admin*


----------



## Lin

Nothing. Its just a marketing ploy, like "teacup" small dogs. The "old fashioned" GSD was smaller than todays! And I don't understand the obsession with "old fashioned" in general, breeding is done for a reason and thats to improve the breed!


----------



## Mrs.K

And why breeding German Shepherds that are so big? I don't get it? IF they want a big dog they should get a big dane and not turn the shepherd into one.


----------



## Dainerra

parts of the guarantee are interesting like: elbow problems are only genetic if both are affected, otherwise it's from an accident. dog is guaranteed for only 6 years, even though the "highlight" of their breeding program is to produce longer-lived dogs? guarantee is invalid if the dog is sold or stays with another owner (what does that mean? If I leave him with my MIL while I'm out of town no coverage?) 

my favorite - guarantee is void if the animal is bred because "you've made your purchase price back and then some"


----------



## Mrs.K

Yeah I just read that.... that's gotta be a joke... she can't seriously believe that it is only genetic when both hips are affected...


----------



## robinhuerta

That entire "first page" is a joke....I' didn't even bother to read further.
Over-sized, Old Fashioned GSD?? Laid back temperament?
How many people trully know what this breed "used" to be???
They were not huge dogs, nor "laid back".......we have created them as such....not a good thing...it's a problem.
JMO


----------



## HeidiW

Frozen semen $2000, wow! 

I do like large males but to a point.


----------



## Mrs.K

HeidiW said:


> Frozen semen $2000, wow!
> 
> I do like large males but to a point.



Not just that. Frozen semen is a no-go over here. :help:


----------



## atravis

To be fair, :silly: has been producing extremely temperamentally/physically sound dogs for years, and have a good reputation for producing excellent "family pet" type dogs. 

Not saying its right or wrong, but they are not your typical "BYB" operation. 

They do not claim to breed working or show animals, only extremely stable family pets. And thus far, that's held true.


----------



## Chris Wild

I have removed the link in the first post.

If people want to discuss the whole "Old Fashioned" thing for the zillionth time they are welcome to, but per board rules bashing specific breeders is not allowed.


----------



## Mrs.K

atravis said:


> To be fair, BLEEP has been producing extremely temperamentally/physically sound dogs for years, and have a good reputation for producing excellent "family pet" type dogs.
> 
> Not saying its right or wrong, but they are not your typical "BYB" operation.
> 
> They do not claim to breed working or show animals, only extremely stable family pets. And thus far, that's held true.


Yeah, by charging 2000USD for frozen semen?
And people actually pay for that?
Holy cow... we seriously do something wrong. 

How much do they charge for puppies?

And why did the link get removed?


----------



## atravis

Her website reads:

"My range in cost is generally between $1300 (females)& $1600(males)."

No clue why the semen costs more than the pups. Maybe that was a mistype?


----------



## fightin14

> Nothing. Its just a marketing ploy, like "teacup" small dogs. The "old fashioned" GSD was smaller than todays! And I don't understand the obsession with "old fashioned" in general, breeding is done for a reason and thats to improve the breed!/QUOTE]
> 
> This is not always true, not all breeding does the breed good. Some of the American show lines are **** near crippled in my opinion.


----------



## Mrs.K

atravis said:


> Her website reads:
> 
> "My range in cost is generally between $1300 (females)& $1600(males)."
> 
> No clue why the semen costs more than the pups. Maybe that was a mistype?


I don't understand people that are willed to pay that kind of money for a dog that doesn't even have the real papers. 

The puppy I bought costs 850 Euros (chipped and everything). Parents titled, champions, went to the world championships, great line... and it costs less than a female puppy from that :hammer: kennel and people pay for that?


----------



## atravis

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with their practice.

But of all the crock "old fashion" GSD breeders out there, :headbang: is really the last one that should be picked on.

Now, do I, personally, think they are doing any big favors for the breed?

It depends. Not from a breeding standpoint, certainly not. A "goliath" dog the GSD is NOT, and was never meant to be.

But from from a PR standpoint? Everything I've ever heard about these dogs makes them out to be MONDO socially stable, wonderful for families, and just an all-around GOOD pet. There are plenty of "correctly" breed dogs that are like this too... but what's so wrong about tipping the odds further in our favor?

I would never own one. Not even remotly my kind of dog. But I'd rather a person who JUST wants a cool family pet go to someone like Royalair, rather than wind up with something that they aren't prepared to handle. It is, after all, the later that make a bad reputation for our breed.


----------



## Mrs.K

I am not trying to pick on them but they should take out the old-fashioned and do more research on the hip issue. Just because it's one hip doesn't mean that it can't be genetically. 

I am not saying that they can't be socially stable. Kuddos for that BUT it is the way she's doing it. 

If she likes large dogs, **** she can state that on her site and I wouldn't bug about it but selling them as old-fashioned is wrong in my book and leads to false conclusions. These dogs are not old-fashioned. If that's old-fashioned our dogs are from the last century. 

She's taking one major thing away from them and something the Shepherd always had and that is agility. These dogs may be social and great family dogs but she's taking away everything the Shepherd stands for. 

Not trying to pick on her... she may have great dogs but she's doing it the wrong way because they are everything but old-fashioned. At least be honest about it.


----------



## Doc

Like Chris said, for the bazillion time, the term "old fashion" has been beat to death in the forms - especially when there has been no real definition associated with it. Unfortunately, most people who dismiss this as a marketing ploy do not know the historical aspects of the German shepherd.

I refer to "old-fashion" German shepherds as the pre Klodo von Boxberg era. Before Klodo, the German shepherds were "bigger, taller" dogs. Especially the ones that were heavily bred on the Wurttemberg dogs. Jung and Tell von Kriminalulize were both substancial dogs most noted for high withers, straight backs, and long back legs. Being such, Max awarded the title to Boxberg in the 20's to buck the trend of bigger dogs - Boxberg being only 23" at the withers. It wasn't the only time Max awarded the title to a dog in hopes of finding some compromise. eventually, even Max altered his standard to give some range for height, knowing that many of the "bigger" dogs had superior traits that he liked.

So to state that the German shepherd has *always* been a smaller dog is factually wrong. I would much rather breed a German shepherd without the numerous health and temperament issues and not be to standard than to have a "standard" dog with health issues and nerve problems.

And yes, the German shepherd was a family memeber/pet - a working family member/pet that earned his keep or was desposed of. Horand was a horrible working dog - Max saved him from the farm to have as his pet.


----------



## robinhuerta

atravis,
The wrong issue with breeding...._is breeding for "pets"._
ALL dogs should be able to be "pets".....they are domestic canines.
When breeders choose to ignore the characteristics that a breed (of any kind) was bred "specifically" for....and choose to breed against it...this practise ruins the breed as a whole.
Breeders are supposed to breed to *ensure *the characteristics & temperament for the next generation...that is including size, structure & working ability.
Using the opinion of "breeding quality pets".....as a reason to breed...is destruction of a breed.
If a companion home wants to purchase a GSD dog/puppy....look for a responsible breeder, who's primary goal is to preserve the breed as it should be. That breeder can help place the perfect puppy for the prospective buyers.
After all......90% of all GSD puppies/dogs, live as loving family companions. The companion home reflects the reputation of the breed.
We as a society....use the term _"quality pet puppies"..._as *IF* it's a selling point....it *SHOULD* be an absolute.
Again...JMO....not directed to any specific breeders of any kind.


----------



## Mrs.K

@Doc: Well, than we talk about a different breed... to me old fashioned isn't a Shepherd that is as big and heavy as a big dane. Look at the father of German Shepherds. THAT is old fashioned!


----------



## robinhuerta

...excuse the misspelled words in my last post.....typed too fast, and didn't have spell-check on!.....


----------



## Lin

fightin14 said:


> This is not always true, not all breeding does the breed good. Some of the American show lines are **** near crippled in my opinion.


Yes, they are. Same with some of the german show lines with their roach backs. I don't consider those breeding to extremes to be bettering the breed. In my opinion a responsible breeder is working on everything the GSD is meant to be, a well rounded, healthy, intelligent, WORKING dog that is also a loyal and protective family member. 

I also don't agree with breeders breeding the GSD to only be a family pet. I think there are enough "just" pet quality dogs from responsible breeders. Same with things such as oversize, long coats, dilutes, etc. I don't think the breed should be changed away from working towards a dog that is a couch potato. I think the people that want such a dog would be better off looking at a breed in existance that meets all of their desires, rather than changing the GSD. If you want a lower drive dog, larger dog, furrier dog, look at the Shiloh Shepherd for example.


----------



## Doc

Mrs.K said:


> @Doc: Well, than we talk about a different breed... to me old fashioned isn't a Shepherd that is as big and heavy as a big dane. Look at the father of German Shepherds. THAT is old fashioned!


As big as a great dane? Where is that coming from. A German shepherd male that weighs more than 90 pounds and taller than 26" at the withers isn't as big as a great dane.

As far as i know, that particular breeder is not breeding monster German shepherd dogs (150 pounds and 35"). 

The real issue, IMO, is that John Q Public does not like what the German shepherd has become. They still remember Rinn Tinn Tinn and Braveheart. They see the dog shows and see these "little" German shepherds that "slope" to the ground and wonder what in Hail happened to the German shepherd dog - the ones that were around when they grew up? And what they remember is that "big" dog that was protective but friendly once they got to know you. They could care less about some "Standard"; they aren't looking to show a dog or "work" a dog except maybe in agility, throw a frezbe, or fetch a ball, and learn to sit, come, stay, and down. So they find a breeder that has that type of dog. Is it right? Who is to judge?

But to blast a breeder - especially one that you do not know or know nothing about the dogs they breed and sell - is wrong. Impecable health, temperament, and structure is what a breeder should strive to accomplish regardless of size.


----------



## fightin14

Yes LIN even some of the german lines are messed up. These dogs should not be used as show dogs in my opinion. I am in total agreement i think people forget what these are dogs are for. A guy i work with just went out and bought a very high quality puppy from from a good working line and he is going to be his house dog. He does not even have a fenced in yard. This dog is going to be inside all the time in a crate. It kind of steams me.


----------



## LaRen616

*Lin*

I agree with you and I disagree with you. I would never want to see a GSD become a "couch potato". But not everyone wants to do agility and other work with their GSD. I believe people should only get GSD's if they are "Go Getter" type people. Someone who loves long walks, hiking or jogging. Also not everyone wants to spend lots of money on putting their dogs in agility or herding or some other type work. I got a GSD because they are wonderful companion dogs, good watch dogs, very smart, easy to train and I cant forget BEAUTIFUL dogs. My dog loves TV (as do I) but we get out and do stuff. We are doing our own "Search Work" and I have to say that my dog is very good at it, but we are using treats and ourselves. We put him in a room, we grab a treat and drag it on the floor making loops and what not and then we hide it. We then let him out and tell him "find it" and he puts his nose to the ground and follows the trail to the treat. We also do it with ourselves, we rub all over a towel and we go hide then the person in control of him gives him the towel to smell and then we say "find it" and he comes and gets us. I would also like to make him a therapy dog. Anyways if everyone with GSD's did games like this then I wouldn't have a problem with them owning a GSD. But dont turn this excellent dog into a "couch potato"


----------



## Liesje

Sometimes what makes a great German shepherd isn't what makes a great pet.

Personally I find the prices, guarantees, and all that pretty ridiculous but if that's what people want let them have it. I just wonder when it's no longer a German Shepherd but something else...


----------



## Liesje

Doc said:


> The real issue, IMO, is that John Q Public does not like what the German shepherd has become. They still remember Rinn Tinn Tinn and Braveheart. They see the dog shows and see these "little" German shepherds that "slope" to the ground and wonder what in Hail happened to the German shepherd dog - the ones that were around when they grew up? And what they remember is that "big" dog that was protective but friendly once they got to know you. They could care less about some "Standard"; they aren't looking to show a dog or "work" a dog except maybe in agility, throw a frezbe, or fetch a ball, and learn to sit, come, stay, and down. So they find a breeder that has that type of dog. Is it right? Who is to judge?


To me it sounds like the real issue is that we are letting JQP define what the breed should and shouldn't be. Are we seriously going to create standards and develop breeding programs based on what people saw on TV? That's just a fad, like everyone getting a Dalmation after 101 Dalmations, a Golden or Ambull after Homeward Bound, a JRT after Wishbone....heck even *I* begged my mom for a JRT when I watched Wishbone and after reading what the breed really is, they are probably one of the last breeds I'll ever own now. Same with White Fang, saw the movie and desperately wanted a wolf dog. So should I get to tell the JRT fanciers and wolf hybrid rescues that they are wrong and they need to change their breeding programs because they do not meet my JQP standard which is just based on fond childhood memories of dogs and TV shows?


----------



## Doc

Like I said, the public could care less about a standard. The Standard is written for an entirely different set of people and purpose. The most publicity a German shepherd gets is on one those food sponsored "Championships". And if that's a German shepherd, it's no wonder the public looks for a "different" type. The same could apply to a working show. Dogs that are "doing what they are suppose to do" is often times misunderstood by the public. They are not interested in "that" type of German shepherd. JQP will never write a Standard - they could care less. Heck, "professional" German shepherd owners that show and work their dog can't even agree what the Standar is suppose to be.

Keep writing the Standard and let the numerous judges interpret it - that's the best way to "judge" the German shepherd because the Standard is the Holy Grail - and you see where it has led.

Health, temperament, and structure is the trinity. How that looks is anyone's guess.


----------



## Liesje

I don't really care about the standard in this context. I think breeders should breed what they honest to God feel is right and correct, not what JQP wants them to supply.


----------



## Mrs.K

Lin said:


> Yes, they are. Same with some of the german show lines with their roach backs. I don't consider those breeding to extremes to be bettering the breed. In my opinion a responsible breeder is working on everything the GSD is meant to be, a well rounded, healthy, intelligent, WORKING dog that is also a loyal and protective family member.
> 
> I also don't agree with breeders breeding the GSD to only be a family pet. I think there are enough "just" pet quality dogs from responsible breeders. Same with things such as oversize, long coats, dilutes, etc. I don't think the breed should be changed away from working towards a dog that is a couch potato. I think the people that want such a dog would be better off looking at a breed in existance that meets all of their desires, rather than changing the GSD. If you want a lower drive dog, larger dog, furrier dog, look at the Shiloh Shepherd for example.


THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU! :toasting:


----------



## atravis

"When breeders choose to ignore the characteristics that a breed (of any kind) was bred "specifically" for....and choose to breed against it...this practise ruins the breed as a whole."

Have you SEEN this breed lately?

The "types" within the breed are so vastly different, that they actually share more differences than things in common. 

Put an Am. bred show dog in a room with a DDR dog. Could you GET anymore different?

Who's right in that situation? Who's wrong? Which one is more "correct" or "to the standard"? 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the GSD was designed to be an ALL PURPOSE dog. Being a family pet is a PURPOSE. 

These dogs may not have extreme drive... but EXTREME drive is every bit against what this breed "should" be as a 150lb monster. EVERYTHING in moderation, is what Max preached. I wager to think he'd be every bit as disappointed in the high drive prey monsters who can't sit still to save their lives, as he would be of the lazy "house pet" types.

Keep in mind that K9, protection, and SAR are not the ONLY jobs a GSD can do. Therapy work, assistance dogs, and guides are also VERY important working venues. A dog does not have to have fight and prey drive out his *** to be a good working dog.


----------



## atravis

And furthermore, "old fashion" to these people may not mean "old fashion" to the breedists.

"Old fashion" to them IS Rin Tin Tin and Strongheart. And to whoever called those dogs a "fad"... you should be ashamed of yourself. These were WAR dogs, turned movie stars, turned legends to the American people and to the WORLD. The GSDs of today could only hope to be as truly great as those dogs were. How many K9s (or just GSDs in general?) do you know that could take down baddies on the street one day, then act on a set with hundreds of strange people banging and clanging and flashing lights in their face on another, THEN do meet-n-greets with the school kids on yet another? These dogs were the EPITOME of what this breed should be. If they are looked upon as simple "fads", then what a sad, SAD time for this breed.


----------



## LaRen616

*ATRAVIS *is correct : )


----------



## Chris Wild

atravis said:


> These were WAR dog, turned movie stars, turned legends to the American people and to the WORLD. The GSDs of today could only hope to be as truly great as those dogs were. How many K9s do you know that could take down baddies on the street one day, then act on a set with hundreds of strange people banging and clanging and flashing lights in their face on another, THEN do meet-n-greets with the school kids on yet another?


No, they were not. Strongheart was trained as a police dog, then purchased as a young adult by a couple of Americans and brought to the US and turned into a movie star. The original Rin Tin Tin was found as a pup towards the end of the war by an American serviceman, Lee Duncan, and brought to the US while still a pup, taught a variety of tricks by Duncan which then caught the eye of film producers looking for the next Strongheart, and started his film career. And of course "Rin Tin Tin" was played by a whole range of different dogs over the years, none of whom were "war dogs".

None of these dogs were war dogs or out "taking down baddies on the street" in between film shoots. 



atravis said:


> These dogs were the EPITOME of what this breed should be. If they are looked upon as simple "fads", then what a sad, SAD time for this breed.


Certainly they are legendary, we all love them, and to many they are what instilled a love for the breed in the first place.

But people also need to realize that what they saw of those dogs was not reality anymore than anything on film or television is reality. It was fantasy. Certainly there is a grain of truth to what those dogs were capable of and what they portrayed for our enjoyment, but they were still acting and performing trained manuevers and nothing more.

It does the breed no good when people think they can get any GSD pup and it will grow up to be Rin Tin Tin, or that Collie pup will grow up to be Timmy's constant companion and save him from all those falls in the well, just by virtue of the breed of dog it is and their preconceived notions that some day, with no effort on their part, it will grow up to be some sort of canine superhero. And believe it or not, many of the JQPs do just that, and when it doesn't work out that way off to the shelter the dog goes.


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN

Amen. 

People need to be educated that these are not push button machines. They are thinking beings.


----------



## atravis

Chris-
I'm sorry, but that's not the story I've been told. Yes, Strongheart was a police dog, but Rinty was trained as a war dog while he was still in Germany with Duncan. 

Maybe I've heard wrong, but that is how I know it to be.


----------



## Mrs.K

LaRen616 said:


> *ATRAVIS *is correct : )


Nope, he's not!
Rin Tin Tin was never a war dog. He was found in France. Chris Wild is actually correct on that one.

And as for this:


> The GSDs of today could only hope to be as truly great as those dogs were. How many K9s do you know that could take down baddies on the street one day, then act on a set with hundreds of strange people banging and clanging and flashing lights in their face on another, THEN do meet-n-greets with the school kids on yet another?



There are still working lines out there that make great working dogs who are afraid of nothing and still be family members!


----------



## atravis

"SHE", thank you.


----------



## Mrs.K

atravis said:


> Chris-
> I'm sorry, but that's not the story I've been told. Yes, Strongheart was a police dog, but Rinty was trained as a war dog while he was still in Germany with Duncan.
> 
> Maybe I've heard wrong, but that is how I know it to be.


Here Rin Tin Tin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I know wikipedia is not the best source but what is on there is actually true.


----------



## atravis

From Rin Tin Tin's own website:

"Duncan worked with the dogs training them to perform as he had seen the German war dogs perform during the war."

The dogs there are still called "pups", so I'm not exactly sure what that is supposed to mean. To me, a 1 year old is still a "pup", so the level of actual training can be questioned.


----------



## Chris Wild

Rin Tin Tin was found in a bombed out kennel in Lorraine, France at the end of 1918. His birthdate is listed as September 10, 1918 though that probably isn't entirely accurate, and rather is based on his estimated age (6-8wks old) at the time he was found by Duncan. The war essentially ended with the armistace in November 1918, though the treaty of Versailles wasn't signed until the following year.

So most certainly not a war dog.

And also, Rinty was not a "she".


----------



## atravis

No, *I* am a she.


----------



## LaRen616

I was saying I agree with *ATravis *and felt she was correct when she said:

*"Correct me if I'm wrong, but the GSD was designed to be an ALL PURPOSE dog. Being a family pet is a PURPOSE. 

Keep in mind that K9, protection, and SAR are not the ONLY jobs a GSD can do. Therapy work, assistance dogs, and guides are also VERY important working venues. A dog does not have to have fight and prey drive out his *** to be a good working dog". *


----------



## Doc

I do breed what I honest to God think the German shepherd dog should be. I am guided by the vision of Max and not not a Standard written by a bunch of people that want to influence the breed to their preference. It just so happens to be dogs that JOhn Q Public love. Are they a hit with the show crowd - hail no. Do they perform in the sport of SchH - no and never will. Do I think they represent what a German shepherd was developed to be - yes. Have I bettered the bred - not if I am judged by the Standard. But for concentrating on health, temperament, and structure I honest to God think I have.


----------



## Chris Wild

atravis said:


> From Rin Tin Tin's own website:
> 
> "Duncan worked with the dogs training them to perform as he had seen the German war dogs perform during the war."


Performing behaviors similar to war dogs for a movie does not in any way, shape or form make a dog a war dog. As anyone who works dogs doing protection or rescue or search work or herding or anything else knows, there is a world of difference between being trained to do it and actually doing it in the real world. And likewise, there is a world of difference between being trained to perform behaviors that look like it, and actually being trained for it much less doing it for real. 

A dog working with constant commands, direction and feedback from an off camera handler to appear to be rescuing someone from a burning building is not even remotely the same as a dog making the choice of his own violition to rescue someone from a burning building and then pulling it off on his own. Film gives the impression of canine superheros with genius IQs, but it is only an impression. 

Sadly for the dogs, while everyone seems to realize actors are just acting and Stallone really isn't Rambo and Daniel Craig isn't really a superspy and Daniel Radcliffe isn't really a teenage wizard, they seem to often think that animal actors are for real. Hence all the dog breed fads with each new Disney movie.


----------



## atravis

I realize what's done in the films is dramatization, thank you. I do have SOME commonsense.

Forgive me for hearing the story differently than you


----------



## Doc

If the Standard is so dang important and powerful, why in hades are we in the dam mess we are today? If that is what the Standard produces - something is bad wrong.

It's hard to say the breeder is only a good if they breed to the Standard and then say the Standard doesn't matter when it comes to such and such for the German shepherd. I have seen many dogs in AKC events that were way bigger than standard. For example, a 27" bitch ended up just over 23" and placed very highly.

A balanced German shepherd can come in many different sizes and not always fall within the Standard. So if a breeder chooses to call their German shepherds "old-fashion" because at some point in the history of the dog, there were many German shepherds that were over the standard, why discard the breeder and the dogs? The breeder never says that her dogs are bred to the standard so the breeder is not lying but actually being truthful. But because the truth does not conform to the Standard - the dogs and breeder are a bad representation of the breed.


----------



## Mrs.K

The reason we are in this mess today is because people started breeding for beauty and there are a lot of people out there that pay thousands of dollars and euros for these dogs. 

Every breed that is bred for beauty is going downhill. Not only the Shepherd and as long as there are shows like the Westminster Kennel show it will never stop.


----------



## LaRen616

I like bigger GSD's but that is my preference. I dont like when their back legs look broken, bending. That is also my preference


----------



## Chris Wild

atravis said:


> I realize what's done in the films is dramatization, thank you. I do have SOME commonsense.
> 
> Forgive me for hearing the story differently than you


I've no doubt you do and didn't mean to imply otherwise. But for many people that is not true.

I was pointing out that the concern over "fads", and you're statement that those dogs weren't fads but true GSDs which is what started the whole RinTinTin/Strongheart tangent in the first place, is a very real and problematic issue. Because many, many people, especially those new to dogs or new to a particular breed do not see the difference. They think Collies are all Lassie and Saints are all Beethovan and GSDs are all Rintys and Stronghearts and Jerry Lees.


----------



## atravis

Yes, sorry about that.

And I do agree. But what they were in the film, and what they were in real life, had a very strong correlation. 

Even if they weren't war dogs, and weren't taking people out on the streets, they were still very stable, very admirable dogs. They had to be, considering the amount of exposure they got. I suppose my point was, these dogs, who they were in REAL life, were still the epitome of what the breed should be. Smart, trainable, dependable, rock solid temperament.


----------



## Doc

Mrs.K said:


> The reason we are in this mess today is because people started breeding for beauty and there are a lot of people out there that pay thousands of dollars and euros for these dogs.
> 
> Every breed that is bred for beauty is going downhill. Not only the Shepherd and as long as there are shows like the Westminster Kennel show it will never stop.


True but they bred to the Standard and to what would win shows at the expense of health, temperament, and structure. 

So which is worst - a "Standard dog" with poor health, and poor temperament or a dog that is "not to the Standard" and healthy, and with outstanding temperament? I know which one represents the breed better.


----------



## Mrs.K

And there are still Shepherds like that out there that fall into the standard size and weight. Not all of them are so called "Wesenskrueppel" and "Scherenschleifer" (thats how weak and low nerved dogs are called in Germany). 

There are dogs that are die-hard working dogs, healthy hips, strong nerves and still live with the family and let the kids ride on them. You can take these dogs anywhere. I can even take my abused Yukon into the city and expose him to a busy mall, take him to festivals, elevators, buses, train stations and and and. 

The key is socialization and there is a huge difference betwen dogs that have weak nerves and dogs that are not socialized at all. 

I've come to realize that many dogs lack socialzation because they are mainly kept in the backyard and housing area or taken from the kennel to the dog club. 
No wonder that these dogs collapse when they are exposed to streets, malls and lots of people.


----------



## Chris Wild

I disagree that it is mainly socialization, or a lack thereof. I think more often than not it is genetically weak nerves, and this is used as an excuse for faulty temperament. I have just known way too many dogs who had little to no socialization yet were as confident, outgoing and stable as could be. And way too many dogs who were socialized out the wazoo and never had a bad experience in their lives that are still skittish, fearful and nervy.

Genetics always trumps environment. And while enviroment and socialization can play a role, it is a smaller one than many people think. And even how much of an influence environment can have is also governed in large part by genetics.


----------



## atravis

"There are dogs that are die-hard working dogs, healthy hips, strong nerves and still live with the family and let the kids ride on them. You can take these dogs anywhere. I can even take my abused Yukon into the city and expose him to a busy mall, take him to festivals, elevators, buses, train stations and and and."

Of course this is true. My Mulder is like this. He's not trained in protection, but if I were truly in danger, I have little doubt in my mind that he would do everything within his power to keep me safe. I've seen him turn "on", and its nothing I would want to be on the receiving end of. I sleep very well at night 

But at the same time, I take him with me anywhere I'm aloud. Stores, outdoor events, you name it. He LOVES children, he likes meeting new people, he's fine with my cats, and is best buddies with my foster dog (or any dog that will tolerate him, really). He's just about as stable as stable gets.


But how many are like this? How common is it? Yes, proper socialization is important, but people shouldn't have to walk on eggshells to make sure the dog turns out ok.

Case in point- how many become dog reactive after being attacked by another dog? 

Mulder has been attack THREE times, and still has a scar on his face from one of them. Yet I can still take him to the local dog park, and he gets along perfectly with everyone there.

YES, I worked hard to keep up his socialization, but there MUST be a genetic base. My point is, how many have this? Why don't MORE have this?


----------



## Doc

Chris, I agree with you. Now don't faint and yes I said it! roflmao


----------



## Mrs.K

Chris Wild said:


> I disagree that it is mainly socialization, or a lack thereof. I think more often than not it is genetically weak nerves, and this is used as an excuse for faulty temperament. I have just known way too many dogs who had little to no socialization yet were as confident, outgoing and stable as could be. And way too many dogs who were socialized out the wazoo and never had a bad experience in their lives that are still skittish, fearful and nervy.
> 
> Genetics always trumps environment. And while enviroment and socialization can play a role, it is a smaller one than many people think. And even how much of an influence environment can have is also governed in large part by genetics.


My female is like that. She had no socialization at all but she OWNS the world LOL. 

However, a trained eye can tell (after a while) if the dog has weak nerves or isn't socialized at all and I can see it especially here on post that some dogs have no manners at all, not socialized and are only taken out to pee and poop and I guarantee you that even strong nerved dogs can be jumpy in certain situations just because they've never been exposed to it before. 
They are not machines and don't know everything from the start, some things you have to teach them. And thats the difference between weak and strong nerved dogs. The weak nerved dogs will not learn it in the first place.


----------



## codmaster

Chris Wild said:


> I disagree that it is mainly socialization, or a lack thereof. I think more often than not it is genetically weak nerves, and this is used as an excuse for faulty temperament. I have just known way too many dogs who had little to no socialization yet were as confident, outgoing and stable as could be. And way too many dogs who were socialized out the wazoo and never had a bad experience in their lives that are still skittish, fearful and nervy.Genetics always trumps environment. And while enviroment and socialization can play a role, it is a smaller one than many people think. And even how much of an influence environment can have is also governed in large part by genetics.


Have to disagree with this one - Genetics ARE importanr BUT it has been shown time and time again that environment/experience also plays a HUGE role in the finished product. Otherwise why bother socializing?

I don't believe that anyone can really split these two when it comes to deciding what actually causes one dog tobe calm and brave while another (maybe from the same litter) is afraid of his own shadow.

My own dog is a great example of the influence of environment/experience, he is bold, extremely curious and outgoing and thinks that almost everyone should be his friend (except that he is protective in certain circumstances) but overall very bold and pushy. His litter brother and sister who we see every now and then are extremely different - not really people friendly and very quiet and timid almost shy esp. his brother. Granted the genes are not identical but I suspect they are pretty close. Their experience is VERY different.


----------



## Liesje

codmaster said:


> Have to disagree with this one - Genetics ARE importanr BUT it has been shown time and time again that environment/experience also plays a HUGE role in the finished product. Otherwise why bother socializing?


To me the genetics defines the ends of the spectrum for the dog. No amount of nurture/socialization/environment can push a dog beyond those points, genetically. But between them, that is where socialization comes in. Say a dog is a bit of an edgier dog. One owner might do a lot of socialization, so that the dog ends up toward the more tolerant end of that genetic spectrum. Another owner might not care if the dog is more suspicious and less tolerant and allow the dog to fall toward the other end.


----------



## Liesje

Doc said:


> If the Standard is so dang important and powerful, why in hades are we in the dam mess we are today?


Good question. I show my dogs in three venues, do Schutzhund and all manor of other training and titling and to be honest, I'm not sure I've ever even read the German Shepherd standard. It doesn't seem to hold us back. If you are so against the standards then just don't worry about it. Form follows function. If the dogs are consistently doing the jobs the breed was designed to do, the structure and temperament will follow.


----------



## Chris Wild

Liesje said:


> To me the genetics defines the ends of the spectrum for the dog. No amount of nurture/socialization/environment can push a dog beyond those points, genetically. But between them, that is where socialization comes in. Say a dog is a bit of an edgier dog. One owner might do a lot of socialization, so that the dog ends up toward the more tolerant end of that genetic spectrum. Another owner might not care if the dog is more suspicious and less tolerant and allow the dog to fall toward the other end.


Exactly! That is what I meant when I said genetics determines temperament and the amount of effect environment can have.

Some dogs are so genetically sound that nothing in the environment is going to change that. This dog can be raised completely wrong in a horrible environment, and will still be ok. Remove him from that environment and he'll shine because his genetics are so sound environment can't change that. Sure, significant negative experiences may produce bagage as it relates to a very specific stimuli, but that will not globalize. For example, a rock solid dog who's beaten everyday by an old lady with a red hat and a cane is going to develop a phobia of old ladies with red hats and canes.. but not old ladies in general or the color red in general and certainly not every strange person it encounters.

Other dogs are so genetically unsound that no amount of socialization and positive experiences is going to help. They can be in the best home, given every advantage and they will still be unstable. Environment can't change that either.

And still other dogs fall somewhere in the middle of the spectrum, with both nature and nurture coming into play. Though knowing the environment and knowing the dog and being able to observe if negative reactions are specific or globalized makes it fairly easy in most cases to get a pretty good idea of which is at the root of most behaviors.

The problem of course is that often we don't know where the dog falls on that spectrum, so giving him every advantage, socializing properly, raising properly, is always the way to go. If he's in the first category, it wasn't needed but didn't hurt. If he's in the second category, it won't hurt, might help a tiny bit, but at least will confirm where the dog stands, and if he's like most dogs in the last category somewhere in the middle it can have an important impact on the final product.


----------



## robinhuerta

Here's a thought/fact for the enthusiasts of *any* breed......"The Standard" is not only regarding structure, or how "pretty" a dog should be..._as many seem to express_. It is about "character, temperament & usefulness"...it is SUPPOSED to be the "breeding guideline/blue print" to follow. It is SUPPOSED to be the "description" of the breed, and it's purpose. You can "interpret" it anyway you choose, you can **** the judges, breeders, sport enthusiasts & handlers...all you want.....bottom line is...breeding for _any extreme_ ..*from *either... "form TO function" is incorrect.
None of us breed the "perfect" dogs...there is no such thing.
But this breed is SUPPOSED to be strong nerved, have working drives, physically & mentally sound and be of correct size. This is a compliant & versatile breed.....it's supposed to be able to conform to the tasks & duties required.
Titles do not make the dog......but a good dog, can make the title....whatever the "title" may be.
JMO


----------



## Mrs.K

Liesje said:


> To me the genetics defines the ends of the spectrum for the dog. No amount of nurture/socialization/environment can push a dog beyond those points, genetically. But between them, that is where socialization comes in. Say a dog is a bit of an edgier dog. One owner might do a lot of socialization, so that the dog ends up toward the more tolerant end of that genetic spectrum. Another owner might not care if the dog is more suspicious and less tolerant and allow the dog to fall toward the other end.


It is not just that. It is everything, it is training, socialization and the nerves that come into the play. 

Let's say that you have a five year old that has strong nerves but has never been socialized. You take them to a mall for the first time in his life. The floor is shiny, there are mirrors on the wall and he's never seen himself in a mirror at all, never walked over a shiny floor, never has been surrounded by so many people at all. 

First he stops. He's scared of the floor because it's so shiny, he looks into the mirror sees himself and becomes curious but there is the shiny floor. He looks at the floor and slowly makes a couple of steps forward. He slips because the floor is not only shiny but slippery to. 
You give him the time to adjust to the situation and after ten minutes he walks on that floor like he's never done anything else before. 

Now all these people that have seen his first steps on that floor call him weak nerved because he was a bit thrown off at first. 

He reacted because he didn't know what he was walking on. It has nothing to do with weak nerves. If he had weak nerves he wouldn't have adjusted to the situation at all. 

Or elevators for example. The first time they might be a little careful but they walk in, the second time they have no problems at all. 

Ever taken a dog into a German Strassenbahn? First two times might be hard and I guarantee you that every dog, that has never experienced it before WILL have problems. It doesn't matter if it is a strong nerved dog or not, you HAVE to train it. They have to be used to it. It'll go much faster with a strong nerved dog but the first time you ride on the Strassenbahn with an untrained dog it's going to be a lot of fun. And this is also part of socialization.


----------



## robinhuerta

I believe that it is not the "reaction" from the dogs to new experiences or circumstances..that is most important.....it is "how the dog recovers" from them....
I believe that is where "genetics" is most apparent....be it "weak or strong".
again...JMO


----------



## Chris Wild

Doc said:


> Chris, I agree with you. Now don't faint and yes I said it! roflmao


oke:
Oh Lordy, what is the world coming to!? Because my next statement is....



I absolutely agree with Doc here:


Doc said:


> Health, temperament, and structure is the trinity. How that looks is anyone's guess.


These are indeed the keys. 

All 3 must be balanced between each other. Losing sight of that, forgoing one or two in favor of focusing solely on another is the downfall of the breed, and the biggest reason the breed is in the state it is today.

A dog with poor temperament is a blight on the breed and of no use to anyone, and in many cases a dangerous liability. A dog with poor health is a heartbreaker. A dog with structure that impeeds his ability to do what his owner wants and what his breed should be able to do, or even to enjoy normal life as a dog going for walks and chasing a ball, is a tragedy. This doesn't mean those dogs don't deserve love and good homes, but they certainly are not good representatives of the breed.

Furthermore, each must be balanced in its own right. It's not just a focus on one or two aspects over others that causes problems, but very differing opinions of what constitutes correct and balanced within each category. Here is where individual interpretation has taken the breed all over the place because everyone has their own idea of what constitutes correct temperament or structure or even health.

Temperament must be balanced. No secret I'm a "working dog" person. But to me, a GSD who can work but can't be a companion is as incorrect for this breed as one who can be a companion but cannot work. The GSD must be able to do both. Of course, how one defines work of course is very open to interpretation.

Structure must be balanced, and here I feel that while the dog should look like a GSD and be pleasing to the eye, structure should never, ever impeed function. (Though personally, I don't find the dogs where it does to be pleasing to the eye or very GSD looking... but obviously some do.) When what "wins" is a structure that severely reduces speed, agility, stamina and structural integrity, something is very very wrong.

Even what constitutes correct health is somewhat open to interpretation. I think we all feel we have a really good idea of what makes a "healthy" dog and what doesn't, but sometimes I wonder. 

I have a 10.5yo dog at home with hips graded at a year old as Moderate HD by OFA. And while the hips shown on the x-rays aren't the worst I've seen, they're pretty ugly. Yet at 10.5 she's as crazy, active and vibrant as ever and has no problem running and jumping and chasing balls, with an energy level that rivals that of our 5mo puppies. 

Is she healthy? Or not? The official ruling of course would be NO! She has moderate HD! But it's never bothered her, she's never had any symptoms, despite it she's more active and spry than a lot of dogs half her age. And we've never done anything extreme to affect that. She's had a good diet, good medical care, good exercise, has been kept fit and trim.. but nothing there out of the ordinary or geared toward dealing with her HD. Only thing we've done differently than with any other dog is adding joint supplements to her diet. That's it.

Would I breed her? No, of course not. But I might be prone to arguing with anyone who said she isn't healthy based soley on her x-rays... and I know she'd argue with them.


----------



## Emoore

Chris Wild said:


> Genetics always trumps environment. And while enviroment and socialization can play a role, it is a smaller one than many people think. And even how much of an influence environment can have is also governed in large part by genetics.


Speaking as a rescuer, this is why it drives me nutzo when every time a dog with an unknown history is remotely shy, people automatically assume the dog's been abused. There can't possibly be _that_ many dogs that have been systematically abused. 

There are 3 dogs sitting in my living room right now. 2 came from the shelter and have unknown histories. The other I got when he was 10 weeks old, has never had a hand raised against him, and has been socialized out the wazoo. Guess which one's shy and nervy?


----------



## Mrs.K

robinhuerta said:


> I believe that it is not the "reaction" from the dogs to new experiences or circumstances..that is most important.....it is "how the dog recovers" from them....
> I believe that is where "genetics" is most apparent....be it "weak or strong".
> again...JMO


Yes, that is what I believe to but it is hard to put it into a different language. 

Anyhow, I think you get what I am trying to say, right?


----------



## Mrs.K

Emoore said:


> Speaking as a rescuer, this is why it drives me nutzo when every time a dog with an unknown history is remotely shy, people automatically assume the dog's been abused. *There can't possibly be that
> many dogs that have been systematically abused. *
> There are 3 dogs sitting in my living room right now. 2 came from the shelter and have unknown histories. The other I got when he was 10 weeks old, has never had a hand raised against him, and has been socialized out the wazoo. Guess which one's shy and nervy?


You would be surprised. Abuse doesn't start by hitting them. 

If there are so many kids being systematically abused, so many women raped, so many other people murdered, so many people abusing drugs... what makes you think that there can't be that many dogs abused?

Puppy mills is a form of abuse. Abandoning a pet is abuse, neglecting a dog is abuse. There is physical and verbal abuse. 
All these dogs in the shelters have been abused one way or the other and if it was only their trust in humans that got abused.


----------



## GSD07

atravis said:


> These were WAR dogs, turned movie stars, turned legends to the American people and to the WORLD.


 Maybe to American people but not to the WORLD, hate to disappoint you. My childhood heroes were a border patrol GSD catching spies with his handler, day and night, and a canine member of T-34 crew who was sharing the hardship of war with his handler. So my idea of a pet was and still is a dog that can kick butts first, and then save children


----------



## Doc

Very well stated Chris. If we both agree with each other, people may start to talk about us ... LOL. 

I'm well aware of what the Standard *is suppose* to do and be, but it has been bastardized to the point that the German shepherd is no longer the dog Max created.


----------



## Mrs.K

> Structure must be balanced, and here I feel that while the dog should look like a GSD and be pleasing to the eye, structure should never, ever impeed function. (Though personally, I don't find the dogs where it does to be pleasing to the eye or very GSD looking... but obviously some do.) *When what "wins" is a structure that severely reduces speed, agility, stamina and structural integrity, something is very very wrong.*


That I totally agree with.


----------



## robinhuerta

Agree...and Max did _not intend_ this breed to be _anything other _than what he created....._including_ the idea, that breeding for the sole purpose of producing "pets" is acceptable.....
The breeding world will always be filled with......"do as I say...not as I do."
Every breeder believes they are doing justice and what they "produce" is best......it's our self esteem button. We all have types we deem "correct", and criticize those that beg to differ. 
The (complete) standard is the "blue print" of the breed......either choose to follow it.(to your best ability)...or choose not......ultimately....the choice is yours.
Robin


----------



## atravis

GSD07 said:


> Maybe to American people but not to the WORLD, hate to disappoint you. My childhood heroes were a border patrol GSD catching spies with his handler, day and night, and a canine member of T-34 crew who was sharing the hardship of war with his handler. So my idea of a pet was and still is a dog that can kick butts first, and then save children


Oh, so you speak for the whole world? 
I'm fairly certain Rinty is a international franchise. His inspiration is not limited to this country. Sorry.


----------



## Emoore

Mrs.K said:


> You would be surprised. Abuse doesn't start by hitting them.
> 
> If there are so many kids being systematically abused, so many women raped, so many other people murdered, so many people abusing drugs... what makes you think that there can't be that many dogs abused?
> 
> Puppy mills is a form of abuse. Abandoning a pet is abuse, neglecting a dog is abuse. There is physical and verbal abuse.
> All these dogs in the shelters have been abused one way or the other and if it was only their trust in humans that got abused.


Yes, but being a puppy machine, being ignored and neglected, being yelled at, being dumped at a shelter. . . these aren't the kind of abuse that will turn an otherwise strong-nerved dog into an animal who's afraid of children, strangers, loud noises, people with hats, and different ethnic groups. It would take true sadism to turn a solid dog into one who's afraid of that much. But when folks come across a dog like that they always want to attribute it to abuse. Besides, 40-50% of kids aren't systematically abused. 40-50% of women aren't raped; 40-50% of people aren't murdered. But roughly 40-50% of the GSDs that come through our rescue have some sort of shy/skittish/weak nerve issue. And that's just sad.


----------



## Doc

If the Standard is the blueprint, then there are a lot of breeders that can not read a blueprint! And today's Standard is not the one drafted by MvS.

At my age, I have no need to stroke my ego. Hopefully I am breeding German shepherds that represent the Golden age of German shepherds in this country.


----------



## Baby Byron

Amen, Doc.


----------



## codmaster

If we agree that genetics provides the raw material of a dogs temperament, we still have the problem of deciding WHICH puppy has the great genetic material so we can ignore their socialization and just tie them in the backyard for 2 years and then take them downtown and into crowds and have them not freak out.

How would we know? 

Also, how many puppies (as a %) do you think would turn out to be solid temperamented dogs without normal socilaization? 10%, 1%, more or less?

I think some folks probably ought to look at the research of puppy socialization.


----------



## StarryNite

I don't know much about this subject, but I have seen the pics of GSD's with their hindquarters so low it makes me cringe and think "ouch". From what I have heard and read that is not originally the breed standard and probably accounts for so many hip problems. I met a guy at the dog park who said he paid $2,500 for his GSD and spent three times that in the first year of his life on vet bills. Again, I am NO expert but that is so sad! Why not keep the breed how they were originally and not for some sort of new show standard which is my understanding of it?


----------



## Mrs.K

codmaster said:


> If we agree that genetics provides the raw material of a dogs temperament, we still have the problem of deciding WHICH puppy has the great genetic material so we can ignore their socialization and just tie them in the backyard for 2 years and then take them downtown and into crowds and have them not freak out.
> 
> How would we know?
> 
> Also, how many puppies (as a %) do you think would turn out to be solid temperamented dogs without normal socilaization? 10%, 1%, more or less?
> 
> I think some folks probably ought to look at the research of puppy socialization.


Thank you. 

You can screw an even strong nerved dog up if he got brought up the wrong way. 

Like I said before, they are not machines, they are living creatures and socialization is a big part of bringing up a puppy. Especially when they go through the fear phase.


----------



## Doc

You don't train well behaved dogs, you breed them. A breeder has a good deal of control over genetics - if she/he does their homework, man controls the environment (for the most part) that a dog lives in, but without good genetics, no environment will make a dog social. JMO


----------



## Mrs.K

Really?

Your dogs obey the commands sit, down and stay automatically? You don't need to train that first? Your dogs are housbroken from the beginning, they never jump at people and know that they can't beg on the table.

They are THAT well behaved from the day they were born because it's all in the genetics?

No need to train a dog at ALL because it's all in the genetics... wow! You really have wonder dogs. 

You know, obedience is part of a well-behaved dog.

Lock a dog (as a puppy) into a cage for three years and just give him the food and water. No other contact whatsoever. Genetics might help a little bit but you will have to work hard to socialize him at that age and there'll probably always things that he'll be scared off because those first puppy weeks are CRUCIAL for a dog. 

Humans are more intelligent as dogs and they have to go through socialization too. They can have the greatest genetics and still be antisocial if they are around the wrong people. 

The some goes for dogs. In the hand of the wrong person you can turn a strong nerved dog into a weapon or a dog that is scared of every human being out or into a great companion. 

It all depends on the person that raises that puppy.
But hey... I agree to disagree...


----------



## Doc

Never said all that Mrs. K - but they can walk on water.

IMO genetics have to be there - they trump training. Manfred Heyne picked herding dogs as young pups based on their natural instincts - and merely cultivated/honed the skills (genetics) that the dogs exhibited. They knew exactly how to bite and move sheep way before he "trained" them to do anything. I'm a little lost about throwing pups in a cage for years and seeing how they grow up. I'm not sure what you are trying to say. And if you are implying that no amount of genetics can over come those condictions perhaps you are right. And I would content that no amount of proper training could turn that around either.


----------



## Mrs.K

Doc said:


> Never said all that Mrs. K - but they can walk on water.
> 
> IMO genetics have to be there - they trump training. Manfred Heyne picked herding dogs as young pups based on their natural instincts - and merely cultivated/honed the skills (genetics) that the dogs exhibited. They knew exactly how to bite and move sheep way before he "trained" them to do anything. I'm a little lost about throwing pups in a cage for years and seeing how they grow up. I'm not sure what you are trying to say. And if you are implying that no amount of genetics can over come those condictions perhaps you are right. And I would content that no amount of proper training could turn that around either.


Yes, I agree that genetics are important but they need training too. Genetics isn't everything and socialization isn't everything either. It takes both to have a great companion dog. One doesn't work without the other and I am pretty sure that we all can agree on that. 
I guarantee you that there are people out there that could even make your dogs snap and/or break them to a point where they wouldn't trust any human being for a long time. You can do that to any dog, doesn't matter if strong or weak nerves and every dog handler knows that. Why do you think training and socialization is so **** important because you can shape and form dogs the way you want if you know how to do it, especially strong nerved dogs!


----------



## Doc

No one will ever have the chance to make my dogs snap. I'm not sure where you are coming from but it sounds to me like all you want is an argument. Well for once, I am not the one to point your biased opinions towards. You seem to know way too much about "breaking" dogs and how to make them snap. I can only hope you are speaking from speculation and not experience.

I'll take my dogs with their genetically innate skills and play with those that encourage and cultivate the dogs potential and stay away from militaristic dog "trainers" who impose their will over nature.

I learn from my dogs through observation and interaction. I rarely have to "make" my dogs do anything. They do "it" because they know how and are encouraged and rewarded to do so. Anything other than that is a crime against nature.


----------



## RubyTuesday

Lin said:


> Nothing. Its just a marketing ploy, like "teacup" small dogs.


In that sense practically everything is a marketing ploy, such as marketing GS sporting dogs as ‘true working dogs’. Many SchH dogs have never seen a day of _real work_. Many so called working lines are placed in companion, sporting or performance homes & not as actual working dogs. The breeder who was linked, while acknowledging that she breeds for superior companion GS, has produced GS that work as SAR, seeing eye, therapy & assistance dogs. I suspect Khawk has produced more actual working GS than many breeders of the so called working lines.

The working GS of yesteryear came in various sizes, colors & coats suited to the work expected from them. Ironically as sport & performance have usurped working functions, the conformational & cosmetic demands have become increasingly stringent. This benefits the show ring, & perhaps SchH enthusiasts, but it doesn’t serve the broader interests of solid GS breeding well at all, IMO. 




Dainerra said:


> ...dog is guaranteed for only 6 years, even though the "highlight" of their breeding program is to produce longer-lived dogs?...


Many breeders have warranties(guarantees) for 1-2yrs. Do you expect those dogs to die at the end of the warranty period? Or those that don’t provide any warranty, do you think those pups will expire at the end of the return period, usually 72hrs-2wks? IF not, then why are you applying such logic to this breeder?




Mrs.K said:


> I don't understand people that are willed to pay that kind of money for a dog that doesn't even have the real papers.


Titles don’t provide the information that’s crucial to me in selecting my dogs. When/if that changes I’ll reconsider my opinion of them. I purchased the dogs I like & not the dogs others think I should seek. Given how happy I’ve been with my dogs, I’ll continue to use my criteria & judgment rather than that of people I’ve never met & have little in common with.



Mrs.K said:


> The puppy I bought costs 850 Euros (chipped and everything). Parents titled, champions, went to the world championships, great line... and it costs less than a female puppy from that kennel and people pay for that?


Presumably you got the pup you want. Cool. I don’t want that pup anymore than you want mine. Titles & awards that resonate with you are meaningless to me. (Note, this breeder's pups are chipped, too. I didn't realize that was especially noteworthy.)




atravis said:


> ...I would never own one. Not even remotly my kind of dog. But I'd rather a person who JUST wants a cool family pet go to someone like Royalair, rather than wind up with something that they aren't prepared to handle. It is, after all, the later that make a bad reputation for our breed.


I certainly respect that your choices in dogs don’t mirror my own. I appreciate that you extend others that same respect & courtesy. Thanks!




Mrs.K said:


> ...She's taking one major thing away from them and something the Shepherd always had and that is agility. These dogs may be social and great family dogs but she's taking away everything the Shepherd stands for...


Her dogs are powerful, fit, active & athletic. They are not as agile as the smaller GS although they’re not even close to being the oafish slugs some people claim. Ironically these are invariably people that haven’t met, don’t know & have never interacted with the breeder or her dogs.




Liesje said:


> I don't really care about the standard in this context. I think breeders should breed what they honest to God feel is right and correct, not what JQP wants them to supply.


It’s not only so called WL(SchH) breeders who are doing this. The vision of companion line breeders might not mesh perfectly with SchH breeders but that difference of opinion doesn’t mean companion line breeders don’t have a vision of what they’re striving for. Ethical, knowledgeable companion line breeders have a great deal in common with ethical, knowledgeable WL/SchH breeders. They both seek stable, strong minded, healthy, balanced, sound, intelligent, biddable long lived dogs. 

Note that while Rin Tin Tin & Strongheart were not war dogs, the more important point is that they were modelled after GS who excelled as soldiers & were greatly admired for their feats of skill & bravery through numerous conflicts. Many American soldiers were awestruck at the uncanny abilities of the GS they encountered.




Doc said:


> I do breed what I honest to God think the German shepherd dog should be. I am guided by the vision of Max and not not a Standard written by a bunch of people that want to influence the breed to their preference. It just so happens to be dogs that JOhn Q Public love. Are they a hit with the show crowd - hail no. Do they perform in the sport of SchH - no and never will. Do I think they represent what a German shepherd was developed to be - yes. Have I bettered the bred - not if I am judged by the Standard. But for concentrating on health, temperament, and structure I honest to God think I have.


Amen, Doc. That's why I admire you & your dogs.


----------



## Samba

I have had dogs from many lines... working, show, american, german, dog pound who knows. They were good pets. That production has not been lost, does not require yet another line and is not any kind of special fashioned best I can tell.


----------



## JOSHUA SAMPSON

As i undersood the history, after WWII the "war dogs" that were brought to america were bread to a different breed standard than those that remained in germany. the hip dysplasia problems became more pronounced due to these altered breed standards (namely bigger dogs with faster growth rates) while the German GSD's remained a medium sized dog with moderate growth rates. Then of course EARLY american breeders of GSD's who didnt quite understand the principles of temperament and drive were allowing the dogs to produce the unstable temperaments. this led to the difference between the american dogs (who eventually became the AKC showlines) and the eurpean GSD's wich is why the majority of police GSD's were euro imports. Today's american breeders have mainly adopted the euro bloodlines and standards.

or at least that's how i remember reading it in some book years ago on the history of the GSD


----------



## Mrs.K

Doc said:


> No one will ever have the chance to make my dogs snap. I'm not sure where you are coming from but it sounds to me like all you want is an argument. Well for once, I am not the one to point your biased opinions towards. You seem to know way too much about "breaking" dogs and how to make them snap. I can only hope you are speaking from speculation and not experience.
> 
> I'll take my dogs with their genetically innate skills and play with those that encourage and cultivate the dogs potential and stay away from militaristic dog "trainers" who impose their will over nature.
> 
> I learn from my dogs through observation and interaction. I rarely have to "make" my dogs do anything. They do "it" because they know how and are encouraged and rewarded to do so. Anything other than that is a crime against nature.


No, you just don't understand what I am trying to tell you. 

I am trying to say that genes are NOT everything and that in the wrong hands a dog with good genes can still snap and that is why the right socialization is so important because you can take any dog and make him snap and it doesn't matter what kind of genes he has. 

I am against brutal training too. I have the result of two dogs right here. One never got socialized properly and the other was abused and didn't get socialized properly and they came from the country into a busy town. 

The abused dog was much harder to socialize but he recovers quickly and faster than I thought (good genes) the other dog owns the world is bold and outgoing but there are still situations where she has to get adjusted to because she's never experienced them but she is a quick and witty learner. 

And all I am trying to say is that you need to socialize a dog properly, no matter if he has good and strong nerves or weak nerves. We owe it to the dogs to give them tools to go through every possible situation.

While good genes are important it's also socialization that plays a huge role. And I don't know what you have against socialization. Why are you so against it?


----------



## Lin

Samba said:


> I have had dogs from many lines... working, show, american, german, dog pound who knows. They were good pets. That production has not been lost, does not require yet another line and is not any kind of special fashioned best I can tell.


Exactly. Specialization doesn't do the breed any favors.


----------



## Liesje

Mrs.K said:


> While good genes are important it's also socialization that plays a huge role. And I don't know what you have against socialization. Why are you so against it?


It plays a role but IMO not a greater one than genes. I have a dog that sometimes acts like she was "abused". This dog has received nothing but the best care and ownership, positive training, been taking out into the world into all sorts of environments....and yet she's a neurotic dog that lacks the ability to recover when put under stress. The next dog I have was neglected and in three or four different homes until we adopted him at the age of one. He received no training other than what he got in foster care before we adopted him, very little socialization at least by my standards, and yet he is happy, outgoing, loves all people and dogs. He actually startles easier than the first dog, but he recovers instantly. I've never seen him shut down or go into a "fight or flight" mode. 

There is no amount of socialization and positive reinforcement that can overcome the neurosis of dog A, and apparently nothing short of maiming the dog physically can challenge the spirit of dog B.


----------



## LaRen616

*Starrynite*

*"I don't know much about this subject, but I have seen the pics of GSD's with their hindquarters so low it makes me cringe and think "ouch". From what I have heard and read that is not originally the breed standard and probably accounts for so many hip problems"*


I agree with her. I also do not like that look.


----------



## Liesje

LaRen616 said:


> *Starrynite*
> 
> *"I don't know much about this subject, but I have seen the pics of GSD's with their hindquarters so low it makes me cringe and think "ouch". From what I have heard and read that is not originally the breed standard and probably accounts for so many hip problems"*
> 
> 
> I agree with her. I also do not like that look.


I don't like it either but my understanding is that extreme rear angulation and/or croups has nothing to do with whether hips are good or bad.


----------



## Chris Wild

^^ Correct. The angulation seen on many American line dogs has NOTHING to do with hips. It is caused by an elongated and wider angled stifle (the knee/thigh) area. Nothing in the hip assembly causes this and angulation has no bearing on whether a dog is more or less prone to HD.


----------



## MaggieRoseLee

past to present (click that)

To see a great comparison with photos how our GSD's have changed. Old fashioned???


----------



## LaRen616

Those dogs look terrible! They look very painful to me. My dog is tall not slanted and I love him that way!


----------



## Doc

I have absolutley nothing against socialization. My pups are born in the laundry room. I am in there from the first sign of labor until the last pup is out. From birth, each pup is handled. cuddled, rocked, sang to, touched several times a day. The first two weeks of their lives they spend a majority of time with mom and siblings in the whelping box plus individual time with human interaction. The following two week, they spend "exploring", learning how to interact in the pack, letting mom clean and nuzzle, being exposed to different sounds, textures on their feet, etc. The next two weeks they spend more time together with sibblings, less time with mom, and more time interacting with humans. They also slowly weaned from mom to food with human scent all over it. Week 6 - 8 they spend even less time with mom, become more independant, learn the pecking order in the pack, spend more time with humans, are introduced to crate training, are exposed to various challenges, etc.

I'm not sure how that makes me against socialization?

And to the post about the German shepherds coming here after WWII. The better breeders imported the best bloodlines from Germany. Sure a lot of junk came in but kennels such as Long Worth, San Miguel, Rocky Reach, and the dogs from the Cosalta lines were all outstanding examples of proper bloodlines. Some of the greatest names in the history of the German shepherd were used during this period in the US. Unfortunately, some were not used enough and we missed our chance of becoming the nation with the best German shepherds in the world.

And Ruby Tuesday touched on a very important concept - weather you are breeding working line, show, or companion dogs, a knowledgable breeder of any "type" of dog is striving for the same thing - making the German shepherd dog better. When Chris Wild and I can agree on something - anything is possible! (no offense Chris, just trying to make a point. Besides, even though we may not see eye to eye on many things, when it comes to the German shepherd dog, we only want the best.


----------



## Mrs.K

MaggieRoseLee said:


> past to present (click that)
> 
> To see a great comparison with photos how our GSD's have changed. Old fashioned???


Well, those are the show dogs. 

Check out the German working line. 



















That is a HUGE difference to the show line, isn't it? 
If you compare that to the pics from the 40's to the 70's than you can see that there isn't much change but I still wouldn't call them old' fashioned thoug...


----------



## Liesje

I'm seeing more and more working lines with more angulation and rear for my taste, not as many as show lines of course but they exist. I also see a lot of very big working line dogs, both large and heavy. I know show lines are often criticized for their size but I'm not really sure where it comes from, maybe they look huge in pictures b/c of coat? My show line male is 70lbs, 24". If your show line is too large and/or too heavy it will most definitely come up in the critique. I don't see a big difference overall in size of show lines vs. working lines. Most of the ones I see are a good size, but I don't see more oversized show lines than working lines.


----------



## crs996

I believe socialization is good for all dogs, and think "genes vs. socialization" argument comes down mostly to two things in my layman's opinion:

1. What stimuli and how often the dog will portray a fearful state.

2. The time required by the dog to recover from the event. 

Socialization will make a dog with good genes even more stable in day to day events, they will not react to things in as fearful a way, are more curious about their environment and accepting of challenges. If they DO get scared, they recover more quickly.
A well socialized dog with bad genes may have better recovery time than one with no socialization, but will still _react_ to more situations, be more fearful, less outgoing, etc.

I have owned GSDs on various places in the spectrum, all were manageable but some needed more attention/effort. 

In regards to different lines and their physical structure, I've personally experienced a big difference in stamina, speed and endurance with working vs. show lines. I've taken my dogs on 10+ mile horseback rides, the "working" dogs trotted along and seemed to have endless ability to do so, the "show" lines always had more difficulty. They could do it, but it was definitely harder for them. This is where the rubber hit the road for me, all the talk of angulation and balance made sense. German show line dogs were my first experience with GSDs, and as I pinpointed more what I wanted to do with my dogs, structurally sound working lines have been all I've had since.

This is my bone to pick with both American and German breeders (although I think "American show" shepherd breeders are the bigger offenders), is the structure. Of course, temperament and health are extremely important, but this area is where I've experienced the greatest loss of the Standard.


----------



## Mrs.K

That's true and I agree with you. I've recently seen pretty big working dogs and was amazed that they actually got 'gekoered' because they are completely oversized and you don't need to measure their size to know that. 

As for the slope and rear, I totally agree with you. I don't like that either.


----------



## dOg

Based on the pictures, yeah, REALLY.

If the kennel clubs don't have to follow the standard and can make freaks then why would anyone have to adhere to it? The governance led the way to the insanity.

The breed is so fragmented and has pretty much undergone every horrible thing Max predicted and cautioned against. No matter which camp you choose from, there will be a larger majority out there telling you you made the wrong choice and that they wish a pox on your breeder for not doing it their more correct way.

What a load. Who cares? Get what you want, and be happy with it. As for all the belly aching about the good of the breed and who holds the holy grail of the true gsd,
nobody cares to hear it. The best gsd is the one you love. The rest is of little matter. Whether you rescued, have a mix, found a stray or had to buy the boat that brought it here, did the training, paid for the titles before hand, or the only work you put into it is vacuuming hair off the couch, it really doesn't matter.

Just-

Enjoy This Day, with your dog!
Go outside and play!


----------



## TxRider

Emoore said:


> Yes, but being a puppy machine, being ignored and neglected, being yelled at, being dumped at a shelter. . . these aren't the kind of abuse that will turn an otherwise strong-nerved dog into an animal who's afraid of children, strangers, loud noises, people with hats, and different ethnic groups. It would take true sadism to turn a solid dog into one who's afraid of that much. But when folks come across a dog like that they always want to attribute it to abuse. Besides, 40-50% of kids aren't systematically abused. 40-50% of women aren't raped; 40-50% of people aren't murdered. But roughly 40-50% of the GSDs that come through our rescue have some sort of shy/skittish/weak nerve issue. And that's just sad.


I have the example of this sleeping next to me on the sofa.

Two rescues. Neither of these GSD's I would say are well bred and neither would be in any show.

One was abused, bred, neglected to the point of almost death from starvation and disease before being forcibly seized. Within 6 months she was stable, lots of drive, shows no fear and recovers from any new surprise almost instantly. Great with kids, people and dogs.

She recently had a reactive dog she approached snatch her entire nose and an inch of upper muzzle and latch on tight for a minute or two, much yelping, some bleeding and I'm hoping the marks across her muzzle aren't permanent. She totally recovered in under 30 minutes and was right back to meeting strange dogs without fear, she is a solid girl.

The other was a stray, likely not abused, but genetically a nervy wreck. She is frightened of almost anything new, and does not recover at all from many things that initially surprise her, terrified of lightning and thunder, or any loud noise etc,. Had the same thing happened to her she would not have recovered, she'll be a nervy problem her whole life.

Genetics play the bigger role in their differences in temperament, and it's night and day.


----------



## Jessiewessie99

Since the link is removed I can't see the site, let alone the pictures of the dogs.Are they that huge?lol.Are they mutated?lol.Anyone got pics?They seem like scary dogs .


----------



## RubyTuesday

Jessiewessie99, the dogs are large to very large, especially the males. Many people find Djibouti frightening, but that's b/c he's very large (29.5") & vigorous. Those who 'read' dogs well aren't fazed by him. In fact they usually love him. 

Her dogs aren't for everyone, (whose are?), but those who have them are largely very happy with them. I've never felt any need to denigrate others choices in dogs & I'm both amused & baffled by the many that huff & puff about over sized GS. Frankly, the breed faces far more serious challenges than Djibouti standing several inches over standard.


----------



## StarryNite

I have absolutely NO expertise in the breeding field, so forgive my ignorance. But I remember GSD's being pretty standard looking with high backs and now all I seem to see at breeder sites for American GSD's is this tall front that slants down where the hindquarters are low to the ground. It looks unnatural and painful for the dogs in my opinion, and I am honestly just asking, why are people breeding GSD's so their hindquarters are so low to the ground?


----------



## mjbgsd

> I know show lines are often criticized for their size but I'm not really sure where it comes from, maybe they look huge in pictures b/c of coat? My show line male is 70lbs, 24". If your show line is too large and/or too heavy it will most definitely come up in the critique. I don't see a big difference overall in size of show lines vs. working lines. Most of the ones I see are a good size, but I don't see more oversized show lines than working lines.


When I went to my first SV show a few years ago I took Cody out to potty, we traveled very far so we had to take the dogs, and realized how tall he looked compared to the German Showline males. Cody is about 25.5'' but he is long thanks to his American half. Even Isa was mostly taller then most of the males but she is over standard at 25.4'' or at least close to that. I thought the dogs there looked great and not one dog was over standard as they measured them all. I'm thinking it's their body mass that makes them look big.


----------



## Mrs.K

Measuring doesn't mean anything. 

Do you know how many dogs in Germany are measured and gekoered even though they are clearly oversized?

You can train a dog to appear smaller than he actually is.


----------



## holland

How do you train a dog to appear smaller than he is...maybe someone has been doing that with Rorie although I like small


----------



## Chris Wild

The dog is taught to scrunch his shoulders down when placed under the measuring wicket. Easy way, is tacks or nails on the bottom of the measuring wicket. He gets poked with them enough times and he learns to scrunch whenever the measuring wicket is placed over him... instant "shorter" dog.


----------



## AbbyK9

The thing that really bothers me about this thread is that someone early on in the thread said that people remember Strongheart and Rin-Tin-Tin, and that's the type of dog they want to buy. I don't understand this as an explanation because neither Strongheart nor the original Rin-Tin-Tin look anything at all like these dogs that are being advertised as "old-fashioned" German Shepherds.

Below are two photos. The one on the left is Strongheart, and one on the right is the original Rin-Tin-Tin. Maybe it's just me, but I don't see oversized, hulking behemoths of dogs when I look at Rinty and Strongheart.

As far as the breed standard goes ... people like to use the excuse that the modern breed standard was written much later and breeders *should* be breeding to what Max von Stephanitz envisioned. Unfortunately, it seems like those people generally have NO IDEA what Max von Stephanitz envisioned. Especially if they say that and breed oversized dogs. Because Captain Max was quite clear what he wanted -



> Giants are never nimble. The ligaments soon give under the weight of the bones in times of hard work, especially in the forelegs on which they fall heavily at every step. 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.
> 
> (...)
> 
> The breed type allows about 24" average height for dogs and bitches, with about 2" allowance either way. These dimensions are to be aimed at for all medium-sized service breeds as correct, whether the dogs are used for the flocks or for any other service. The service dog, like a good cavalry charger, must be indefatigable, enduring, and capable of maintaining a persevering, even quiet, but also a rapid gait, that is to say a trot, and also a gallop. Further, he must be mobile, capable of turning easily, and skillful in overcoming obstacles, whether by jumping or climbing. For this it is necessary to possess a specific size combined with strength.
> 
> (_The German Shepherd Dog in Word and Picture_, page 500.)


If you're breeding neither to the standard nor to what the breed's founder envisioned, exactly what are you breeding? Because IMHO it's not a German Shepherd.


----------



## Liesje

I don't have a problem with massive dogs, if that's what people like (but I wonder why not get a Shiloh, since that's how they look and act?), but I'm still not seeing how this represents the "old fashioned" GSD. I will never own one because personally I like a very lean, well conditioned, athletic, active dog.

I'm not super picky on size and I've never seen judges being really picky in shows either. My dog has never been measured besides my unofficial attempt to satisfy my own curiosity. They are required to be measured for Koer, but not every judge will measure during a show, and even if they do they do not have to throw the dog out because it's half an inch over or under. I have seen/heard many a judge comment on size in general- not specifically height, but a dog that is just plain massive and/or too heavy or not in correct condition. My bitch is a UKC champion with legs towards her Grand (meaning she has beaten other champions multiple times) and she's about half an inch under the standard height. In my experience showing in three different venues, the judge is looking at the overall size, and more importantly the condition of the dog. The dog must be lean and physically fit. Most dogs I see being marketed as the oversized gentle giants are simply just too heavy and not in correct condition.


----------



## Doc

AbbyK9 said:


> The thing that really bothers me about this thread is that someone early on in the thread said that people remember Strongheart and Rin-Tin-Tin, and that's the type of dog they want to buy. I don't understand this as an explanation because neither Strongheart nor the original Rin-Tin-Tin look anything at all like these dogs that are being advertised as "old-fashioned" German Shepherds.
> 
> Below are two photos. The one on the left is Strongheart, and one on the right is the original Rin-Tin-Tin. Maybe it's just me, but I don't see oversized, hulking behemoths of dogs when I look at Rinty and Strongheart.
> 
> As far as the breed standard goes ... people like to use the excuse that the modern breed standard was written much later and breeders *should* be breeding to what Max von Stephanitz envisioned. Unfortunately, it seems like those people generally have NO IDEA what Max von Stephanitz envisioned. Especially if they say that and breed oversized dogs. Because Captain Max was quite clear what he wanted -
> 
> If you're breeding neither to the standard nor to what the breed's founder envisioned, exactly what are you breeding? Because IMHO it's not a German Shepherd.


As I stated earlier, I define "old-fashion" German shepherds as pre- Klodo v Boxberg. With this in mind, let's look at the historical trends in size of the German shepherd. From my historical notes - "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, the Secretainerie lines were all tall, large dogs, well known and well regarded in their time. In the early twenties, with dogs like Norse of the Kriminalpolizei (29 inches) being so heavily used, (180 litters were recorded from Norse alone) Stephanitz, who had choosen taller, larger dogs in the past, deliberately chose Klodo of Boxberg, a small (24 inches) but very correct dog as Sieger in 1925, knowing people would turn to Klodo to breed and that would inevitably bring the dogs _back to the middle ground_. Choosing the Klodo son von Haus Schutting in 1929 to follow merely soldified 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 *their 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.

To say the German shepherd dog was never a large dog is historically wrong.


----------



## LaRen616

I recently went to a dog show and I saw a very small female GSD and I kid you not I thought she was a puppy 6-7 months old. She was 2 1/2! She was so small I could not believe it. My GSD, my friends GSD and my Co Workers GSD are all about the same size and around the same weight. Mine is 85-88 pounds, friend's is 95 pounds and my co worker's female is about 80 pounds. They are all very tall, not fat at all. No slanted legs and all of them are very athletic. Very good looking dogs in my opinion


----------



## Mrs.K

Doc, there is nothing that can convince me to like those oversized, allmost dane faced, Shepherd. 

In my book it is wrong. I respect your opinion but at the same time I highly disagree with you and the reasons of breeding way to large, oversized and heavy German Shepherds.


----------



## Liesje

LaRen616 said:


> I recently went to a dog show and I saw a very small female GSD and I kid you not I thought she was a puppy 6-7 months old. She was 2 1/2! She was so small I could not believe it. My GSD, my friends GSD and my Co Workers GSD are all about the same size and around the same weight. Mine is 85-88 pounds, friend's is 95 pounds and my co worker's female is about 80 pounds. They are all very tall, not fat at all. No slanted legs and all of them are very athletic. Very good looking dogs in my opinion


This is my bitch, she is six years old, weighs 50 lbs and is lean and athletic. She actually has a deeper, more developed chest than my male who is 25lbs heavier (show line, still maturing). If you look at her from the front, her chest is lower and if you look at her from the top, her chest is wider. She has very little angulation relative to today's show fads, but moves very balanced, no looseness, firm back. I was at a dog show this weekend showing my male and since I had her along, I entered her as well.











I have no problem with the occasional dog having a much larger frame, or breeding an oversized dog because it carries even more important characteristics (temperament, drives, health, etc), but to me there's a difference between a dog with an oversized frame and a dog that is simply overweight and not in athletic condition.


----------



## Doc

I have no idea of the dog you speak of Mrs. K. The ones I breed look like German shepherds not Great Danes, perhaps over-sized in Germany takes on a different look?










One of my gals at 7 months.


And another one of gals at 2 years and 90 pounds.


----------



## Samba

My females have all fallen in the upper 50 go lower 60 lbs for weight. I had one oversize male in the 90s but the others all weighed in the 80s. I have always thought of them as a medium sized breed in general. Of course, there are nice dogs who are outlyers occasionally.


----------



## LaRen616

I dont think I have ever seen a heavy GSD? Maybe I have and dont remember but my GSD is very lean, just very tall


----------



## Baby Byron

Here are my babies:

Gus at 110 lbs (at the picnic table with the humans) and Molly when she was 9 mo ~90 lbs









Another shot of Gus and Molly when she was 8 weeks









Don't think they look like Danes and they are all very athletic, muscular, agile, active dogs. 
I guess we just need to agree to disagree. It's OK to have 90-100 lbs GSDs and have them healthy. All of mine have been at least that size, the ones that passed lived long healthy lives. All have been wonderful, mentally sound dogs. No issues at all. It's been 25-30 years of amazing GSD joy here. 

Hugs to all,
Ana


----------



## Liesje

LaRen616 said:


> I dont think I have ever seen a heavy GSD? Maybe I have and dont remember but my GSD is very lean, just very tall


You can't always tell just from a picture. If you go to an SV show you might see dogs that are too heavy or not conditioned. They are exhausted before their class is finished and not just panting but their chests make these guttural heaving noises and you can tell they are not enjoying it one bit. And this is after maybe 20-30 minutes of gaiting, compared to a fit dog who might be panting in the heat but is nowhere close to slowing down and could run and work for hours. To me healthy, athletic dog is in working condition, not just a healthy looking dog that goes on a walk or two and plays some fetch. Nothing wrong with the latter, but I personally prefer a dog that's going to hold up during exercise and work.


----------



## Mrs.K

> 9 mo ~90 lbs


That can't possibly be healthy... :help:


----------



## lhczth

Doc said:


> I have no idea of the dog you speak of Mrs. K. The ones I breed look like German shepherds not Great Danes, perhaps over-sized in Germany takes on a different look?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One of my gals at 7 months.
> 
> 
> And another one of gals at 2 years and 90 pounds.


 

Jung Tell von der Kriminalpolizei was a tall dog, but he was also fairly square. He was not what I would call a bulky dog. 










Klodo vom Boxberg was closer to Max' ideal being a medium sized (that would be 62-63 cm) dog that is also slightly longer than he is tall (compare to his maternal great grandfather shown above). 










While heavy bulky dogs were used in the foundation of the breed I have never found any photos of GSD that looks like this until more modern times. This is supposed to be an athletic utilitarian working dog and not a huge bulky mastiff/draught type breed. 

Of course this is my understanding of the breed history as a working dog. Others obviously have a differing opinion.


----------



## Doc

An award winning and recognized influential dog from the past.









A more recent dog from the same lines.


----------



## onyx'girl

**link removed by Admin**


----------



## Doc

onyx'girl said:


> **link removed by Admin**


You've been asking to see some of my dogs





































These are some of my dogs. Please excuse the quality of the photographs - I didn't take most of them.

I can trace their bloodlines back to the "older" dogs posted above.


----------



## Baby Byron

Mrs.K said:


> That can't possibly be healthy... :help:


I honestly do not think so. If the dog has the sound structure and frame there's nothing unhealthy about her. She has great structure and is absolutely healthy. As were 13 other GSDs we've had. One of the most amazing ones I've had was 135 lbs, and only went to the vet once a year for check ups. Absolutely fit to the end. Another male was 140 lbs also passed peacefully was quite often thought to be 6-7 yo when he was crossing 12. That's how sound and healthy he was. A small framed dog overweight is unhealthy. A large framed animal, whose genes condition large frame, is not unhealthy. Remember, bad hips and the likes can affect smaller dogs just the same. If it's in the animal's genes it doesn't matter the animal's size. 
Here's my sister now with her Maltese dogs, 8 lbs a piece, perfectly fit, with hip dys. and rupture of cruciate ligaments left and right. 
It is not the size that will cause a dog to develop hip problems. Bad breeding will.
I really am not trying to stir up things here but there are positive things in a GSD's genome as well as negative and because somebody selects for sound frame and/or coat doesn't mean that the breeding will be poor healthwise.
Cheers,
Ana


----------



## Doc

Check your PM Ana.


----------



## LaRen616

*Doc*

I think your dogs are good looking, I like em big


----------



## Doc

LaRen616 said:


> *Doc*
> 
> I think your dogs are good looking, I like em big


Thank you.:smirk:


----------



## crs996

onyx'girl said:


> **link removed by Admin**


 
Now that sounds like a breeder I would rush to. The first words on the page reference Oversize and Large, claims of 125 lb shepherds that "you remember as a child"... lol Later there is a token reference to health and intelligence.


----------



## crs996

Doc said:


> An award winning and recognized influential dog from the past.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A more recent dog from the same lines.


These all look like more recent photos. The older photos of large dogs show much more clean body lines, square with less angulation. The "new" giant dogs look fat, heavy and awkward. Some of the young dogs you posted look like giant Welsh Corgis. 

Although there were large (super oversize compared to the standard) dogs in the past, I would be interested to see the working ability of modern "giants". 

If everyone has an excuse not to follow the Standard and just do their own thing, why have one??


----------



## Doc

onyx'girl said:


> **link removed by Admin**


The pictures I posted in this thread are some of my bloodlines. I think you should remove any links in your post to a breeders a web-site - particularly when you have no idea whose it is. You are just fishing onyx'girl and until you know for a fact, your speculation should remain just that - a speculation.

I told you several times I will never post my link in this thread. I have posted some dogs out of my bloodlines in this thread. 

crs996, sometimes it is better to remain silent and make people guess than to open your mouth and remove any doubt. Giant Welsh Corgi's?


----------



## LaRen616

You know what, big or small, fat or thin, slanted or not, they are all GSD's. If a big non slanted GSD needed a home your telling me you wouldn't take him because he is not the standard? If so then you shouldn't be on this site. This site is for *ALL GSD LOVERS.* A GSD is still a GSD even if they are a different color. Animals evolve just like we do.


----------



## Castlemaid

Doc, you have left enough hints throughout your various posts that it is easy to be able to tell that is your kennel. Since you have a strong conviction about your breeding philosophy, and defend it staunchly, why try to hide your website? I think that is sending mixed messages which only dilutes the strenght of your arguments.


----------



## Doc

People have made up their minds concerning German shepherds that are not to standard. Their logic is flawed when they state German shepherds that are over the standard are fat, lazy, and can not work. They are not speaking from experience. I know many "over-sized" German shepherds and breeders that produce large German shepherds. I do not know anything about "giant" German shepherds nor how they are defined. But to imply that a German shepherd dog that falls outside of the Standard is non-functional is an inaccurate statement.

I would like to "call the question" before this gets topic digresses too far.


----------



## Castlemaid

LaRen616 said:


> You know what, big or small, fat or thin, slanted or not, they are all GSD's. If a big non slanted GSD needed a home your telling me you wouldn't take him because he is not the standard? If so then you shouldn't be on this site. This site is for *ALL GSD LOVERS.* A GSD is still a GSD even if they are a different color. Animals evolve just like we do.


You are right about that LaRen, and NOBODY would EVER say that a GSD does not deserve a good home based on lines or looks. All dogs are worthy of love and care. The discussion is more about BREEDER's and what they are producing, and what people feel that a breeder should strive for in a breeding program.


----------



## Doc

Castlemaid said:


> Doc, you have left enough hints throughout your various posts that it is easy to be able to tell that is your kennel. Since you have a strong conviction about your breeding philosophy, and defend it staunchly, why try to hide your website? I think that is sending mixed messages which only dilutes the strenght of your arguments.


I decided to remove my web-site from this thread because I am not here to sell dogs or promote anything. I came here to learn. 

Lucia, do you know for a fact that is my web-site? You can speculate until the cows come home. My dogs are extremely healthy, have proper temperament, and are over the Standard in regard to height and weight. If you or anyone else in this forum want to discard them as useless, bastards, fat, unable to work, giant welsh corgis, etc. that's fine. 

Seeing the current state of the German shepherd dog in general and in specific the many health issues now so common, wouldn't our time be better spent addressing these with the intensity and conviction exhibited towards weather a dog is or isn't within the Standard? Aren't there other more important things to discuss?


----------



## KayElle

I'm supporting Doc. I own two American show line shepherds who are both oversized. My male, a long stock coat, is 29 1/2" and 98 lbs. lean. My bitch is 26 1/2" and 78 lbs. lean. BOTH can outrun, out-corner, and out jump the "working" shepherds in my neighborhood that participate in Schutzhund. Moreover, when my male was only a year old, the county sheriff K9 unit called on me and asked if I would be willing to sell my male to the sheriff's department to be used in their K9 unit. He's not overly aggressive -- his temperament is what a shepherd should be. Soooo, stop the bashing! I plan on getting oversized shepherds after my two pass on, maybe from the breeder whose website started this, maybe from Doc (love to talk to you), or from some other breeders that breed oversized, straight-backed shepherds that are used in therapy and SAR.


----------



## KayElle

Also, I'm pretty certain that Doc's website is not the website that began this thread. As I said, I am quite familiar with that site, the breeder, her reputation, etc. To imply that the site is Doc's is disingenuous at best and clearly unfair. How can Doc disprove it? You should not put anyone, much less a gsd lover, in that position.


----------



## LaRen616

*KayElle *well said!

Maybe I'll look to *Doc* in the future as well


----------



## Mrs.K

Why can't we all just agree to disagree. 

She can have oversized shepherds if she wants to, it's a free country. What bugged me was the Old Fashioned statement and why in the world there is a need to breed such oversized and heavy Shepherds in the first place. That, however, doesn't mean that these Shepherds are not healthy. 

From what I have learned, in all these years, fast growing, heavy weight Shepherds are not really that healthy BUT it doesn't mean that it has to be like that. We don't know for sure. 

Some of us love the healthy, standard sized (up to 65 cm), not overweight, slim, fit and athletic German Shepherds and other like that oversized and big Shepherd... 

So why don't we all agree to disagree before it's turning more and more into a flamewar. That was not the intention of that topic!


----------



## Baby Byron

I second KayElle and LaRen616. Somehow the most important point of all is falling through the cracks here: we all love GSDs. Some of us love the big guys and it's completely fine because some of us don't have a shred of interest in showing (and hence needing to comply to standard).
I have my breeder and love her to pieces but will, without doubt, contact Doc in the future.
Like KayElle said, y'all should watch my babies run. They are anything but fat or lazy. And, boy, are they agile. My Sidney was 135 lbs and outran huskies all the time. And nobody have or had health issues (except for Arrow's skin allergies).
Guys, we love GSDs. That's all.
Cheers,
Ana


----------



## Castlemaid

Doc, I never said a single negative things about your dogs. I have stated what I believe a breeder should try and strive for in a breeding program, but I challenge you to go over my past posts from this thread and others, and find attacks and criticism from me aimed at the lines or pictures or specifics about your dogs that you have posted. It is hard sometimes to have a generalized discussion without people taking everything personally. 

So your insinuations are misplaced. I may disagree on your breeding philosophy, but I am sure your dogs are exactly what you say they are, and no arguements from me on that point.


----------



## KayElle

Bravo!!!!


----------



## Liesje

Baby Byron said:


> I second KayElle and LaRen616. Somehow the most important point of all is falling through the cracks here: we all love GSDs. Some of us love the big guys and it's completely fine because some of us don't have a shred of interest in showing (and hence needing to comply to standard).
> I have my breeder and love her to pieces but will, without doubt, contact Doc in the future.
> Like KayElle said, y'all should watch my babies run. They are anything but fat or lazy. And, boy, are they agile. My Sidney was 135 lbs and outran huskies all the time. And nobody have or had health issues (except for Arrow's skin allergies).
> Guys, we love GSDs. That's all.
> Cheers,
> Ana


This is beside the point. It is the "breeding" forum and someone raised the question about whether or not dogs being advertised as "old fashioned" really do represent the GSDs of old. What would be the point of just having one forum where we all sing Kumbaya? To me that is selling our dogs and our breed short. It is possible to have a discussion about our breed without getting all emotional about it. Maybe you are OK with people misrepresenting the breed and their dogs but I'm not. If such discussions upset you then maybe avoid this part of the forum?


----------



## KayElle

Lies--
You stated that she "misrepresented" the breed. That is your opinion. As Doc has pointed out correctly, the early gsds were straight backed and several of the foundation stock were "oversized" by today's standard. I believe there is room for interpretation here and that NOONE is absolutely right or wrong. I hope this comment is in the spirit of debate that you suggested; if not, since we are all soliciting opinions here, do you suggest several of us "quit" (as you stated) this forum? I certainly hope not!


----------



## Mrs.K

Liesje said:


> This is beside the point. It is the "breeding" forum and someone raised the question about whether or not dogs being advertised as "old fashioned" really do represent the GSDs of old. What would be the point of just having one forum where we all sing Kumbaya? To me that is selling our dogs and our breed short. It is possible to have a discussion about our breed without getting all emotional about it. Maybe you are OK with people misrepresenting the breed and their dogs but I'm not. If such discussions upset you then maybe avoid this part of the forum?


Thank you. :wub:


----------



## Baby Byron

Lies,

Please don't get me wrong. I'm not upset or emotional. Just trying to expose the Running With The Big Guys point of view. A discussion only exists when there are two talking. Meaning if everybody says "amen" to the topic starter then there's no discussion just corroboration. Its' OK to disagree. I'd just prefer that folks would stick to disagreeing without personal attacks which, and you have to agree with me, always take place when a new thread on "big size" or "long coats" or "old fashioned" comes along. That's all. Truth is, we all come from different schools of thought here and we all know that. And that's fine. Let's just remember to keep it civil. In the end it boils down to the fact that, for example, I've had large long coats for 25+ years and that's all I'm ever going to get and you have standard dogs and that's all you're going to get. And it's perfectly fine with me. Again, I'm not upset, just defending my turf but respecting yours (by yours I mean everyone that does not partake of my particular view). 
Cheers,
Ana


----------



## Liesje

KayElle said:


> Lies--
> You stated that she "misrepresented" the breed. That is your opinion. As Doc has pointed out correctly, the early gsds were straight backed and several of the foundation stock were "oversized" by today's standard. I believe there is room for interpretation here and that NOONE is absolutely right or wrong. I hope this comment is in the spirit of debate that you suggested; if not, since we are all soliciting opinions here, do you suggest several of us "quit" (as you stated) this forum? I certainly hope not!


My comment about misrepresentation was not directed at Doc or his dogs and does not really have to due with size. I believe form follows function. Hard working dogs are going to be smaller and thinner, pets can get away with being larger and heavier. Neither is right or wrong, it just is what it is.


----------



## AbbyK9

Max von Stephanitz himself says that dogs and bitches should be "about 24" at the withers" with "2" to go either way", meaning two inches larger or smaller than that. So Von Stephanitz envisioned his "ideal" dog to be between about 22" and about 26" in height - a dog that's 27" wouldn't have been considered "outside the standard" as the original standard only says "about" that size, not "exactly" that size.

However, those 27" inch males are a far cry from what these breeders of (supposed) "old-fashioned" German Shepherds are producing. They're not breeding dogs that come out to be an inch or two above the standard - like the ones Doc is using as his example above - but breeding dogs that are 30" and taller, plus very heavy in weight as well. And I don't mean "heavy boned", although many of them are, but just plain heavy. 

On the majority of "old-fashioned" German Shepherd breeders' sites that I've seen, they tout the height of their dog (above 30") as well as the weight of their dogs - and many, if not most, of these dogs are grossly overweight. When you can't see a tuck-up behind the rib cage, and have to guess where the dog's ribcage ends and his midsection begins, you have a problem. And you see a lot of those dogs with just rolls of neck fat and wobbly bellies, along with the breeder's description of how they are "large-boned and muscular, but not fat." Uh ... really? I don't think so.

IMHO I also don't believe that Doc's view of early German Shepherds necessarily holds water. While it's true that some breeders were breeding larger dogs, most of those were within Von Stephanitz's standard - a dog that is 27" still falls close to his written standard, and there's no reason why such a dog, if he is otherwise correct for the breed, wouldn't be chosen as a Sieger dog. 

Doc also notes that when some breeders began breeding larger dogs, Von Stephanitz put a stop to that by choosing a relatively small (24") male as Sieger so more people would be encouraged to breed to him. That speaks volumes to Von Stephanitz's goals, IMHO - he was aware that people were oversizing and tried to put a stop to it to fit with the breed vision that he had created when he created the breed.

IMHO if the breed's founder is saying, "This is WRONG and we need to stop oversizing", maybe it's time to listen. 

I think, historically speaking, the German Shepherd was never intended to be a large dog, and while some dogs were on the larger end of the standard, the majority still were not - and even those larger dogs were nowhere near the "old fashioned" German Shepherds that these breeders are producing now, where the dogs resemble more a Newfoundland than a Shepherd in size.


----------



## Doc

I'm a breeder and proud of what I produce. I feel my dogs represent what a German shepherd should be. If you have no personal knowledge of or experience with my dogs, then your acquisitions about them may, or mostly likely, be entirely off-base. 

To make such statements in a public forum has to be defended. And since I have spent my life with these dogs I would say I know a lot more about them than anyone who has made their opinion known in here. Am I upset? Not really - but to say my dogs look like giant welsh corgies is a little disturbing and insulting; but I have come to expect such verbage from certain people in here. 

As far as form and function, that can apply to any size German shepherd. To associate poor function because of size only means you have not experienced or seen a properly bred oversized German shepherd. It all goes back to genetics - a major tenet of the German shepherd's foundation and one that is not clearly understood by many German shepherd owners. If you want to capture what the german shepherd is all about genetically, read some of the interviews with Manfred Heyne. His understanding of the GSD is spot on. It's too bad he is no longer with us to share his wisdom and knowledge of this breed.


----------



## crs996

Doc said:


> But to imply that a German shepherd dog that falls outside of the Standard is non-functional is an inaccurate statement.


Then prove everyone wrong by showing the working titles and abilities. If this is indeed your website, all I saw was references to things that bear little or no consequence to bettering the breed.

I repeat, if "breeders" obviously know better than to stick with the standard, why have one. Or is the standard flawed?


----------



## Mrs.K

> As far as form and function, that can apply to any size German shepherd. To associate poor function because of size only means you have not experienced or seen a properly bred oversized German shepherd. It all goes back to genetics - a major tenet of the German shepherd's foundation and one that is not clearly understood by many German shepherd owners. If you want to capture what the german shepherd is all about genetically, read some of the interviews with Manfred Heyne. His understanding of the GSD is spot on. It's too bad he is no longer with us to share his wisdom and knowledge of this breed.


Doc, there are things that a heavy, oversized German Shepherd will not be able to do as good as one of the more athletic and smaller GSD's because he is too heavy and big to do it.

He might function but is definitely limited in everything he does just like any other big breed. 

He can't run as long, he isn't as fast as smaller and more athletic and agile dogs, he can't jump as high... he might be able to jump but just not as high, he is able to run but just not as fast... you get the idea...


----------



## Liesje

Doc said:


> To associate poor function because of size only means you have not experienced or seen a properly bred oversized German shepherd.


My point exactly. I've never seen a properly bred oversize (not talking about an inch or two and ten pounds give or take, but 20, 30, 40lbs) working.


----------



## Baby Byron

Once again, I'm with Doc.
The GSD genome is amazing and a properly bred GSD should be sound regardless of size and coat length. Standards cannot be set in stone because life itself is dynamic. What is the scenario nowadays? Most of us grew up with GSDs in the house and none of those dogs were K9 officers or took care of livestock right? So, yes there's room for wiggle there. By golly, if we went by set-in-stone standards none of us gals here would ever be able to wear trousers or jeans right? Yep. That was the standard when our Grandmas were young ladies. And the list goes on and on. 
Ana


----------



## Doc

To set the record straight, I do not have dogs that are 30+" tall. I do not have any dogs that are over 120 pounds. So maybe my dogs aren't giants? I'm not sure how they are defined. I do know that Norse Krim. (29" tall) had a recorded 180 litters that he sired. To say that the German shepherd wasn't going to be a tall dog is hard to accept. You have to remember that Max also had 6 or 7 working farmers (shepherds) that organized the SV with him. These people were farmers - mostly in the Werttember/Barvaria region of Germany that utilized larger dogs to work their farms (herd sheep). The farmers life depended on his dog and the ability to herd. These dogs were much bigger than Max's Thurginia Horand, and had better nerves also. Max recognized the importance of breeding to these dogs. In fact, Max moved to Barvaria to be closer to these dogs and better able to cross breed to them. The Krone Kennel produced outstanding working German shepherd dogs - they were large, calm, had better structure, and better tail set that Max incorporated in the earliest breedings. Max was never able to produce the "German shepherd" he desired. He depended on the old farmer breeders that understood genetics. With Max's overpowering dictator style, the old herdsmen of Wurttember went back to farming while Max overtook the SV and ran it as he saw fit. It's little wonder that he chose smaller dogs to get back to his dream. Horand was a little, horrible worker and was saved from certain death by Max - to be his pet. With the traits from the Wurtember dogs well established in the German shepherd (1920's), Max didn't see any value in "tall" dogs and rewrote the standard and would not list the tall dogs in the offical register of stud dogs in Germany. It was a political move, a power move, a move based more on his desire than the quality of the larger dogs.

So "oversized" shepherds have been around since the breed was invented. Many German shepherds scholars often refer to "old-fashion" as the German shepherds before Klodo v Boxberg. It is not a term that was recently made up to market big German shepherds. I suspect there are few pictures of the really large shepherds from the early days - most of these dogs were on the farm working and would not be in the events of the SV.


----------



## LaRen616

King Shepherds are kinda like bigger GSD's right???? This is an honest question


----------



## Doc

Mrs.K said:


> Doc, there are things that a heavy, oversized German Shepherd will not be able to do as good as one of the more athletic and smaller GSD's because he is too heavy and big to do it.
> 
> He might function but is definitely limited in everything he does just like any other big breed.
> 
> He can't run as long, he isn't as fast as smaller and more athletic and agile dogs, he can't jump as high... he might be able to jump but just not as high, he is able to run but just not as fast... you get the idea...



Please define what you mean by heavy. And please define what you mean by over-sized. I want to better understand your generalizations and what you are basing them on.


----------



## Doc

King Shepherds are not 100% German shepherds. They have been crossed with breeds such as the Great Pyrenees and others. And yes, they are can be very large.


----------



## Mrs.K

Doc said:


> Please define what you mean by heavy. And please define what you mean by over-sized. I want to better understand your generalizations and what you are basing them on.


I am talking about a 120 lbs + Shepherds that are claimed to be old fashioned. (The website I found on the internet says that all their males are over 120+ heavy and I bet you that none of them would be able to catch one of my dogs. 

I know, I know there are always exceptions.


----------



## Liesje

Baby Byron said:


> Once again, I'm with Doc.
> The GSD genome is amazing and a properly bred GSD should be sound regardless of size and coat length. Standards cannot be set in stone because life itself is dynamic. What is the scenario nowadays? Most of us grew up with GSDs in the house and none of those dogs were K9 officers or took care of livestock right? So, yes there's room for wiggle there. By golly, if we went by set-in-stone standards none of us gals here would ever be able to wear trousers or jeans right? Yep. That was the standard when our Grandmas were young ladies. And the list goes on and on.
> Ana


For what it's worth, myself and I think most of the people commenting here have our own issues with the standard. We are not really defending the standard (whichever one you are referring to since there are several), but the correct form for the working functions of the breed. Like I said earlier, I _show_ dogs and I don't even know the standard, but I know when I see a dog that is overweight and/or too large to safely perform working tasks for sustained periods of time and not have to "retire" at age 6.


----------



## Mrs.K

Liesje said:


> For what it's worth, myself and I think most of the people commenting here have our own issues with the standard. We are not really defending the standard (whichever one you are referring to since there are several), but the correct form for the working functions of the breed. Like I said earlier, I _show_ dogs and I don't even know the standard, but I know when I see a dog that is overweight and/or too large to safely perform working tasks for sustained periods of time and not have to "retire" at age 6.


I am with Liesje here. I've got my issues with the standard and hate to see what breeders have made of the German Shepherds and that is why I don't understand why people are going for the oversized line because there are too many issues with the GSD already.


----------



## crs996

I will stop using "standard" as it is a confusing term. I am referring to what Liesja said very well: "the correct form for the working functions of the breed". 

I would have much more respect for breeders who breed outside of this if they were simply honest about it. If they were to say, "Yes I breed outside the ideal working characteristics because I have clients that prefer this and are not concerned with standards or working ability, and I like them the way I breed them." Or "Yes I breed soft temperaments with low/no prey drive or working drive because they are most suitable for quiet families." At least then it would not be disingenuous. I would not agree with it, but I could at least respect the honesty.


----------



## codmaster

My question, as an outsider to this debate, is this - If a breeder is not working toward breeding dogs that adhere to the official standard ary you saying that you know better than the people who wrote and improved that standard? 

If the standard says 24-26" at the withers for a GSD male - what in the world are you doing breeding dogs that are over 30"? 

It might be kind of amusing, though, to see one of these giants trying to herd sheep! 

I would suggest that if you want a giant dog, get involved with Great Danes or some other giant dog.


----------



## Liesje

codmaster said:


> My question, as an outsider to this debate, is this - If a breeder is not working toward breeding dogs that adhere to the official standard ary you saying that you know better than the people who wrote and improved that standard?


The standard itself is fine, and if you show dogs you will see that the judges are not automatically tossing out any dog that's a fraction above or below the standard. My female is a bit small and is a champion; my male's mother is a bit large and is a champion. 

The problems are the _interpretations of the standard_, and those interpretations are what most people now think ARE the standard. So if I say "I am defending the standard!" some people might think I'm defending the extreme American line dogs with ridiculous angulation, loose rears, anteater heads, and a spooktastic temperament. Someone else might think I'm defending extreme German line dogs with a terribly roached and/or broken topline and steep croup.

Maybe everyone should post a picture of five dogs that THEY believe fit "the standard" - whatever their interpretation might be.


----------



## RubyTuesday

> Originally Posted by *Doc*
> To associate poor function because of size only means you have not experienced or seen a properly bred oversized German shepherd.


Comments that associate poor health, longevity & compromised abilities with over sized GS invariably come from those who appear to have very little hands on experience with these dogs or the knowledgeable breeders that produce them. It’s for reasons such as this that I prefer acquiring over sized GS from breeders with years of experience producing large, healthy, long lived GS. 




> Originally Posted by *Liesje*
> Maybe you are OK with people misrepresenting the breed and their dogs but I'm not. If such discussions upset you then maybe avoid this part of the forum?


It’s well documented that over sized GS existed even under the guidance of Max Von Stephanitz. Many over sized GS work real jobs as service dogs, SAR, guide dogs, LE & military dogs. According to info posted by MrsK, they’re still recognized, albeit with a wink & nod. Clearly they’re admired & sought after by more than simply pet people. To try & insist differently is misrepresentation. Those piling on assertions that they’re inherently weak, sickly, short lived, lazy & unsuited to any job beyond couch anchor are guilty of gross misrepresentation. I once believed this was due to ignorance, but as it seems to be a determined & willful ignorance, I now suspect it’s to support a bias opposed to over sized GS regardless of what the facts & history are. Perhaps those immune to inconvenient truths should avoid this part of the forum…


MrsK, larger, athletic dogs will have a power & strength that smaller GS can’t match. This is useful in some working endeavors as is the height of the taller GS. It’s why working breeds are often represented by a continuum of sizes, especially all rounders such as GS. In my experience it also increases the deterrence factor which can be invaluable. While I’d never claim the large GS can do everything as well as the smaller dogs, the reverse is equally true. Proponents of the smaller GS seem loathe to admit that but their reluctance doesn’t alter the truth of it. Could my guy catch yours? Perhaps not. I doubt yours could have hoped to catch or keep up with my 28" 50-60lb Sibe. So??? The one piece of info is about as useful or impressive as the other.

My guy is 29.5”. At one yr he was ~92lbs. He might weigh a bit more now but I doubt he’s gained much. I favor tall & lean. He was acquired from the breeder originally linked. Her dogs are fit, powerful & athletic. They don’t look like Mastiffs(???) or act like Goldens. They won’t suit everyone, nor does the breeder pretend that they do. I looked at her dogs for years before getting Sam & later my little Djibouti. The breeder has been forthright, honest & helpful even prior to getting one of her dogs. Those who dislike her dogs shouldn’t get them. I’m not certain why it’s necessary to go beyond that.


----------



## GSDSunshine

crs996 said:


> I will stop using "standard" as it is a confusing term. I am referring to what Liesja said very well: "the correct form for the working functions of the breed".
> 
> I would have much more respect for breeders who breed outside of this if they were simply honest about it. If they were to say, "Yes I breed outside the ideal working characteristics because I have clients that prefer this and are not concerned with standards or working ability, and I like them the way I breed them." Or "Yes I breed soft temperaments with low/no prey drive or working drive because they are most suitable for quiet families." At least then it would not be disingenuous. I would not agree with it, but I could at least respect the honesty.


If a breeder were to breed a German shepherd, to have no drive, to have "soft temperaments", to breed over-sized dogs, then they are not breeding for the betterment of the breed. If the Bob Smith wants a GSD, but does not want to do anything with him; does not feel compelled to work his brain beyond the simple trick of sit and down, does not have the time to exercise the dog because he either has no time (gone 12 hours a day), or chooses not to, then Mr. Smith should not own a German shepherd.

The whole reason behind different breeds was because each dog was bred for a purpose. The Shepherds were meant to herd, the Retrievers retrieved, Dalmatians watched carriages, hounds hunted. The fact that they looked different were only second to the ability to do their job. 

A Man that owns a flock of sheep, has no need for a Lab, or a hound. They don't fit into the niche of a herder. he needs a Shepherd, whether need needs a GSD or a border collie, or a Kuvasz all depends upon what he prefers.

Why would a responsible breeder purposefully breed out the characteristics that make a GSD a GSD, for the sole purpose of cattering to the gerneral public? The general public has already been identifying as not caring about standards or many of the other things that are important to many breeders. This doesn't make them right. The general poplution has NO IDEA about dogs or breeding. For every one of us here, learning and informing others about the bredd, there are thousands of people misinformed about the breed and about dogs in general.

Why should the informed individuals lower their standards to appeal to the general puplic? They should not. Instead it is your resposibility as a breeder, as an owner, as a trainer, and pack member to inform others as to why certain traits are essential to the GSD breed and shouldn't be bred out.

What purpose does breeding 120+ lb, over weight GSDs carry? How does an oversized GSD do its job better than one that is within or near the standard? I'm not talking about not wanting a severely angulated GSD, or a "roached backed" GSD. There are plenty of GSDs in the world being bred to a standard that might not be to the AKC standard, but does have a standard, a purpose, a function, and an ability to do a job. 

These dogs CAN live in a home with a family. They can work at their job, they can watch over their families and be great companions. When the best things you can say about a dog though, is that he is big boned, and a sweet dog that gets along with everyone, and loves kids, you aren't breeding a GSD, you are breeding a dog to meet some demand. 

I'm sorry but when you breed animals, nature has a need to remain in balance. In a population, there will always be a natural varience in size as well as temperament and other fators. The "mixing" of the different sizes and shapes and forms, is what keeps a species healthy. The canine is already limited in its variation since breeders stick to one breed (not saying its a bad thing). With in each breed there is variation and as such a breeder should not just breed small GSD or Large GSD, or Tall, or Short, or Black and tan, or black, or sable, high stung or mellow, but all of them. Granted some of this shoudl be watched (for instance an unstable bitch shouldn't be bred, or a diseased dog).


----------



## Lin

excellent post GSDSunshine! I completely agree. And one of the things that REALLY gets me is for those that want an oversized, under-driven GSD look-a-like it already exists in other breeds such as the King Shepherd or Shiloh.


----------



## crs996

GSDSunshine, I completely agree with your post. I am in favor of keeping the GSD in line with its original intents and purpose.

I think some of the deviation from what a GSD was meant to be comes about because there is so little need for their original purpose, and this perhaps gives some breeders what they feel is license to stray from the ideal. There are so few "true" working dog homes, with sheep to tend, etc. The modern American dog is often a pampered, humanized member of the family and there is the perception that there is no need for their original instincts. This may work for many people, but is not true to the breeds original intent. So now people buy what looks nice, what they saw in a movie or what a celebrity owns. As GSDSunshine said, it's breeding to demand, when the case may actually be that some people should not own a GSD.


----------



## RubyTuesday

There are over sized GS working the jobs traditionally performed by GS. The breeder originally linked has produced these working GS. Khawk is a terrific example of a breeder that produces over sized working GS. In another thread there were many links & pictures posted showing over sized GS working various endeavors. Given this, the assumption that over sized breeders are 'breeding out' the characteristics that define the GS is yet another 'misrepresentation'. 

I've seen over weight GS of all sizes. My guy is lean & fit. A dog over the height or weight standard does not need to be obese. Unfortunately, too many owners & breeders mistake plump for muscular. This is hardly restricted to only the over sized GS & s/b equally deplored regardless of whether the dog is large, medium or small.


----------



## Castlemaid

I will argue against the notion that a small GSD cannot do what a large GSD does - heart, power, strenght does not lie in physical size alone, but in the psychological and physiological make-up of the dog. 

Some of the top world-class competing and winning GSDs are in the 60-70 lbs range, and believe me, the helpers get a workout working them! The actual working RCMP GSDs I have seen training and working, many are on what many would consider on the smallish size, but actually are within the standard - dogs that have actually caught and brought down perpetrators. Their bark alone is enough of an intimidating factor that suspects usually give themselves up - not due to the dog's size, but due to the dog's presence. 
Not to say that larger GSD would not be able to do the same, but to say that a smaller dog does not have the presence or the power of the larger dogs is false.


----------



## Liesje

The only reason I can think of where size or height offers a distinct advantage is for service work, for dogs that help stabilize people. Also I think service dogs are better suited with more moderate temperaments and less prey drive, so in this scenario I think a larger dog with less prey drive is appropriate.

For police work or any type of protection, the dog needs to have a presence. Even a 40lb dog can catch up with a perp, bite him, and take him down. I've seen a rat terrier do protection work and believe me that dog was scarier to me than many of the GSDs on the SchH field. Enormous size offers no advantage as long as the dog is quick, committed, and scary looking. I can't say I've ever seen a real working GSD or Mal larger than 80lb. Maybe a few exist but it doesn't seem like any departments are rushing out to intentionally buy larger dogs. Also in many working scenarios the handler needs to be able to lift and carry their dog. Size would seem to only present disadvantages.

I agree there are overweight GSDs and dogs of any size everywhere. My issue is with doing this intentionally, even promoting it and using it as a marketing tool and then breeding overweight dogs.


----------



## Doc

Some one explain this to me. Why are there so few German shepherds being used as "seeing eye dogs" when they were the breed that started the whole movement? Why are german shepherds being replaced daily as dog of choice for police work when at one point, German shepherds were called German Police Dogs? And I could go on and on about our breed being replace in almost every aspect of work that was once dominated by the GSD.

I submit that people have turned the natural working German shepherd, the one breed that is intelligent and versitile, into show ponies and sports specialists. The true work ethic genetics - whatever task it may include - has been diluted to the point that the German shepherd is not viewed as capable to perform the tasks they mastered and excelled in years ago. Above all else, I define "old fashion" in those terms . The sport of SchH is an attempt to prove that the German shepherd is a versatile working dog - and everyone knows I have my problems with SchH. But what is really lacking is the actual presences of German shepherds leading the blind, on the side of police officers, and guarding the family farm. These are "old fashion" German shepherds regardless of their shape and size. I perfer a bigger dog but not a 30"+ and 150 pound dog.


----------



## Samba

Oh yes there are wicked good appropriately sized dogs. That is what I look for. I have had larger dogs and don't look for that for my competition dogs. Size does matter and bigger is not always better. I can't see the benefit of breeding larger than life ones for working endeavors when appropriate sized ones do just fine. Due to genetics, there are pups born who grow large and work great, but I don't know that I would try to continue to keep the next generation large. They could be utilized to improve size in lines where that is needed. My pup's Gsire was large and recommended to improve size in breed survey. But to keep a separate line going?


When advertising leans to make claims for 'better pets' I have my antennae go up. This is not a good brag for not breeding appropriate German Shepherds. Having had some bred for pets and some bred for work or performance focus.... amazing which dogs I found to be better pets.


----------



## Liesje

Doc said:


> Some one explain this to me. Why are there so few German shepherds being used as "seeing eye dogs" when they were the breed that started the whole movement? Why are german shepherds being replaced daily as dog of choice for police work when at one point, German shepherds were called German Police Dogs? And I could go on and on about our breed being replace in almost every aspect of work that was once dominated by the GSD.


Are they? Maybe it's a local thing? Our local PDs and staties use GSDs, I have never even seen a police Malinois around here and the people I know who import, breed, and train for departments typically have Malinois for ring sport, not work, they supply GSDs for the police. The local Leader Dog program uses Labs and GSDs, and a friend of mine routinely gives them GSDs. I think Fidelco breeds their own GSDs. 

I know for detection purposes, some agencies have gone with labs and beagles because they appear more friendly. Really any dog has the capability to do detection as long as it has the drive.


----------



## Samba

It is sometimes more than breeding of GSDs that results in other choices for police departments. The factors are not just the suitability of the dogs for the job.


----------



## Lin

Lies, large size would actually be a downfall when it comes to service work. As far as stabilization, mobility assistance harnesses come in various heights to make up the difference. A lower handle might be an asset but the instances where a smaller size is more convenient outweighs any advantage. Its hard to imagine having a service dog with you all of the time; it turned out to be vastly different than what I had expected. Tessa is 24" and around 65-70 lbs and she has had to squeeze into some pretty tight spaces! Such as between my knees and the seat in front of me at a theatre or concert, under a table at a restaurant, standing or walking through tight crowds, on an elevator, on a public bus, narrow or crowded store isles, and so much more. My Emma is 25" right now and I'm hoping she doesn't get any or much taller as I am hoping for her to be my next service dog. She is longer bodied than Tessa which I would rather her not be.


----------



## Castlemaid

As for the downfall of the German Shepherd . . . The RCMP have their own breeding program, a very successful one, most of the dogs working the streets are from their own breeding and training - all GSDs, I don't think they use anything else, but I could be wrong.


----------



## Castlemaid

Lin, interesting to get some feedback from someone with actual experience using a service dog. Thank you, very informative and illuminating.


----------



## Liesje

Lin said:


> Lies, large size would actually be a downfall when it comes to service work. As far as stabilization, mobility assistance harnesses come in various heights to make up the difference. A lower handle might be an asset but the instances where a smaller size is more convenient outweighs any advantage. Its hard to imagine having a service dog with you all of the time; it turned out to be vastly different than what I had expected. Tessa is 24" and around 65-70 lbs and she has had to squeeze into some pretty tight spaces! Such as between my knees and the seat in front of me at a theatre or concert, under a table at a restaurant, standing or walking through tight crowds, on an elevator, on a public bus, narrow or crowded store isles, and so much more. My Emma is 25" right now and I'm hoping she doesn't get any or much taller as I am hoping for her to be my next service dog. She is longer bodied than Tessa which I would rather her not be.


Thanks for the input!


----------



## Samba

Fidelco is apparently not the only one utilizing GSDs.

Our Dogs: About Our Guide Dogs

I think my Carmspack dog might have made a nice service dog. So devoted, easily trained, independent decision making and thinking type. Won't ever know, but her relatives are in search, police, competition venues and pets. Similar lines but many niches for the pups according to strengths and abilities. Not sure why this can't be done with GSDs still. Many of dogs in her pedigree did get breed surveyed, schutzhund titled etc. This didn't seem to cut down on the utility of the dogs bred from them in real life situations. The breeding decisions matter more than the titles and venues, I think, but there is no harm in asking for some minimal core abilities to me.

Oh my girl is a bit oversized but only weighs 67lbs so not huge. LOL


----------



## KayElle

Doc is right that GSDs are not used as much in police work. The ULTIMATE police work is the US military---they now breed their own Belgian Malinois at Lackland AFB in San Antonio, Texas. So much for the superiority of those "titled" "sporting" "working" line GSDs. They are no longer used by our military!


----------



## Liesje

KayElle said:


> Doc is right that GSDs are not used as much in police work. The ULTIMATE police work is the US military---they now breed their own Belgian Malinois at Lackland AFB in San Antonio, Texas. So much for the superiority of those "titled" "sporting" "working" line GSDs. They are no longer used by our military!


Again, this widely varies by location/department. It often has more to do with costs and what is being supplied than which breed is actually better. Last I heard many departments were switching_ back_ to German shepherds. The ones local to me use German Shepherds and do not use sporting dogs. The LE agencies have their own breeders and brokers that they go through.


----------



## KayElle

I hate to disagree with you, but Lackland AFB supplies ALL branches of the US military, regardless of where the dogs and handlers may be stationed around the world. I have a great friend down there and the military gets ALL of their dogs, including training, from Lackland.


----------



## Samba

There are a number of GSDs in the military kennel at Fort Leonard Wood. Just helped a young fellow getting his bomb alert dog, a lovely red sable GSD, out of the military.


----------



## KayElle

Yes, there are still some around, but the military is trying to phase them out. That is why they have established their own Belgian Malnois breeding program at Lackland. As I said, this is directly from an air force officer at Lackland who has areas of responsibility that include the K9s.


----------



## Samba

Well, certainly the malinois breed is very prey, prey, prey. They love to bite. They are generally small, light boned and agile. They are low triggered and easily stimulated. Aggression can ride on the surface with some. They are probably a breed less likely to make a good pet than a GSD.

I guess the sport dog breeders have not succeeded in breeding such animals as their GSDs are being beat out by animals with the actual extremes they are often accused of producing. If we must compete with these little guys we best amp up the drive, the quickness to bite, add more drive, lower trigger thresholds, reduce size and angulation, etc. 

I have a feeling there is more to the decision to go with mals than this, but for sure the Mali are generally a more extreme dog than the GSD. Go figure. They tend to be healthier and have intense work ethic and drive. They are beating the GSDs due to small size, healthy genes, and the go, go,goness of it all.

A little mal is much easier to lift into a helicopter than a GSD... so much for the utility of the larger dogs.


----------



## Mrs.K

Samba said:


> There are a number of GSDs in the military kennel at Fort Leonard Wood. Just helped a young fellow getting his bomb alert dog, a lovely red sable GSD, out of the military.


There are still a lot of Shepherds in Germany too. Know one of the trainers and I doubt that they can use all dogs they produce as military working dogs. Breeding is very complex and you don't always get what you want out of it.


----------



## HarleyGirl52874

I have a question, for all of you that think people shouldn't own a GSD if they don't work them some way. Do you think the breeder should't sell a dog to a family that wants just a family dog? 

What is wrong with people wanting a GSD but not "working" it? Who are you to say somebody shouldn't own a dog that they want, will love take care of etc. because they choose not to do anything with it, other then a walk or play in the yard?


----------



## Samba

It is funny to me that the military has chosen a dog that has the characteristics that the working line breeders are accused of over accentuating and "ruining" the GSD with. I don't take it as as a slam to breeding working line GSDs... I will maintain they come closer to these "desired" malinois traits than other lines of GSD.

If we want to have GSDs in the military then healthy genetics will have to be carefully selected for and those dreaded working drives in even greater extremes will have to be selected for. 


And they will also need to be smaller dogs, lighter in frame... which to me look like some some old generation GSDs actually.

If the working line GSD folks aren't breeding " malinois wanna be's", then that is fine by me really.


----------



## Mrs.K

Samba said:


> It is funny to me that the military has chosen a dog that has the characteristics that the working line breeders are accused of over accentuating and "ruining" the GSD with. I don't take it as as a slam to breeding working line GSDs... I will maintain they come closer to these "desired" malinois traits than other lines of GSD.
> 
> If we want to have GSDs in the military then healthy genetics will have to be carefully selected for and those dreaded working drives in even greater extremes will have to be selected for.
> 
> 
> And they will also need to be smaller dogs, lighter in frame... which to me look like some some old generation GSDs actually.
> 
> If the working line GSD folks aren't breeding " malinois wanna be's", then that is fine by me really.


Honestly I don't want a malinois wannabe, I want the "old" high drive, stable shepherds back. 

Oh... wait, they are still out there.


----------



## crs996

HarleyGirl52874 said:


> I have a question, for all of you that think people shouldn't own a GSD if they don't work them some way. Do you think the breeder should't sell a dog to a family that wants just a family dog?
> 
> What is wrong with people wanting a GSD but not "working" it? Who are you to say somebody shouldn't own a dog that they want, will love take care of etc. because they choose not to do anything with it, other then a walk or play in the yard?


Family dogs are awesome, and a GSD can be a great one! One definition of "working" to me is obedience training. This is mentally challenging and stimulating for a working dog. Of course, I feel that a dog of _any_ breed deserves to have a more fulfilling life with its owner by having at least basic OB. To me, fulfilling their needs is "love".


----------



## Samba

I believe they are still out there. 

Now if we want military dogs in GSDs, it appears we might move from schutzhund to mondioring for an activity for GSDs that meet the military desires. I believe Malinois do very well in that activity, so it must play to these desired military service characteristics. These will be new fashioned GSDs for sure. They will different from working line GSDs and very very different from the popularly called "old fashioned" GSDs.

We shall see how long this military endeavor lasts. I know my personal police friends are anxious to leave their malinois and return to a working line GSD.


----------



## HarleyGirl52874

crs996 said:


> Family dogs are awesome, and a GSD can be a great one! One definition of "working" to me is obedience training. This is mentally challenging and stimulating for a working dog. Of course, I feel that a dog of _any_ breed deserves to have a more fulfilling life with its owner by having at least basic OB. To me, fulfilling their needs is "love".


 
I know they are awesome, I have 2 of them, yes they have had basic obedience, but that is as far as it will go, they will not be doing agility or schutzhund even though Kaiser would probably do really well in it. I don't think that makes me any less of an owner is my point, because I choose not to work my german shepherds.


----------



## Castlemaid

HarleyGirl52874 said:


> I know they are awesome, I have 2 of them, yes they have had basic obedience, but that is as far as it will go, they will not be doing agility or schutzhund even though Kaiser would probably do really well in it. I don't think that makes me any less of an owner is my point, because I choose not to work my german shepherds.


You are right, it does not make you any less of an owner, - and when people are talking about the importance of working and titling GSDs, people are talking about breeders and breeding dogs - which is a different ball game all together.


----------



## crs996

HarleyGirl52874 said:


> I know they are awesome, I have 2 of them, yes they have had basic obedience, but that is as far as it will go, they will not be doing agility or schutzhund even though Kaiser would probably do really well in it. I don't think that makes me any less of an owner is my point, because I choose not to work my german shepherds.


I'm not sure who said you were less of an owner for not doing more, it wasn't me because I do not believe that someone is less of an owner for not doing advanced dog sports. If your dogs have basic OB, they work with/for you everyday. If they are happy and fulfilled, that should be good enough for anyone.



Castlemaid said:


> You are right, it does not make you any less of an owner, - and when people are talking about the importance of working and titling GSDs, people are talking about breeders and breeding dogs - which is a different ball game all together.


Exactly.


----------



## HarleyGirl52874

LaRen616 said:


> *Lin*
> 
> I agree with you and I disagree with you. I would never want to see a GSD become a "couch potato". But not everyone wants to do agility and other work with their GSD. I believe people should only get GSD's if they are "Go Getter" type people. Someone who loves long walks, hiking or jogging. Also not everyone wants to spend lots of money on putting their dogs in agility or herding or some other type work. I got a GSD because they are wonderful companion dogs, good watch dogs, very smart, easy to train and I cant forget BEAUTIFUL dogs. My dog loves TV (as do I) but we get out and do stuff. We are doing our own "Search Work" and I have to say that my dog is very good at it, but we are using treats and ourselves. We put him in a room, we grab a treat and drag it on the floor making loops and what not and then we hide it. We then let him out and tell him "find it" and he puts his nose to the ground and follows the trail to the treat. We also do it with ourselves, we rub all over a towel and we go hide then the person in control of him gives him the towel to smell and then we say "find it" and he comes and gets us. I would also like to make him a therapy dog. Anyways if everyone with GSD's did games like this then I wouldn't have a problem with them owning a GSD. But dont turn this excellent dog into a "couch potato"


 

This is the first one I could find, don't feel like going through every post to find the other, but it has also been said on here before about not getting a GSD if your not going to work it, and no nobody has told ME that I am less of an owner, but the general theme has been on the board many times to many people.

And not really is it two different ball games, this thread is about oversized, while I don't care for the ones from the site, family dogs. I just don't get what the big deal is with a family dog? Basically every dog was made for a purpose. A GSD with no titles is no less of a dog to me vs. one with titles. 

Are there bad breeders out there breeding family dogs that shouldn't be, absolutely, are there titled dogs out there being breed that shouldn't be absolutely. If this person is producing good sound dogs, who cares if they work or not.


----------



## Mrs.K

Samba said:


> I believe they are still out there.
> 
> Now if we want military dogs in GSDs, it appears we might move from schutzhund to mondioring for an activity for GSDs that meet the military desires. I believe Malinois do very well in that activity, so it must play to these desired military service characteristics. These will be new fashioned GSDs for sure. They will different from working line GSDs and very very different from the popularly called "old fashioned" GSDs.
> 
> We shall see how long this military endeavor lasts. I know my personal police friends *are anxious to leave their malinois and return to a working line GSD*.


I don't blame them. From what I've seen in the dog clubs, those malis are not easy to handle pus some of them are a little crazy.


----------



## crs996

HarleyGirl52874 said:


> This is the first one I could find, don't feel like going through every post to find the other, but it has also been said on here before about not getting a GSD if your not going to work it, and no nobody has told ME that I am less of an owner, but the general theme has been on the board many times to many people.
> 
> And not really is it two different ball games, this thread is about oversized, while I don't care for the ones from the site, family dogs. I just don't get what the big deal is with a family dog? Basically every dog was made for a purpose. A GSD with no titles is no less of a dog to me vs. one with titles.
> 
> Are there bad breeders out there breeding family dogs that shouldn't be, absolutely, are there titled dogs out there being breed that shouldn't be absolutely. If this person is producing good sound dogs, who cares if they work or not.


Ok I see what you mean now. There is nothing wrong with a family dog, but this was about breeders. _I believe that a good GSD should be capable of working in whatever capacity AND be a family dog._ Just because the parents of a litter have numerous titles and have proven that they are _physically and mentally sound_, does not mean that the puppies must follow suit and be titled, or that they will not make good family pets. However, some breeders are apparently breeding dogs based solely on looks, or "create" family pets by breeding the drive and working abilities out of the dogs, which does the breed a disservice. A properly bred GSD should be a a good family pet because they are versatile, NOT by breeding out their drives/working ability. The problem with some of these breeders is that they have not proven the dogs in any fashion, they have dogs that look like GSDs, but what beyond that? 

Having a title does not guarantee that a dog is breedworthy, but there need to be some guidelines and standards in place. Basing a breeding program on dogs being "oversize and 120+ lbs" etc, is really not a breeding program at all.


----------



## JKlatsky

HarleyGirl52874 said:


> If this person is producing good sound dogs, who cares if they work or not.


 
I don't think it's really a question of if they DO, so much as if they CAN. There are plenty of good dogs out there that exist just as the family pet. A good GSD is adaptable BUT should have an instinct to work. Much like a good hound should have an instinct for hunting or A good terrier for tenacity to kill rodents. 

I also agree with previous posters that the GSD shouldn't be for people who want a couch potato. You don't have to do formal activities, but if you are not an active person interested in training their dog, this is probably not the dog for you. Part of what makes the GSD so special is the correct temperament. A non reactive couch potato that won't chase a ball and looks good laying on a dog bed by the fire may be what the average pet owner wants, but it is no more correct than the nervy hyper dog that some sport breeders produce. 

And just because your pet (you in general, not in particular) happens to more closely fit the description of couch potato, doesn't mean your dog isn't wonderful for you. But it's not correct and shouldn't be bred.

Just my .02


----------



## Samba

OFA stats: Malinois 5.5% dysplastic GSD 19%. I know this is one of the things that people supplying working dogs like about the Mal.

GSDs have a higher incidence of dysplasia. If you breed lop-sidely for better hips in the GSD it is difficult to get production of other needed traits. This makes them less appealing to those supplying.

This added to the agility, small size, bite and engagement willingness, intense drive, work ethic etc. make that Mal appear to fit a working bill for some.

I don't see how this military dog decision makes a point for larger dog "lines" or against working GSD breeding really. 

Every time I express the desire for such intensity in the GSD, I hear about niche breeding, ruining the breed, deviating from intended purpose because of a desire for extreme working characteristics. Should the GSD be bred to compare with Mal characteristics so they can claim U.S. military service credentials? Or does their rejection by the military rather point to working line GSD breeding having rather preserved the GSD as a GSD and not a Mal type dog?


----------



## RubyTuesday

I’ve never said the smaller GS have less presence. Nor do I think they lack mental strength, will & determination. I prefer my big guys, (tall & lean), but I don’t scorn & dislike the dogs outside my preferences. Larger, heavier, well conditioned athletes will generally have more raw power than those who are considerably smaller, even when the smaller athletes are equally fit & conditioned. This applies to canine athletes as well as human. 

The additional size & power can be invaluable for those needing brace/balance & wheelchair assistance dogs. Khawk has previously posted about this. It’s an area she brings years of expertise to. Trainers who have worked/trained military & LE dogs have also stated that larger dogs are preferred for some jobs while other tasks are better performed by smaller dogs.

Someone I once knew, imported several dogs from East Germany after the wall came down. They were working dogs (employed by the military, I think) & were b/w 28-29”. On another GS board an immigrant from East Germany confirmed that this was not uncommon, & that working ability not size, was the most important criterion.

SchH, sporting & competition enthusiasts seem to universally deplore the over sized GS. Those actually working dogs want the best dog for the job & many are open enough, honest enough to acknowledge that best dog can be an over sized GS.


----------



## Liesje

RubyTuesday said:


> Larger, heavier, well conditioned athletes will generally have more raw power than those who are considerably smaller, even when the smaller athletes are equally fit & conditioned. This applies to canine athletes as well as human.


Can you elaborate? I'm not sure what "raw power" means, how it is measured, and why it is important. It seems that a good street dog would need to be fast on a chase, thorough in building searches, be able to scale walls and fences and squeeze through holes in pursuit. A 70lb GSD hits and grips with plenty of power, no need to add 60lb only for the sake of more force when the larger dog becomes a hindrance in other aspects of work. I wore a sleeve for a 55lb police K9 and the dog shook me like a ragdoll, and I had the advantage of protection and knowing how the dog was going to be sent and what would happen. _Again, I'm not talking about dogs that are a few inches and ten pounds over_, but right this moment I'm looking at breeding dogs advertised as 127, 137, "150+" pounds and "dogs exceeding 30"". And these are the dogs most suited to do the work of the breed?

Power is only one aspect, what about agility? I disagree with the comment about athletes. As a competitive gymnast it's absolutely not true that a 300lb linebacker has an athletic advantage when it comes to agility.

Since I've never seen anything but a GSD at work doing police work, I have nothing to compare, but at least on the SchH field when watching the Rottweilers, mastiffs, and Boerboels train, they looked very heavy and slow and those were the comments I heard from the trainers. Other than a bone crushing grip, the rest was pretty much a snore. Claudia Romard's jack russell worked with more intensity.


----------



## Castlemaid

RubyTuesday said:


> Someone I once knew, imported several dogs from East Germany after the wall came down. They were working dogs (employed by the military, I think) & were b/w 28-29”. On another GS board an immigrant from East Germany confirmed that this was not uncommon, & that working ability not size, was the most important criterion.
> 
> SchH, sporting & competition enthusiasts seem to universally deplore the over sized GS. Those actually working dogs want the best dog for the job & many are open enough, honest enough to acknowledge that best dog can be an over sized GS.


You brought out a key point here, these dogs were being bred for working ability first and foremost, size (as in height) taking a second level importance. 

Part of the issues in this discussion about "old fashioned" GSDs, is breeder breeding for size, with the argument that their dogs are retaining working ability in the true spirit of the GSD, without selecting and testing their breeding stock for working ability. Just as a smaller size is no guarantee that a dog can work, and a larger size does not automatically mean a dog CAN'T work. But again, the size is incidental, the focus being on working ability, not on breeding solely for over-the standard in order to meet a market demand.


----------



## Lin

I also disagree with the comment about brace/balance and wheelchair assistance dogs. I use my service dog for a brace and balance and like I mentioned earlier a larger size would be a hindrance. I don't know anyone with a mobility assistance dog larger than 26". I'm sure there are some out there, but its not whats best fitted. And actually my experience with service dog training organizations I see more medium sized dogs than large dogs when it comes to wheelchair assistance.


----------



## Samba

An individual over size dog is not a problem. I know a couple of nice dogs who work like mad with great drives who are around 100 lbs. I haven't heard their handler or those breeding to them hoping to preserve the size though. Certainly, they desire the working abilities. So an individual dog who is large can work but I have never known of pursuing the preservation of the oversize for size sakes.


----------



## Xeph

> I use my service dog for a brace and balance and like I mentioned earlier a larger size would be a hindrance. I don't know anyone with a mobility assistance dog larger than 26".


You do now  Strauss is 27"

My personal preference for my mobility dogs is 25-27" Anything taller is too tall for me. I'm hoping my new puppy will turn out a bit tall for a bitch as I am concerned about her being too small.


----------



## RubyTuesday

Lin, there are advantages to a smaller size exactly as there are to a larger size. While you might disagree, it is a fact that Khawk works with & prefers oversized GS for wheelchair assistance. She also assists with training & placing GS (many over sized) as assistance dogs. She too speaks from actual experience, coupled with decades of studying, breeding, & working GS, many of which are over sized.

Castlemaids, regardless of what they are being bred for, the important point is that over sized GS can & do work. It's frequently maintained that they don't & even that they can't. IF the error of that is pointed out, suddenly the rules/arguments shift. The breeder originally linked acknowledges breeding to produce exemplary pets. She's also produced outstanding working GS. As I noted earlier, a realistic assessment of many WL breeders shows that they too cater largely to the pet or sport market. They simply dress it up.

Lies, where did I state that larger athletes have every athletic advantage? Where did I infer that much larger athletes are as agile? Where raw power is needed, a fit & conditioned athlete of considerably greater size will have an advantage. IF a 55' dog was able to shake you like a ragdoll, a dog twice that size might have caused you actual, even serious injuries.

Samba, I prefer over sized GS for several reasons but I don't breed. However there are breeders that select for size b/c it is useful in the endeavors in which they work their dogs. Others want a smaller GS for sport, competition & work which is fine but I'm glad the over sized breeders follow their vision of the working & companion GS rather than the dictates of SchH enthusiasts.


----------



## Samba

I have a couple of old fashioned dogs myself. They are healthy and have very straight backs. They have a lot of bone and are of some substance. They are awesome with the very young and the very old. They seem to have an innate sensitivity to the infirm. 'They will lay at your feet or accompany you on any trip. They will play if a family member wants a bit of a game. They are not quick to bite, but would valiantly stand up to a threat to home and family. 

I will not tell them of their "sport" (which I don't think is a thing) ancestry for fear they will abandon these traits. The dogs I see aren't needing supplementation by yet another line because of lost valuable GSD temperament and characteristics. Sure wish I could see these sporty dogs some day who fail to be like a good ol' GSD. I am sure there are some who have fallen off the breeding wagon but I can't see that it is enough to justify the supplementation of the breed with other types. 

I am glad there are people who like an oversize GSDs as some will be produced due to the genetics in the breed even when not intended. I certainly don't see working people rejecting them due to size if they work. On the contrary actually.


----------



## Doc

Jackie, go sit in the corner with your tye dyed tee on. Wishing for a female that is larger than the standard!?? Blasphemy, plain out blasphemy! You know a tall gal can't perform as brace balance dog - just read the threads! roflmao


----------



## Doc

Are there any breeders adding to this thread or am I the only one dumb enough to stay here?


----------



## onyx'girl

My WL pup is getting big and I see my SchH helper not liking that so much!:shocked: He is strong and packs a punch, the mals are welcomed by the helper so his body doesn't break. My pup is agile and fast, but he can stop growing now. 
Two of my dogs(I think Onyx is Am pet line mix up) are over the standard for height and the other one is a long coat, big boned female(not sure her lineage) .
I like a smaller dog to be truthful, my foster was a 65# male, easy to manuever around. 
Doc, I think most of the breeders are on spring break...where are you going for yours? :sunburn:


----------



## Samba

So far, it doesn't appear that Jackie is going to a large size dog breeder unless she changes her mind on her next selection. I hope a dog from the kennel she choses will have old fashioned characteristics. I imagine that it will! I don't mind that my dogs grew above the standard and below it sometimes. It happens, but who the dog is is most important. I looked for working temperament because really that is very near and dear to the origin of the breed and is the basis from which all this pet suitability comes from. 

Size is not the first thing I look at and I wonder why people mention it at a selling point in some kennels as it certainly isn't the defining characteristic of the breed. I don't say give me a big giant dog or give me a little bitty one... but I have had both! I know agility folks who have looked for a smaller dog for speed on the course. I can see that, I guess. If you were a real tall person, due to center of gravity a larger dog might stabilize better... a shorter person would be out dogged. These are individual needs and the variety in the breed naturally will provide without kennels for big tall people and kennels for smaller stature people.


----------



## Liesje

FWIW, my heart dog is large and tall (albeit skinny, he weighs about 25lbs less than he looks) and he's not even pure GSD.

I just don't understand the obsession with size, going to such lengths to select for it and promote it.... WL people are not obsessed with size, their dogs just happen to generally turn out 60-90lbs.


----------



## Doc

Jane,

Maybe I'll go to Germany, drink massive amounts of warm beer, whistle and flirt with all the German women, and start a German shepherd club.

On second thought, I'll stay in Miami and bitch about the government. roflmao


----------



## Samba

To some breeders... size matters! Now, to say that some sort of sport people or martians or such reject them due to size, is to focus on the people for whom size does not really matter so much! Heck it doesn't even matter that much to show judges I know. But, it seems to some people it matters enough to breed for large, have a preference for large in and of itself, sell based on large, etc.


----------



## Xeph

> Wishing for a female that is larger than the standard!?? Blasphemy, plain out blasphemy! You know a tall gal can't perform as brace balance dog - just read the threads! roflmao


But the thing is Doc, I'm hoping for such out of standard parents, and I'm not purchasing from a breeder that breeds for size.

It's just that a 23" bitch is highly unlikely to be suitable for my needs. To me there's a difference.

If I didn't need her for service work, I'd much prefer her to be in standard. I'd rather have another male to be honest, but Strauss won't allow for another boy.

Also, I shall get more pics of me in the tye dye, just for you xD!



> So far, it doesn't appear that Jackie is going to a large size dog breeder unless she changes her mind on her next selection.


I'm getting an Eichenluft baby  And nope, no mind changing here. I prefer a standard sized dog. I don't find 30" GSDs appealing and have not experienced such a large one doing very well in agility.


----------



## Doc

I understand Jackie. I hope you find exactly what you are looking for. You still have the tye dyed tee, right? LOL


----------



## Liesje

Samba said:


> To some breeders... size matters! Now, to say that some sort of sport people or martians or such reject them due to size, is to focus on the people for whom size does not really matter so much! Heck it doesn't even matter that much to show judges I know. But, it seems to some people it matters enough to breed for large, have a preference for large in and of itself, sell based on large, etc.


Exactly. It seems people making the biggest deal out of it are those that want 30" dogs.

Nikon's mother is large but I don't care. Wouldn't be my first choice for size but everything else fits. I like the overall temperament of the dog and would take her home in a heart beat. Also the progeny are all smaller, meaning normal. She's V rated, KKL1, and CH. She might stand out in a ring full of smaller German bitches but otherwise we just shrug at the size.


----------



## Andaka

Here is one of the best dogs I have ever known. She was a Troll von Richterbach grand-daughter. I was in the 4th grade or so in this photo.


----------



## Lin

Doc said:


> Jackie, go sit in the corner with your tye dyed tee on. Wishing for a female that is larger than the standard!?? Blasphemy, plain out blasphemy! You know a tall gal can't perform as brace balance dog - just read the threads! roflmao


:rolleyes2:


----------



## robinhuerta

Well...as a breeder myself...I've already stated my "opinion" in regards to the topic.
The GSD breed originated for a purpose. The "founder" created a standard/blueprint for which he "believed" the dog should adhere to. As years have passed, the "interpretation" of those views & ideas have been compromised....
The breed is supposed to be "tested" and judged as being breed worthy.
I am not just refering to the sport of Schutzhund...I also refer to the Police K9s, SAR, Service Dogs, Herding and any other organization that requires dogs of excellent temperament and sound bodies.
All breeders "believe" that their dogs are "worthy"...I would assume, that is why they choose to breed them. But I believe that as a "breeder" we must actually be able to have our dogs "tested" worthy, by actually having dogs that can & DO perform in the jobs & venues that this breed participates in....before we choose to breed them.... (perhaps thats just my own requirement).
People like to imagine that "their" dogs fit the description of what the GSD is supposed to be....and I'm sure that many do....after all, we love them and they are part of our family. All GSD dogs should be sound enough mentally & physically that they would be a perfect breed for companion life..(that should be a given, not an exception)....but they are supposed to be capable of being more......that is the point that gets lost. WL or SL...makes no difference.
my personal feelings....nothing more.


----------



## robinhuerta

sorry for the typo's...did not hit "spell-check" before posting.....I must be tired, besides being sick.


----------



## RubyTuesday

Lies, the obsession with size is overwhelmingly on the part of those who oppose over sized GS but are incapable of doing so without piling on 'misrepresentations' about health, soundness, longevity, temperament, ability etc.

I like them large, specifically tall & lean. I also like em coated & sable but my little Djibouiti is a B&T stock coat. IF it was difficult to acquire an over sized GS with the temperament, health, personality & longevity I want, I'd compromise on size much as I 'compromised' on coat & color to take the pup both the breeder & I felt was the best match to my household. In my early correspondence with Djibouti's breeder I gave her a list of the temperament, personality & appearance traits that were most important to me. Temperament was listed 1st, followed by personality, with appearance characteristics listed last b/c I wanted to be clear which qualities were most important to me. I passed on a very large, gorgeous coatie b/c the breeder felt he'd be a poor fit in my household. Given that I'm not obsessed about size, I don't insist that others should adopt my preferences. I will applaud any sound, stable, personable, healthy, athletic GS regardless of size & a thumbs up to those breeders consistently producing such dogs. 

Lies, you like 'em small. Reading that, I'm not compelled to go off on a RANT trying to convince you how WRONG that is & why larger is better if you'd only just see the wisdom of *my* way. I'm not going to pull things out of my *ahem*hat to 'prove' smaller GS are structurally incorrect, undesirable, incapable of meaningful performance & largely coveted by wusses incapable of handling a 'real'(ie behemoth) GS. IF I attempted such logical twists, it would be bunk, as it's bunk when people resort to such tactics to deny the worth of larger GS.

Those who _work_ their dogs aren't obsessed with size, although they might prefer a size that is better suited to particular tasks, be that small, medium or large. IMO, it's sport enthusiasts(esp SchH) who are obsessed with size & seemed determined to convince all of us what we oughta like, seek, breed.



> Originally Posted by *Onyx'Girl*
> My WL pup is getting big and I see my SchH helper not liking that so much!:shocked: He is strong and packs a punch, the mals are welcomed by the helper so his body doesn't break. My pup is agile and fast, but he can stop growing now.


I wonder how much of the SchH opposition is rooted in this...Lies stated earlier that a 55" GS shook her like a ragdoll. A dog twice that size or more could prove dangerous to her.



> Originally Posted by *robinhuerta*
> but they are supposed to be capable of being more......that is the point that gets lost.


The point that seems to get lost(ignored?) is that many over sized GS are indeed capable of more & are delivering more. (I hope you're feeling better soon)


----------



## Samba

But, I know relatively large dogs who are quite successful at sport and are admired and even make a good go at the BSP. My dog's grand sire was recommended to improve size and was a big boy going sorta slow around the BSP blinds! I have not noted them to be discriminated against. If it can work and is a clear headed, well balanced dog I know the working enthusiast won't care if it is a bit big, has one nut and a googlie eye! They would work with it and train with it but hopefully not breed it. Wouldn't be breedworthy in the places that have a system to check for basic characteristics. 

To point at sport people and say they don't like such and such just doesn't seem to me to be a reason to justify this type of breeding?? There has to be something beyond someone had their own personal vision to take a different track with the breed and sport people don't like them anyway??


----------



## crs996

As has been stated, size is less of an issue than working ability for many. That is fine, but I find it odd that "oversize, etc." breeders rarely if ever mention the working abilities of their large dogs. They are large for the sake of being large, and that is the first thing mentioned on their websites.


----------



## mjbgsd

To me, if a breeder can't prove that their dogs can work in some way, they shouldn't be breeding. 



> As has been stated, size is less of an issue than working ability for many. That is fine, but I find it odd that "oversize, etc." breeders rarely if ever mention the working abilities of their large dogs. They are large for the sake of being large, and that is the first thing mentioned on their websites.


I agree, I find it odd too. People have a weird fascination with huge dogs. My breeder for Akbar did SAR for many years and has a son in SAR right now, who is the youngest SAR member, and she's said things before that bigger is not better when it comes to SAR. Picking a 120lb dog up is not possible. She had to hike all day up and down turrain and a dog of great size is not cut out for that work. There's a reason SAR picks smaller sized dogs.


----------



## Dainerra

I've read this whole thread and what I'm seeing is that the 2 sides are talking about different things.

Doc and the others in favor of "old-fashioned" or over-sized dogs are talking mainly about dogs that are out of standard, but only a little. Dogs that many people on the other side agree aren't a problem.

The "anti-big" side is talking out against breeders who are selling dogs that are over 30" tall, 100+ lbs (some sites have them at 140!!). Dogs that even the "old-fashioned" fans say are too big.

So why are you even arguing unless it's for the sake of arguing? It seems that both sides are so entrenched they don't see that they are against the same thing. And that is breeders whose only goal is to breed a BIG dog because, in America, people believe that bigger is better.

Just last week, a guy was wanting to breed Freya with his male at home which, he claims, is 180 lbs!


----------



## Doc

How much is that doggie in the window, the one with the waggity tail. I think one key point that is never discussed about the German shepherd dog in this country is the fact that after WWII, the greatest demand for German shepherds were by home owners and service folks who saw the German shepherd either on TV (as mentioned before) or those who saw them working in the war. The demand did not come from show groups or SchH. people. Just another major evolutionary mildstone in the history of this breed. Size wasn't an issue back then.


----------



## Liesje

RubyTuesday said:


> Lies, you like 'em small.


Sorry I had to chuckle a bit. You seem to know how I think despite having never met me or my dogs. I actually love males on the large size, heavier boned and big heads, the bigger and blockier the better. But I pick a dog based on a dozen things other than size. Neither of my dogs were ones that I personally chose, and neither of them embody my ideal "look" of what I would want in my perfect GSD. I've always wanted a larger, dark male with a big head, fuller coat and heavy bone. What was I given? A tiny female with a light, tight coat. The next time around, I was set on a male and ended up with the smallest male in the litter. That litter was chosen based on what I know and like about the dam (who is large) and the opinions of people I trust about the sire (never met him, do not know his size or care).



> I wonder how much of the SchH opposition is rooted in this...Lies stated earlier that a 55" GS shook her like a ragdoll. A dog twice that size or more could prove dangerous to her.


This was not in the context of SchH. The owner of the dog is a state trooper and has never competed in SchH. The dog is a police dog and is not trained in SchH. He has no trouble making his paycheck with a smaller female dog. I am not a helper so I can't comment on a dog twice her size, that's just a fantasy scenario. Our helpers do work dogs nearly twice her size and there's not really any comparison, since again, size is one of the absolute last things that matters as far as how a dog gets worked. The balance of drives, the body language, the barking, the grip....those things matter. Your argument should be reversed. I'd wager that LEOs might prefer a more medium sized GS over a large one (and for the gazillionth time, by large I mean ~27-28", 80-100lbs) whereas for SchH it's not really going to matter.

I have never seen a 30" 140lb dog doing or even attempting SchH or police work.


----------



## LaRen616

The bigger the GSD the better the protection. Jk. But I hear "Your dog is huge", "That is the longest dog I have ever seen", "I wouldn't dream of messing with you with him around" and of course my favorite "Holy Crap"  My dog makes me feel very very safe and where I live that is a very important thing to me. Also my dog is VERY fast and energetic and does not have an ounce of fat. No small GSD with slanted back here.


----------



## Liesje

Dainerra said:


> The "anti-big" side is talking out against breeders who are selling dogs that are over 30" tall, 100+ lbs (some sites have them at 140!!). Dogs that even the "old-fashioned" fans say are too big.


Correct


----------



## Doc

crs996 said:


> As has been stated, size is less of an issue than working ability for many. That is fine, but I find it odd that "oversize, etc." breeders rarely if ever mention the working abilities of their large dogs. They are large for the sake of being large, and that is the first thing mentioned on their websites.


Perhaps size is mentioned first because that is what is always asked for by the buyer? Maybe a great deal of potential and current German shepherd owners don't place a high value on the dogs "working ability" - however you define it. Maybe they want a "big" German shepherd that is "good" around the house; will alert when something isn't normal; whose rear end isn't "messed up and dragging the floor"; that they can trust not to knock down Granny and bite her; and be good around cats and small children. Different people prioritize their wants differently. Different breeders select different segments of the population to sell to. Is it marketing? Perhaps. But don't try to convince me that SchH. breeders and showline breeders aren't doing the same in their marketing efforts - they flash ribbions and titles around but rarely mention health and temperament. When was the last time you saw a breeder of SchH. or showlines list SIBO and/or EPI as a common illness that runs through their lines?


----------



## atravis

> I have never seen a 30" 140lb dog doing or even attempting SchH or police work.


I have. 
Its called a Rottweiler. Cane Corso. Bouvier. Beauceron. 
Provided 140lbs is a bit heavy, its not uncommon to see a healthy 120lb Rott doing the work. There are lots of larger dogs that can do the sport. Size ALONE does not prevent the animal from working.


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN

So maybe the difference is that some are breeding for the consumer, and some are breeding for the breed?


----------



## robinhuerta

I can't comment on "other" breeder's and their program......but I would want to know health issues & such things....
As for "marketing ploys", ALL breeders (including the one this topic started about) will state to the general public...WHY their dogs/puppies should be considered for purchase.
The ribbons and medals are "proof" of specific accomplishments....why would anyone want to "degrade" them?
They are "goals" that breeders put before themselves, and are proud to have achieved them. I would never criticize any breeder or owner, for setting goals for themselves, and for working towards them.....
We have dogs that have done extremely well in the German Conformation Shows, have ScH titles, work as Service dogs, a SAR dog, and have been & currently are in Police K9 training teams......should I not be proud??!....is it a marketing ploy? SL dogs that CAN work...and continue to do so...
Health, Temperament & Form are important to many of us.
My overall comment & opinion is: This breed is SUPPOSED to be capable of many things...when you start to breed...against the grain of ANY of it's attributes...you have contributed to the down hill spiral within the breed.
All dogs will be different... size, color, coat, specific workabilities...etc......no one breeds the "perfect" dog. But it's our jobs to do right by the breed.
I won't criticize on a forum, other breeders for their breeding practices....I will only state if I agree with them or not....etc...etc......to each their own.
Just another comment......


----------



## JKlatsky

I have 2 Big dogs in my house. We used to raise Mastiffs. I know all about BIG dogs. Argos at 90lbs and Ike at 95lbs are both big shepherd at the very top or a little over standard in height. I love them and they work hard for me. I see where it is more diifcult for them to be as quick or agile as my other 70lb dogs, but I don't think less of them. And when they drop their weight and really pull they can stop a helper from moving or pull the unsuspecting from moving. So I can see the point about a heavier dog being more difficult to move and a lighter dog being more agile and fast. That's why if I ever bred my boys (which isn't my priority) I would go to a more moderate sized female to try to achieve a golden middle. I might get some pups that were big like Dad and that would be just fine. I'm sure they would be excellent dogs.

I think we're really talking about 2 different animals here though. We're not really talking about size. We're talking about dogs bred for size and advertised as such. A good dog can be oversized. But they usually look like this...









Not like this...









Now I'm not trying to necessarily make any comments on the health or temperament of these dogs. They both might have excellent hips and no genetic health problems. But to me, one clearly looks more athletic than the others. I have no problem with a big dog, and if as a pet owner you choose to keep your dog heavier, well that's your choice. But I have a problem with the main point of advertisement of these dogs being the size. When you see "vet verified at 120lbs! and 29" at the shoulder! as the first line of description about the dog, then I think you are clearly breeding for a niche market that has very little to do with the working German Shepherd. Shouldn't the goal of the conscientious breeder be to educate and perhaps if it's in the best interest of the client steer them towards another breed that better suits their needs? There's a reason people created the Shiloh and King Shepherds, which to me have more in common with Newfoundlands or Pyrenes than the GSD.

This same kind of attitude started into Mastiffs. Our Westminster BOB winner in the early 90s had a show weight of about 180-190lbs. Now you see all these dogs at 220-230lbs. And with that weight you have sloppy heads, hound ears, and a general movement away from the powerful type in order to just get size. Picking these kind of characteristics as the focus of a breeding program is to the detriment of any breed.


----------



## Doc

JeanKBBMMMAAN said:


> So maybe the difference is that some are breeding for the consumer, and some are breeding for the breed?


Here's an earth shattering idea - DO BOTH.


----------



## Doc

robinhuerta said:


> I can't comment on "other" breeder's and their program......but I would want to know health issues & such things....
> As for "marketing ploys", ALL breeders (including the one this topic started about) will state to the general public...WHY their dogs/puppies should be considered for purchase.
> The ribbons and medals are "proof" of specific accomplishments....why would anyone want to "degrade" them?
> They are "goals" that breeders put before themselves, and are proud to have achieved them. I would never criticize any breeder or owner, for setting goals for themselves, and for working towards them.....
> We have dogs that have done extremely well in the German Conformation Shows, have ScH titles, work as Service dogs, a SAR dog, and have been & currently are in Police K9 training teams......should I not be proud??!....is it a marketing ploy? SL dogs that CAN work...and continue to do so...
> Health, Temperament & Form are important to many of us.
> My overall comment & opinion is: This breed is SUPPOSED to be capable of many things...when you start to breed...against the grain of ANY of it's attributes...you have contributed to the down hill spiral within the breed.
> All dogs will be different... size, color, coat, specific workabilities...etc......no one breeds the "perfect" dog. But it's our jobs to do right by the breed.
> I won't criticize on a forum, other breeders for their breeding practices....I will only state if I agree with them or not....etc...etc......to each their own.
> Just another comment......


To the average dog owner, all the titles and ribbons in the world don't mean squat. Only those owners who participate in the biased, flaw ridden, crooked, rigged shows and sports events value these things. Let's see what those breeders have contributed to bettering the breed - hmmmmm, I'm thinking, .... I'm sure there is something ... oh yeah, the dam mess we are in today.


----------



## robinhuerta

And the breeders that have done nothing, will do nothing, & continue to chastise those who have done something in the breed ...will have contributed even ...less.
If one isn't part of the solution...then one must be part of the problem.
Some of us want it all.....some don't......to each their own.
_But average dog owners, should care about the dogs & breeders they are buying_ _from_.....it's called being educated in the breed itself.
If a buyer is looking for a specific "quality or qualities" for their purchase.....it would make perfect common sense to look for breeders that value those same qualities.
That would be recommended for ANY breed.
This is just fact....not fiction.


----------



## Chris Wild

With regard to oversized breeding, I think there is a definite difference between what different people are talking about with regard to oversized.

The majority of the criticism toward oversized breeding, as near as I can tell, are the breeders who are breeding giant GSDs. Dogs several inches over standard and well over 100lbs, who are often also quite a bit overweight judging by photos on websites, so as to allow for them to accurately be described as even bigger. And there are plenty of those such breeders out there. When getting to that size range, working ability and health most certainly can be compromised, though as much so by breeding focus (or lack thereof) than size itself. That many of these giants are carrying an extra 20-30lbs so they can be marketed as even bigger sure doesn't help matters any. But this is a very different situation than those who like bigger dogs in the sense of upper end of the standard or slightly oversized. This has been said many times in the thread, but it appears some people seem to think they're being lumped into the same group. 

The biggest concern I, and probably many others, have with this sort of breeding is that when the main goal is one specific trait.. be it oversized, undersized, coat type, fad colors or anything else... what is lost in the process? Are more important things like temperament and health sacrificed? You bet often they are. This is certainly not always the case, but it is in many instances. Someone breeding for giants, marketing their pups toward people who want giants, may very well choose the 30" 140# beast with health and temperament issues over the middle standard sized dog with excellent health and temperament, because that is the focus of their breeding program. Not to say they may not be able to find a giant dog with excellent health and temperament, no doubt they could if they looked hard enough. But will they, especially if they have a giant nervebag with working plumbing in the back yard. Certainly this is not true of all of them, but it is true of enough that it makes people very leery when they encounter breeders pushing any one specific trait. 

Then there is the issue of a shallow gene pool, which means that even if a breeder is trying to keep balance in other areas while producing a huge dog, can make it extremely difficult to do so. The majority of GSDs running around do fall within the standard with regard to things like size and color. Seeking out the genetics of dogs who do not severely limits the options available, perhaps forcing a breeder to choose between using a dog who doesn't fit their goals of size to maintain more important things like health and temperament and thus going against their stated goals and target customer base, or keeping with their stated goals and customer base and perhaps sacrificing more important things along the way. That is the concern, that the breeder will choose poorly. 

This concern is magnified by the marketing. When someone markets their dogs talking first about size and putting emphasis there over all other things, it leaves the impression that is where they put emphasis when it comes to breeding decisions as well. And the more singular and specific traits they emphasize, especially combined with a much smaller gene pool in which to find those traits, can lead to a complete loss of balance in the breeding program and dogs. 

Personally myself, I like a larger dog. I prefer dogs toward the upper end of the standard. A bit oversized wouldn't be a huge issue, but a giant is another matter and would be completely out of the question. I would not want one of those. At 26" and 95lbs I prefer Kaiser's size over Wulf's 25" and 85lbs, and certainly over a 24" 75lb male. Though I guess I have a double standard there because with females I prefer Della's 23" 65lbs over Raven's 24" 78lbs. But really, size is secondary. Health, temperament, nerve and working ability come first. We have a litter we bred where despite both parents being well within standard, most every dog in the litter is maturing out to be top end of the standard or a little bit over. I'm not pleased with that as I'd rather they be a bit smaller (I'd rather they had better pigment too) and the large size wasn't something we wanted. But I'm not overly displeased with it either because in terms of more important things we got pretty much exactly what we wanted. Size alone wouldn't deter me from doing the same or similar breeding. I'd just know better what to expect and warn new owners about with regard to size. Though ideally I will find a way to get similar results with regards to the important things, in a slightly smaller package next time around. Ultimately though, within reason, what sized package that comes in is of no more concern than what color it comes in. I have my preferred color too, yet neither of my girls even come close. Instead I have to settle for gazing at Wulfie from afar and cuddling him on the couch.

As far as the "old fashioned" claim, that one drives me nuts too and I just do not see any validation for it. Of course some of the GSDs of olden days were oversized, but it was not the overwhelming majority. Though I don't think that aside from the possible occasional mutant there were ever 30" 140# dogs running around herding sheep and serving police and military in late 19th and early 20th century Germany. Early on there were also dogs of all colors including white, blue, liver, brindle, piebald and merle, floppy earned dogs and perky eared dogs, short coats and long coats and curly coats and just about every other physical trait imaginable. Temperament was set first, then physical traits were weeded out to get the desired look of the breed as well as the size and structure deemed most widely utilitarian, which to me is a correct set of priorities. Now, it seems some are going backwards, focusing too much on looks and certainly not nearly enough on temperament.

But as far as "old fashioned" goes, there is a huge difference between it being common in some lines and it being the true "old fashioned" dog. The problem with the "old fashioned" marketing is that it says to people that these oversized (and very often long coated) dogs are the only true GSDs of old. That all GSDs back in the day were like this and that smaller, standard sized (and even standard coated) dogs are some new fangled idea that is not true to the breed's history. That is completely incorrect. There were just as many smaller dogs in the old days as big ones, with most actually falling in the middle. With the defense I've seen for the "old fashioned" marketing saying that it isn't a lie because there were big dogs back then, the same would hold true for anything else. Someone breeding undersized dogs or standard sized dogs would be no less accurate to describe their dogs as "old fashioned". Heck, with that line of thinking, if all it takes is being able to point back to a few examples of such in the early days of the breed to justify it, someone breeding merle flop eared curly coated dogs might get away with marketing their dogs as "old fashioned". I don't dispute that there have always been big dogs in the breed. I don't even dispute that for some specific forms of service a larger dog (though not a giant) may be more useful. I dispute the implication with the "old fashioned" marketing that this was the norm, and universally seen and desired amongst the old dogs and smaller dogs are some new craze.


----------



## JKlatsky

^^^^^^^^:thumbup: Exactly.


----------



## crs996

Doc said:


> Perhaps size is mentioned first because that is what is always asked for by the buyer? Maybe a great deal of potential and current German shepherd owners don't place a high value on the dogs "working ability" - however you define it.


That may be the case, but YOU as a breeder still should if you truly care about maintaining the breed.



Doc said:


> ... that they can trust not to knock down Granny and bite her; and be good around cats and small children.


This is a training issue. A proper GSD should not have to be specifically be bred down for these qualities at the expense of the breeds integrity. Besides, what about an oversize GSD with with no proven working ability makes it inherently better around Granny, cats and kids? My pup is from active police K9 working lines and is fine with all 3, with training.


----------



## crs996

JKlatsky said:


> But I have a problem with the main point of advertisement of these dogs being the size. When you see "vet verified at 120lbs! and 29" at the shoulder! as the first line of description about the dog, then I think you are clearly breeding for a niche market that has very little to do with the working German Shepherd. Shouldn't the goal of the conscientious breeder be to educate and perhaps if it's in the best interest of the client steer them towards another breed that better suits their needs? There's a reason people created the Shiloh and King Shepherds, which to me have more in common with Newfoundlands or Pyrenes than the GSD.


:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## crs996

Doc said:


> To the average dog owner, all the titles and ribbons in the world don't mean squat. Only those owners who participate in the biased, flaw ridden, crooked, rigged shows and sports events value these things. Let's see what those breeders have contributed to bettering the breed - hmmmmm, I'm thinking, .... I'm sure there is something ... oh yeah, the dam mess we are in today.


So instead, let's do nothing to prove them and focus on large dogs that won't knock Granny over? I doubt this is an issue that Max looked at when selecting large dogs.

Doc, you are very quick to reference GSD history to justify size, but don't reference the possibility that they also possessed appropriate, proven working ability.


----------



## FredD

"Questioning is the door of knowledge"

Maybe we should go back and read notes.

http://www.maxvstephanitz.homestead.com/


----------



## Doc

crs996 said:


> That may be the case, but YOU as a breeder still should if you truly care about maintaining the breed.
> 
> 
> 
> This is a training issue. A proper GSD should not have to be specifically be bred down for these qualities at the expense of the breeds integrity. Besides, what about an oversize GSD with with no proven working ability makes it inherently better around Granny, cats and kids? My pup is from active police K9 working lines and is fine with all 3, with training.




For someone who does know me personally or ever in the history of my kennel ever seen, touched or encountered y dogs, you think you know a great deal about me and my breeding program. Where you acquired all this knowledge is beyond me. So if you can't back up your claims about me, maybe you should refrain from slandering my name, my dogs, and my breeding program.

You seem to have an answer and response to everything - which is usually 180 degrees from what I state. If I didn't know better, I swear you are trying to pull me into an argument. I have the breedings records for all my crosses - the good, the bad, the ugly. And until you know and can understand the art and science involved in my breeding, you should point your anger somewhere else.

Maybe you should post a picture of your German shepherd so i can see what one should be like. Make sure you capture it walking on water - anything less will be a great disappointment.


----------



## Doc

crs996 said:


> So instead, let's do nothing to prove them and focus on large dogs that won't knock Granny over? I doubt this is an issue that Max looked at when selecting large dogs.
> 
> Doc, you are very quick to reference GSD history to justify size, but don't reference the possibility that they also possessed appropriate, proven working ability.



In my world, German shepherd dogs possessing "appropriate, proven working ability" is a given. Just like having 4 legs.


----------



## AbbyK9

Actually, if someone writes something nasty about you, that would be libel and not slander. Slander is when people say nasty things about you. 

Although, quite honestly, it seems to me like Doc is the one fishing for an argument in this thread, rather than the people he is accusing of "slander" (sic). Like I said before, you get the responses you ask for. When you perceive people as being nasty, it may just be because that is the tone you are setting.

I quit posting in this thread when Doc said that "German Shepherd scholars" use the term "old fashioned" to describe the dogs of the early era. Funny thing, I've never seen a site or book providing true, factual information about the breed use the term to describe those dogs. I've only ever seen the term used by breeders of giants to advertise their humongeous dogs to the public as "what the Shepherd used to be", particularly the ones who do nothing - no obedience, no herding, no sport or work of any kind - with their dogs and revel in the fact that the dogs are "not bred to do any kind of work."

Of course, a true scholar would probably recognize that while there were big dogs, there were equally as many small dogs and the majority of dogs fell somewhere in between, and that the primary goal was working ability - any kind of work, not necessarily herding or police work - and not size or color. Then again, a true scholar would be able to spell the breed, breed founder's name, and relevant German locations correctly.

But hey, what do I know.


----------



## Liesje

Doc said:


> For someone who does know me personally or ever in the history of my kennel ever seen, touched or encountered y dogs, you think you know a great deal about me and my breeding program. Where you acquired all this knowledge is beyond me. So if you can't back up your claims about me, maybe you should refrain from slandering my name, my dogs, and my breeding program.



Well, ditto....



> biased, flaw ridden, crooked, rigged shows and sports events


That's pretty inflammatory from someone who admittedly never participates.

I guess it is Doc vs. everyone else, as usual.


----------



## Samba

I will agree that while the showing and exhibiting do not always lead down a rosey path this is no justification in my mind for other ventures down some roads. To point to some venues flaws do not justify another in any way. 

Within these so characterized as sordid venues, one can find breeders and dogs who are not so corrupted because really there are breeders out there who understand the breed and don't just haphazardly breed for a point or two or a win. There are good dogs being produced and therefore, to me, no need for further "nicheness". The regular venues don't mean the dog breeding is destroyed because there are still people who have a nice grasp of a good shepherd dog. 

There were obviously itty-bitty dogs in the breeds history too because we see them produced from the current dog genetics. One might as well start production of the mini-shep and justify it as having come to us from history as well as fit in an apartment or a gas-saving car. I see a niche for myself as I am limited on space! 

Of course, they will have working characteristics... maybe I can sell them to those helicopter guys too!


----------



## Lin

Doc said:


> You seem to have an answer and response to everything - which is usually 180 degrees from what I state. If I didn't know better, I swear you are trying to pull me into an argument.


Sure pot. 

You've tried to argue with everyone here by making up your own versions of what they said. And I find it ridiculous that you're here trying to defend your breeding when you're too ashamed to actually share your webpage and kennel. You obviously have something to hide, or feel you do.


----------



## Chris Wild

Can I ask what a "SchH breeder" is? One would think, based on the phrasing, that means someone who participates in SchH with their breeding dogs, or someone who sells mostly to SchH people, or both. 

But apparently it doesn't because the things being said about "SchH breeders" and "SchH dogs" bear no resemblance to reality when it comes to the vast majority of SchH dogs, or people who participate in SchH with their dogs or SchH title their breeding stock. So it must mean something different?

According to various comments in this thread, the "SchH breeder":

Is obsessed with size and only wants small dogs. Not true. Go to any SchH event and you'll find a much wider variance in size than at any other venue. Working lines as a whole have a tremendous variance in size, much more than any other "type" of GSD. Also a greater variance in structure and color because emphasis on breeding is not placed on those things. Size and structure are to be reasonable and utilitarian, but provided it doesn't compromise ability to perform, stamina, soundness and structural integrity more or less anything goes. Within reason of course.

His dogs can't be family companions. Guess I'd better kick mine out, and tell 99% of our customers, all members of our SchH club and most SchH folk I know across the country to do the same. Have to tell that to a few Nationals, BSP and WUSV winners as well.

His dogs aren't good with kids. Guess I'll have to pass that along to everyone too, tell the neighbor kids they can't come play with our dogs anymore and the 5yo who's been attending SchH club with her mom since she could walk that she can't come either.

His dogs will eat cats, small dogs, livestock or anything else that moves. Ok, will see what I can do to convince the dogs to eat our cats since that's what they're supposed to do. I'm guessing I should pass that along to the SchH folks I know with cats as well. Probably the ones with chickens to, and definitely the one who has her dog and Sid, the house rabbit, living together. 

His dogs will knock down Granny. This one I find especially amusing. And I know my 5'1", 90lb grandma is up in heaven having a very good laugh over that one. She spent countless hours with our "SchH dogs". Playing ball, throwing frisbees, playing tug (they always let Granny win), cuddling on the couch and just enjoying one another. And her constant companion and guardian until the day she died last year at 94 years old was a working line GSD. Not sure if she was a "SchH dog" since she didn't do it herself, though she could have. But her brother, my Kaiser, is a SchH dog as was her sire and most of her relatives.

One side claims these dogs are crazy nutjobs, can't live in the house, can't be companions, and are a danger to every living creature (especially kids, cats and Grannies). And cites service dog organizations moving away from GSDs as proof of this, ignoring that the Seeing Eye and Fidelco both still use GSDs and in fact have their own breeding programs, and if one asks the other organizations why the move to labs and goldens will find out that the most prevailing reason is public image and not wanting to intimidate the public.

Then other side says they're not crazy enough because Lackland now breeds Mals. Yes, they breed Mals, however there are also numerous brokers who supply the US military. Not all their dogs come from their breeding program at Lackland and there are many, many GSDs (as well as other non-Mal breeds) serving the US military. Many police departments still use GSDs, and in fact many who switched to Mals in the past are switching back. I know dozens of K9 handlers personally, and the majority work GSDs. Some absolutely refuse to work a Mal and one has told me flat out that if the department switches to Mals, he is retiring. This argument that because some, not all but some, police and military organizations have moved from GSDs to Mals proves they can't work and aren't crazy enough ignores the other very key reasons why Mals are often preferred: less prevalence of health problems, a greater percentage of the Mal population has working traits (as they are not nearly as popular and have not yet fallen victim to generation after generation of watering down for pet and show purposes), and the number one biggest reason Mals are a lot cheaper and quality Mals are a whole lot cheaper than quality GSDs. 

Then there is the irony that it seems the two sides who are anti "SchH dog" can't even make up their minds on whether they're too crazy, or not crazy enough. I just don't get it. All I know is that these opinions just don't stack up to the hundreds of SchH dogs and SchH people I personally know and have first hand experience with. Sure, such too crazy dogs exist, though they aren't limited to any specific bloodline and they certainly aren't the norm. And there's tons of not crazy enough dogs, though to me if the criteria is a completely different breed altogether, that's just fine. If I wanted a Mal temperament I'd get a Mal, not a GSD.


----------



## mysablegsd

Doc said:


> To the average dog owner, all the titles and ribbons in the world don't mean squat. Only those owners who participate in the biased, flaw ridden, crooked, rigged shows and sports events value these things. Let's see what those breeders have contributed to bettering the breed - hmmmmm, I'm thinking, .... I'm sure there is something ... oh yeah, the dam mess we are in today.


 
Bravo! :thumbup::toasting:


----------



## crs996

Doc said:


> In my world, German shepherd dogs possessing "appropriate, proven working ability" is a given. Just like having 4 legs.


If it's a given, how do you show that to your clients? 

I guess being a breeder like Chris Wild who produces dogs that apparently don't kill cats, kids or knock over Grannies AND have proven working ability is a waste of time?

All I know of your "breeding program" is what was posted on your website, which you were hesitant to even admit was yours. If your dogs do posses sound temperament, health and working ability, I applaud you. However from the look of your website I would say you do a poor job expressing all of these qualities to your potential clients. Perhaps that is why people here are wondering what exactly you breed for aside from being old fashioned.


----------



## Dainerra

I may not be the average pet owner, you know John Q Public who ties his dogs outside, feeds whatever is on sale at the grocery store, etc etc. But I am not a fanatic participating in biased sports either.

the ribbons, titles and trophies mean one thing to me: that the person knows their dogs, has confidence in their dogs and is working to improve their dogs. Because all the breeders who work/show that I have talked to have one thing in common: a willingness to say what's WRONG with their dogs. This bitch is a little too large. This dog has a more "feminine" head than I like. I want to increase the working drive with this breeding. etc etc.

I'm looking for a breeder who knows that their dogs aren't perfect and who has a plan on making the next generation better. The people I see who are breeding "big" dogs aren't doing that. Their only criteria is bigger and bigger. 
As far as not knocking down Granny, I could pick up a dog in the WalMart parking lot for $20 that will be able to do that. Same goes for "not eating the cat"
I want a GSD, not a lab or collie in a GSD body. Not a Mastiff in a GSD body. Not an over-stuffed couch potato either.

Frankly, the only thing that the public knows about dogs is what they see on TV. Dalmatians? They think they are all like in the Disney movie. All collies are Lassie. All GSDs are Rin Tin Tin. And of course they think that they are all like that "naturally," not realizing the huge commitment in time, exercise, and training that it takes to make it that way.


----------



## Samba

To me there aren't these "ScH dogs" either. I don't get that except that some people seem to use it as justification for their own actions in reaction to this conjured and maligned entity. I am not sure about the term "sport" either. Sure it is graded and there are points, so it will be hard to argue that it isn't a sport for some, but not all. 

I don't do sport but rather enjoy it for its revelation of the dogs make up. Might as well say those "herding" dogs too. But one can take a well done GSD and do some herding, and some protection and then relax wiht the dog in the house. Man protection used to be part of the herding test. These dogs, well bred and well trained, are absolutely lovely companions for all ages of people. They don't need a rescuer to swoop in and breed companion dogs because these dogs aren't... they are. The very characteristics that make them good workers make them very nice companions. 

I am not sure what type of dogs I have.... companion, herding, schutzhund, SDA, obedience, tracking, dock diving, therapy dogs. Niche bred... I find it hard to figure out which one as they seem to have the ability to do so many things. Walk on water...nah... they are just nice German Shepherd dogs.


----------



## Lin

Dainerra said:


> Frankly, the only thing that the public knows about dogs is what they see on TV. Dalmatians? They think they are all like in the Disney movie. All collies are Lassie. All GSDs are Rin Tin Tin. And of course they think that they are all like that "naturally," not realizing the huge commitment in time, exercise, and training that it takes to make it that way.


Ugh yes. A few years back a friend adopted a shepherd mix from a shelter, later to rehome the dog.... 

He told me he chose a shepherd mix because he "wanted a dog like Tessa." I replied "you DO realize she didn't come this way, right? That we've spent years and tons of money and time on training?" No answer.


----------



## crs996

Samba said:


> To me there aren't these "ScH dogs" either.


Agreed. Their ability to participate _in_ "SchH" is just a part of what makes them great, versatility.


----------



## Liesje

Chris Wild said:


> Some absolutely refuse to work a Mal and one has told me flat out that if the department switches to Mals, he is retiring.


That reminds me of a friend of mine who will not even allow himself to be photographed handling someone else's Mal, lol. He did it a few times as a favor and told me in all seriousness I had to crop him above the waist.


----------



## Doc

crs996 said:


> If it's a given, how do you show that to your clients?
> 
> I guess being a breeder like Chris Wild who produces dogs that apparently don't kill cats, kids or knock over Grannies AND have proven working ability is a waste of time?
> 
> All I know of your "breeding program" is what was posted on your website, which you were hesitant to even admit was yours. If your dogs do posses sound temperament, health and working ability, I applaud you. However from the look of your website I would say you do a poor job expressing all of these qualities to your potential clients. Perhaps that is why people here are wondering what exactly you breed for aside from being old fashioned.




My web-site? - prove it.

I actually like Chris Wilds dogs. She and I will probably never dance in concert, but I like her dogs.

Start clapping because my dogs and their offspring do posses sound temperament, health, and working ability - even if the look like "giant Welsh Corgies". Believe it or not, there are actually people in this forum that own/know my dogs. 

I breed German shepherd dogs. Ones that I feel represent the breed in all aspects. I choose not to advertise in here. I'm not sure how that makes me ashamed or trying to hide something. Most of you have made it real clear that my dogs are poor representations of the German shepherd - they are nothing but Welsh Corgies on roids.

I don't have to participate in a show to know that a show or event is rigged. One can learn a lot from observation.

I spell pretty well for a one-handed, blind old geezer.


----------



## Liesje

Why is it rigged? B/c your dogs have never won? When's the last show you have entered? Attended?


----------



## Chris Wild

<<putting on Admin hat>>

C'mon guys, 26 pages of spirited, but more or less civil debate and when you weed through it all actually a whole lot of very good information and excellent argument for the differing opinions. Let's try to keep it that way. There is certainly no reason to be dragging people in by name, pointing to specific websites, or any of that. You can debate and attack the opinions all you want, but not the people behind them.

<<taking off Admin hat.. and going outside to play with some dogs>>


----------



## Lin

Liesje said:


> Why is it rigged? B/c your dogs have never won? When's the last show you have entered? Attended?


Don't let him bait you.


----------



## holland

Umm...my dog actually did walk on water...but then spring came and that was a little scary...but we're ok...I saved her


----------



## Castlemaid

> I don't have to participate in a show to know that a show or event is rigged. One can learn a lot from observation.


Really, all show and performance events are rigged? So my mutt-from-the-pound who got a High Tracking Score in Trial at a Schutzhund event from an ex-pat German Judge who breeds working lines was showing bias?? Darn!! And I thought we had earned our title through perseverance and hard work!!! Well, the three dogs from his breeding that are in our club then don't have a chance . . .


----------



## Doc

Castlemaid said:


> Really, all show and performance events are rigged? So my mutt-from-the-pound who got a High Tracking Score in Trial at a Schutzhund event from an ex-pat German Judge who breeds working lines was showing bias?? Darn!! And I thought we had earned our title through perseverance and hard work!!! Well, the three dogs from his breeding that are in our club then don't have a chance . . .



Where did I say ALL shows and sport events were rigged? Show me where I said that. I can attend without showing. I can see the back slapping palm-out "judging". I see professional handlers covering the flaws of the dogs. I can see dogs that are clearly not the best be awarded the best. There are numerous breeders who have left the show/performance rings in disgust - not just me. Does it happen all the time? I never said it did. does it happen? Yes. 

Next you will imply that a UKC Champion really isn't a champion because it was awarded through the UKC instead of the AKC. I've heard that nonsense too.

Dogs that are able to do the task and requirements should be awarded, but there are times when the best is passed over due to unethical actions. that's all I am saying. And I choose not to be involved in those type of games. Besides, do you honestly think a judge would give a second look to a German shepherd that is at the top or over the standard that has a squared body type and no hock walking or a 45-60 degree slope? Why waste my time and money entering events?


----------



## Dainerra

that's what always floors me, though. people with working line/old-fashioned dogs don't enter shows because they won't win. judges put up angulated dogs because, most of the time, that's all there is. people breed more of the same and even more extremely angulated dogs because that's what wins. people point to that as proof that a "square" dog will never win. People who breed angulated dogs point to that as proof that it's what the public wants. 

Meanwhile, John Q Public (admitted moron) doesn't even know that GSDs can look any way beside the extreme angulated dogs they see on TV. I've gotten that comment many times with my two. It's a very circular argument that proves it's own point for both sides!

Will the trend change overnight? of course not. is there a chance of turning the tides? hopefully. But the only way to do that is by education. I'm not saying spend $20K to campaign a working line dog to BIS at Westminster. But maybe we can make a difference a little at a time. If nothing else, by letting the world see that there ARE other dogs out there.

ETA: about the events being rigged. I've been hearing that about EVERYTHING since I was knee-high. High School football team loses on the road? That because the other team had some "home cookin' " (thats biased Refs for those that don't know). Does it happen? Sure. Is that the majority of the problem? I doubt it. It's more a matter of reputation. Judges are only human and the idea that "Bob Smith, famous handler, would have an inferior dog is ridiculous" can be hard to get out of the mind. Or the fact that once a dog starts winning, it's likely to keep on winning because of its reputation. Again, there is also the problem that I stated above: A judge can't reward a type of dog that isn't entered.


----------



## Liesje

Doc said:


> Besides, do you honestly think a judge would give a second look to a German shepherd that is at the top or over the standard that has a squared body type and no hock walking or a 45-60 degree slope? Why waste my time and money entering events?


I have a dog like this except substitute over for under and she is a championship with wins toward grand champion.

At our last show, the best of breed went to a very moderate working line male (balance but moderately angulated) who was not a CH or GRCH (typically the CH or GRCH dogs win the breed). Nikon is a somewhat type-y German show line and there were other extremely type-y American Lines that were beat in the process.

In our locale there is also a GRCH coated dog and several GRCH working line and mixed line dogs including a Czech dog.

You never know until you try. We've never won breed or won a show but that doesn't stop me. Judges are only human. Some are looking at topline, some are looking at front assembly, some take temperament into account and some don't care. Conformation is not infallible. You win some, you lose some, but as long as the dogs are enjoying themselves I'm not going to get in a huff about certain judges only giving a nod to American line dogs.



> Next you will imply that a UKC Champion really isn't a champion because it was awarded through the UKC instead of the AKC. I've heard that nonsense too.


I've heard that as well but after hearing and see the results of how the AKC judges are trained, I've switched to exclusively UKC (and the UKC's headquarters are here so it is easy to find events). Also in UKC you are only awarded points and wins against your own breed so there are less opportunities to earn them. I think AKC is done differently, you can get points for group or BIS wins?


----------



## Samba

I noted that Lackland previously admitted to only moderate success with the Malinois breeding program. They were looking for some sires and dams to add in hopes of better production. US Govt, welcome once again to the vagaries of breeding! It is no easy go, I will sure give breeders that. 

Now, I am trying to think of more types of dogs that the "public wants'. I find my son's Beagle has a horrible propensity to follow his nose and forget his name. I think I will work on breeding Beagles that don't hunt because they are so cute and people want them as pets... except those pesky attributes get in the way. Food drive needs to be decreased a bit too... that dog can walk up walls to get to a treat. 

I still believe that it would be difficult to breed for certain physical traits such as size and well preserve strong working abilities. It is difficult to concentrate solely on hips and do so, or on color etc. Happy to be wrong, but so many long time breeders have mentioned such.


----------



## Dainerra

Samba said:


> Now, I am trying to think of more types of dogs that the "public wants'. I find my son's Beagle has a horrible propensity to follow his nose and forget his name. I think I will work on breeding Beagles that don't hunt because they are so cute and people want them as pets... except those pesky attributes get in the way. Food drive needs to be decreased a bit too... that dog can walk up walls to get to a treat.


you're too late! lol at least people are already trying to do it. Main problem is finding beagles that are less "nose-driven" to breed!


----------



## RubyTuesday

Lies, my apologies for incorrectly stating that you prefer smaller GS. That was actually Onyx'Girl. My memory glitched & I neglected to verify prior to posting. My post was based on an actual post within the thread that I mistakenly attributed to you.


----------



## Liesje

That makes more sense. I think Jane does prefer smaller size but I know two of her dogs and they are at the large end of the standard.


----------



## crs996

Doc said:


> I actually like Chris Wilds dogs. She and I will probably never dance in concert, but I like her dogs.


Nice job evading the part about the work and effort she doubtlessly puts into her breeding program by proving her dogs, working them and seeking to improve future generations. 



Doc said:


> I breed German shepherd dogs. Ones that I feel represent the breed in all aspects.


But don't back that up (apparently) in any way other than your say so. That combined with your attitude regarding having your dogs judged just proves my point over and over. 
My take is that if someone doesn't want to jump through the hoops (agility pun not intended) and make the effort to work/prove their dogs in some form or fashion, perhaps breeding isn't for them. 

To the Mods, I'm done now. 

To the conscientious breeders: I am truly impressed with all that you do to maintain/advance/improve the breed, it must truly be a labor of love because I know you're not getting rich (or even breaking even sometimes). I am very grateful that there are breeders who take the immense amount of time and financial commitment required to produce the great dogs that people like me so enjoy spending our lives with.


----------



## Samba

Dainerra said:


> you're too late! lol at least people are already trying to do it. Main problem is finding beagles that are less "nose-driven" to breed!



LOL Once again! I was already worried about foundation stock and that had stymied my further venture!


----------



## robinhuerta

The truth about the German Conformation Shows is.......it's VERY HARD TO WIN.
Never had a "win or place" _given_ to me....never had a "title" _just handed over._
In every type of event there is such things as "politics"...come on...we all are educated enough to know that. ( Money & Power begets Money & Power.)
However;...there are some of us that continue to _fight_ our way to the top....
If that means, that we *must* breed 3x the quality, as the "Politically gifted"...so be it.
If that means, we must *sacrifice* more time & energy into our dogs with training....so be it. In the end....the breed is better for it....and that is the best gratification, ANY breeder should expect.
I love this breed period.....WL, SL, makes no difference to me....I have both.
JMO..again.


----------



## Liesje

robinhuerta said:


> If that means, we must *sacrifice* more time & energy into our dogs with training....so be it.


So true, Robin. I show my dog because I believe in him and what he is. I believe he is correct, not perfect, but he is fit mentally and physically for obedience, herding, dock diving, tracking, protection, lure coursing, flyball, the endurance prufung.... We can't expect to change anyone's mind if we don't ourselves enter the dogs that WE believe are correct. The SchH people scoff because I have a show line dog, the show people scoff because he is not type-y enough or is the wrong line of show line. Whatever, it doesn't get me down and hasn't stopped the dog from doing well at everything he's tried including multiple venues of conformation. I don't need to win because I'm not campaigning my dog for top wins or as a breeding dog. I'd rather have someone else who is obsessed with conformation win because if it means so much to them, they can have it. Considering the extremes in both show lines it's almost more valuable to me NOT to win. As long as my dog gets VP, SG, and V-ratings and earns the UKC CH fair and square I am satisfied that the judges see what I see, without being first in the class or best of breed. I'll leave the big wins to those that breed solely for that purpose. I'm not out there trying to "prove" anything other than that I believe in my dog.


----------



## Doc

crs996 said:


> Nice job evading the part about the work and effort she doubtlessly puts into her breeding program by proving her dogs, working them and seeking to improve future generations.
> 
> 
> 
> But don't back that up (apparently) in any way other than your say so. That combined with your attitude regarding having your dogs judged just proves my point over and over.
> My take is that if someone doesn't want to jump through the hoops (agility pun not intended) and make the effort to work/prove their dogs in some form or fashion, perhaps breeding isn't for them.
> 
> To the Mods, I'm done now.
> 
> To the conscientious breeders: I am truly impressed with all that you do to maintain/advance/improve the breed, it must truly be a labor of love because I know you're not getting rich (or even breaking even sometimes). I am very grateful that there are breeders who take the immense amount of time and financial commitment required to produce the great dogs that people like me so enjoy spending our lives with.



I don't know you at all. I asked you to post your German shepherd, you didn't. I asked that you prove this so called web-site was mine - you didn't. You say I have never proved my dogs in any way - I ask you to prove that. You have called my German shepherd dogs "giant Welsh Corgies" - I never once labeled your dogs. I asked if you were a breeder - you never answered. You have ridiculed me, my dogs, my so called breeding philosophy that I didn't post in this thread, and hinted that I might should stop breeding. You've done all of this without any knowledge about me or my dogs. And when you discover that I do not "jump through hoops and make the effort to work/prove my dogs in some form or fashion"? Have you lived with me for past century? I hope you feel better now.

I said I liked Chris Wild's dogs. I know what she has done with her dogs. I don't know what else I have to say. I may disagree with some of her points and actions but that doesn't take away from the accomplishments she and her dogs have made. Besides, how I feel about her is none of your business, but you sure want to make it yours. 

I guess you are done because you are out of fodder to spread about me and my dogs. 

As a conscientious breeder, I thank-you.


----------



## RubyTuesday

> Snippet from post #252 by *ChrisWild*
> _Can I ask what a "SchH breeder" is?_


I’ve used the term so I’ll try to explain what I mean by it. SchH breeders select & produce GS for sport/SchH. SchH dogs are 'designed'(bred) to excel at SchH regardless of their other strengths or weaknesses. There is as much variance among SchH breeders & SchH dogs as any other type. The dogs might or might not work. Some SchH dogs are beloved family members. Others are living, breathing sporting equipment, albeit well cared for. Some of the most competitive dogs are breed worthy. Others, despite impressive scores, really aren't. Some are well suited to PP. Others might look, even act the part, but don’t really have it. Traits that favor SchH competition are heavily favored & breeding goals are focused on SchH competition. Involvement in SchH can be beneficial to the breed, but isn't necessarily so.



> Additional snippets from post #252 by *ChrisWild*
> _According to various comments in this thread, the "SchH breeder":_
> _Is obsessed with size and only wants small dogs._
> _His dogs can't be family companions._
> _His dogs aren't good with kids._
> _His dogs will eat cats, small dogs, livestock or anything else that moves._
> _His dogs will knock down Granny. _
> _One side claims these dogs are crazy nutjobs, can't live in the house, can't be companions, and are a danger to every living creature (especially kids, cats and Grannies)._
> _Then other side says they're not crazy enough because Lackland now breeds Mals._
> _Then there is the irony that it seems the two sides who are anti "SchH dog" can't even make up their minds on whether they're too crazy, or not crazy enough._


Chris, who made those statements? Perhaps you could provide quotes & attribute them to those posters who believe such things. SchH competition definitely isn’t my cuppa, but I like & admire many of the dogs. My issue is with SchH enthusiasts who refuse to recognize a world of worthy canines, including GS, outside of SchH. This is particularly manifest on the subject of over sized GS.

Over sized GS are outside the standard & I won’t dispute that. Many have complained that the size standard wasn’t adhered to until recently so it’s not just pet owners that find them attractive & useful. A common complaint was that dogs within the standard were unfairly ignored/penalized. Clearly over sized dogs, including some very large GS, aren’t just a pet owners whim. 

With so many competitive breeders ignoring the standard they should have openly, honestly discussed whether the standard needed to be changed. Unfortunately, it didn’t happen. It now appears the over sized GS will be eliminated from competition & presumably not used for breeding. All around it’s a shoddy way to do things, IMO, but I have no desire to breed, title or compete. Nor do the affected dogs interest me much, whether over sized or within the standard, so I’m largely indifferent. 

That people don’t like my dogs or breeder is unimportant. Rhinos are thin skinned & crocodiles are warm & fuzzy compared to me. However, it speaks volumes that the opposition invariably resorts to misinformation & innuendo. Through numerous threads it’s been shown that over sized GS can & do work…That they can be healthy, sound & long lived…That they perform many endeavors & excel where size & strength are needed.

They’re not simply a fad. Some breeders have been involved with them for decades. This involvement is rooted in a love of the breed. It’s not simply a marketing ploy. Nor are they breeding solely for size any more that good SchH breeders are selecting solely for bite power. Nor are they neglecting health, temperament & personality just to achieve size any more than good SchH breeders ignore those traits in the quest for ‘full, firm grips’.


----------



## Melissa

Im new here, and probably not as educated to the breed as some, but the saturday just passed i went to a german shepherd club training session and i was in tears to the point that breeders have bread the "roach" style back into shepherds so far to the fact one dog was almost dragging its legs along the floor.
i dont know what you consider "the correct style of sheperd" whether its the slanted back or a straight back.... but i know what’s cruel on an animal as I have bred English cocker spaniels for 9 years... and having a dog at the age of 3 having to need a mobility chair to get around is disgusting and shameful and i would prefer this style regardless if you think its "improving the breed" to stop.


thats my opinion so dont get pissy about it.


----------



## Mrs.K

Chris Wild said:


> Can I ask what a "SchH breeder" is? One would think, based on the phrasing, that means someone who participates in SchH with their breeding dogs, or someone who sells mostly to SchH people, or both.
> 
> But apparently it doesn't because the things being said about "SchH breeders" and "SchH dogs" bear no resemblance to reality when it comes to the vast majority of SchH dogs, or people who participate in SchH with their dogs or SchH title their breeding stock. So it must mean something different?
> 
> According to various comments in this thread, the "SchH breeder":
> 
> Is obsessed with size and only wants small dogs. Not true. Go to any SchH event and you'll find a much wider variance in size than at any other venue. Working lines as a whole have a tremendous variance in size, much more than any other "type" of GSD. Also a greater variance in structure and color because emphasis on breeding is not placed on those things. Size and structure are to be reasonable and utilitarian, but provided it doesn't compromise ability to perform, stamina, soundness and structural integrity more or less anything goes. Within reason of course.
> 
> His dogs can't be family companions. Guess I'd better kick mine out, and tell 99% of our customers, all members of our SchH club and most SchH folk I know across the country to do the same. Have to tell that to a few Nationals, BSP and WUSV winners as well.
> 
> His dogs aren't good with kids. Guess I'll have to pass that along to everyone too, tell the neighbor kids they can't come play with our dogs anymore and the 5yo who's been attending SchH club with her mom since she could walk that she can't come either.
> 
> His dogs will eat cats, small dogs, livestock or anything else that moves. Ok, will see what I can do to convince the dogs to eat our cats since that's what they're supposed to do. I'm guessing I should pass that along to the SchH folks I know with cats as well. Probably the ones with chickens to, and definitely the one who has her dog and Sid, the house rabbit, living together.
> 
> His dogs will knock down Granny. This one I find especially amusing. And I know my 5'1", 90lb grandma is up in heaven having a very good laugh over that one. She spent countless hours with our "SchH dogs". Playing ball, throwing frisbees, playing tug (they always let Granny win), cuddling on the couch and just enjoying one another. And her constant companion and guardian until the day she died last year at 94 years old was a working line GSD. Not sure if she was a "SchH dog" since she didn't do it herself, though she could have. But her brother, my Kaiser, is a SchH dog as was her sire and most of her relatives.
> 
> One side claims these dogs are crazy nutjobs, can't live in the house, can't be companions, and are a danger to every living creature (especially kids, cats and Grannies). And cites service dog organizations moving away from GSDs as proof of this, ignoring that the Seeing Eye and Fidelco both still use GSDs and in fact have their own breeding programs, and if one asks the other organizations why the move to labs and goldens will find out that the most prevailing reason is public image and not wanting to intimidate the public.
> 
> Then other side says they're not crazy enough because Lackland now breeds Mals. Yes, they breed Mals, however there are also numerous brokers who supply the US military. Not all their dogs come from their breeding program at Lackland and there are many, many GSDs (as well as other non-Mal breeds) serving the US military. Many police departments still use GSDs, and in fact many who switched to Mals in the past are switching back. I know dozens of K9 handlers personally, and the majority work GSDs. Some absolutely refuse to work a Mal and one has told me flat out that if the department switches to Mals, he is retiring. This argument that because some, not all but some, police and military organizations have moved from GSDs to Mals proves they can't work and aren't crazy enough ignores the other very key reasons why Mals are often preferred: less prevalence of health problems, a greater percentage of the Mal population has working traits (as they are not nearly as popular and have not yet fallen victim to generation after generation of watering down for pet and show purposes), and the number one biggest reason Mals are a lot cheaper and quality Mals are a whole lot cheaper than quality GSDs.
> 
> Then there is the irony that it seems the two sides who are anti "SchH dog" can't even make up their minds on whether they're too crazy, or not crazy enough. I just don't get it. All I know is that these opinions just don't stack up to the hundreds of SchH dogs and SchH people I personally know and have first hand experience with. Sure, such too crazy dogs exist, though they aren't limited to any specific bloodline and they certainly aren't the norm. And there's tons of not crazy enough dogs, though to me if the criteria is a completely different breed altogether, that's just fine. If I wanted a Mal temperament I'd get a Mal, not a GSD.


And in vieanna they want to ban Schutzhund training because of pretty much the same claims. They don't know what they are talking about but still want to ban it because Schutzhund dogs are crazy, dangerous, a weapon, knock over granny, go after cats and can't be any companions at all.


----------



## Liesje

Melissa said:


> Im new here, and probably not as educated to the breed as some, but the saturday just passed i went to a german shepherd club training session and i was in tears to the point that breeders have bread the "roach" style back into shepherds so far to the fact one dog was almost dragging its legs along the floor.
> i dont know what you consider "the correct style of sheperd" whether its the slanted back or a straight back.... but i know what’s cruel on an animal as I have bred English cocker spaniels for 9 years... and having a dog at the age of 3 having to need a mobility chair to get around is disgusting and shameful and i would prefer this style regardless if you think its "improving the breed" to stop.


There's always going to be dogs with health/structural problems in any line, so I'm not sure what "style" you are referring to, other than implying that anyone who breeds anything other than a gigantic "straight back" (what does that mean anyway?) dog is cruel. No more cruel than packing 30 extra pounds on a dog to market it as "oversize and heavy boned".

Here is my dog last night









I can assure you he has NO trouble getting around


----------



## Samba

Two extremes don't make a right?


----------



## Liesje

lol


----------



## KayElle

This thread is simply unbelievable!! How can anyone bash a heavy boned, oversized line of GSDs unless you have PERSONAL, first-hand experience with them?? Your repeated claims that they weigh well over 100 lbs. because they are fat (which you surmise from your supposedly "expert" viewing of pictures) shows ignorance. The fact that you repeatedly say that these dogs have health problems when you have NO evidence about these lines whatsoever is incredible. Finally, your repeated "expert conclusions" that these dogs can't work, do agility, or anything else you dream up to put these fine animals down, and thus elevate the standing of your own dog lines shows an unearned and never justified arrogance. Just how many of you have been around the dogs descended from the breeder of the website at issue here? How many of you have ever met or researched the lines of her dogs and the dogs of several other breeders who strive for the same type of GSD? How many of you can say that your lines often live past, and are members of the GSD 13 club? Hers do!! I often advise my kids that they can quickly determine if someone knows what they are talking about based on whether a person listens politely with an open mind, offers statements that can be substantiated, and readily admits those areas of a subject that he/she doesn't have specific knowledge. Many of you critical of oversized GSDs -- and you know who you are -- flunk this simple test. Indeed, it's quite comical to read posts from "wanna be GSD experts" that simply assert claims and falsehoods, using different large sized breeds to substantiate their points about oversized GSDs. Yet at the same time, it is also quite pathetic -- closed minds are quite pitiful to me. I feel sorry for your inability to open your minds to subjects you have little -- if any -- knowledge. I personally love all GSDs, regardless of the lines and try very hard to learn more about all of them. I would never belittle one over another!


----------



## Liesje

Being fat IS a health problem. An HD dog can live to be 16 but it still has HD. Longevity is not the only way to gauge a dog's health.

Only one of my GSDs' parents are dead and they both lived into their teens.

To clarify, I don't think anyone is talking about one specific breeder. I'm not really sure who the "she" is that you are referring to.

It's kinda hard to research the lines when none of us who actually participate in sports and work have ever seen such dogs or dogs from similar lines or the "old fashioned large size" style. My idea of research is more hand's on then taking the word of what is posted on web sites. RubyTuesday (who does have personal experience with the breeder in the OP) has said in another thread that dogs from these lines would not be the best for agility. Not every dog has to be good at everything, there's nothing unusual about some dogs just being physically unfit to perform certain tasks. None of my dogs can "go to ground" like a terrier or beat a greyhound in a race.

The issue is that some of these breeders are making unsubstantiated claims about the working ability (both physical and mental) of their dogs. Other breeders clearly state they are breeding low drive dogs for pet homes. I don't see anything wrong with that as long as the breeder is honest about their breeding program.

Of those of us that actually DO agility, Schutzhund, personal protection, SDA/UKC Dog Sport....no one owns these 130lb+ dogs. That has to say something. Many people here are saying there's no reason why they can't....then why don't they?


----------



## onyx'girl

KayElle~So do you do agility with yours? Show proof that the oversized, overweight can work, I don't see them in the venues I attend.
It is about breeding to the standard, and if you are not bettering the breed, then you shouldn't be breeding.
If you want a giant dog, get another breed, GSD's are medium size, not large.
Because the link of the _breeder of the website at issue_ has been removed, it is really no longer the point, it is about "breeders" not breeding to the standard, and the marketing of "oversized, old fashioned".


----------



## FredD

KayElle said:


> This thread is simply unbelievable!! How can anyone bash a heavy boned, oversized line of GSDs unless you have PERSONAL, first-hand experience with them?? Your repeated claims that they weigh well over 100 lbs. because they are fat (which you surmise from your supposedly "expert" viewing of pictures) shows ignorance. The fact that you repeatedly say that these dogs have health problems when you have NO evidence about these lines whatsoever is incredible. Finally, your repeated "expert conclusions" that these dogs can't work, do agility, or anything else you dream up to put these fine animals down, and thus elevate the standing of your own dog lines shows an unearned and never justified arrogance. Just how many of you have been around the dogs descended from the breeder of the website at issue here? How many of you have ever met or researched the lines of her dogs and the dogs of several other breeders who strive for the same type of GSD? How many of you can say that your lines often live past, and are members of the GSD 13 club? Hers do!! I often advise my kids that they can quickly determine if someone knows what they are talking about based on whether a person listens politely with an open mind, offers statements that can be substantiated, and readily admits those areas of a subject that he/she doesn't have specific knowledge. Many of you critical of oversized GSDs -- and you know who you are -- flunk this simple test. Indeed, it's quite comical to read posts from "wanna be GSD experts" that simply assert claims and falsehoods, using different large sized breeds to substantiate their points about oversized GSDs. Yet at the same time, it is also quite pathetic -- closed minds are quite pitiful to me. I feel sorry for your inability to open your minds to subjects you have little -- if any -- knowledge. I personally love all GSDs, regardless of the lines and try very hard to learn more about all of them. I would never belittle one over another!


Nicely written!


----------



## JKlatsky

KayElle said:


> I often advise my kids that they can quickly determine if someone knows what they are talking about based on whether a person listens politely with an open mind, offers statements that can be substantiated, and readily admits those areas of a subject that he/she doesn't have specific knowledge.


I agree! It's just funny that it works both ways. Those darn crazy SchH dogs...

Go ahead and Google "Old Fashioned German Shepherds" I did. In my first hits, all the dogs had heights and weights listed with the vast majority being in excess of 28" and 100lbs. With exclamation points. Some had OFAs, which I applaud as being commendable. Good breeders of a variety of breeds OFA. Very few (I think in my very brief perusal just now I saw 2 out of dozens of dogs) with any kind of performance title. I saw a lot of unsubstatiated claims about excellent temperament, but most of what I saw was a chronicle of growth...90lbs at 7 months!! That sort of thing. 

I don't think that these breeders are necessarily "bad" people. I'm sure they care about their dogs and are working on what makes them happy. The good ones are about SIZE, Health, and a mellow easy going personality. 

I just don't think what makes them happy is a German Shepherd.


----------



## Liesje

KayElle said:


> How can anyone bash a heavy boned, oversized line of GSDs unless you have PERSONAL, first-hand experience with them??


And you have PERSONAL, first-hand experience doing agility, herding, Dog Sport, Schutzhund..... ?? Why would I abandon buying dogs that can easily do these tasks and switch to 130+ dogs who are advertised as having lower drive based on the word of someone who has never done these activities?


----------



## Samba

I don't know "her" either or who the reference is too. Seems there is some personalization. 

I am not freaking out regarding the assertion that a more extreme in the rear dog is in pain or crippled. Not necessarily so. Not necessarily an unhealthy animal at all. But it does exhibit an extreme in conformation as others exhibit other extremes. 

It appears to me that many times I see dogs that are outliers in some way advertised as being better because they have this and that is now "lost" in modern times. It strikes me as interesting that sometimes one extreme is used to promote another. 

If someone had dogs that were very healthy, of dynamic temperament suitable to a German Shepherd, suitable to various activities... that would be great. If they said, these lines have great attributes but could be somewhat more to standard in size and I am working on that through selective breeding choices, I could understand that. But, to acclaim based on an obviously selectively bred for extreme... I can't really get with that just yet.


----------



## codmaster

KayElle said:


> This thread is simply unbelievable!! How can anyone bash a heavy boned, oversized line of GSDs unless you have PERSONAL, first-hand experience with them?? Your repeated claims that they weigh well over 100 lbs. because they are fat (which you surmise from your supposedly "expert" viewing of pictures) shows ignorance. The fact that you repeatedly say that these dogs have health problems when you have NO evidence about these lines whatsoever is incredible. Finally, your repeated "expert conclusions" that these dogs can't work, do agility, or anything else you dream up to put these fine animals down, and thus elevate the standing of your own dog lines shows an unearned and never justified arrogance. Just how many of you have been around the dogs descended from the breeder of the website at issue here? How many of you have ever met or researched the lines of her dogs and the dogs of several other breeders who strive for the same type of GSD? How many of you can say that your lines often live past, and are members of the GSD 13 club? Hers do!! I often advise my kids that they can quickly determine if someone knows what they are talking about based on whether a person listens politely with an open mind, offers statements that can be substantiated, and readily admits those areas of a subject that he/she doesn't have specific knowledge. Many of you critical of oversized GSDs -- and you know who you are -- flunk this simple test. Indeed, it's quite comical to read posts from "wanna be GSD experts" that simply assert claims and falsehoods, using different large sized breeds to substantiate their points about oversized GSDs. Yet at the same time, it is also quite pathetic -- closed minds are quite pitiful to me. I feel sorry for your inability to open your minds to subjects you have little -- if any -- knowledge. I personally love all GSDs, regardless of the lines and try very hard to learn more about all of them. I would never belittle one over another!


How about because they are deliberatly going against the GSD Standard? 

A GSD (US) male is to be between 24-26 inches at the shoulder, NOT 30+ inches. That is another dog! If you like giant dogs, get into another breed and leave the GSD alone! 

If I like hound ears, would it be ok to breed GSD's with hanging ears so that my line would all have droopy ears also?


----------



## LaRen616

Droopy ears is different than being bred to be taller. Droopy ears drastically changes the way the GSD looks, being a couple inches taller does not.


----------



## LaRen616

Also..... I have NEVER heard that the GSD is a medium sized breed. NEVER. Siberian Husky's are considered a medium sized breed and they are 2-3 inches smaller and around 20 pounds lighter than a GSD.


----------



## FredD

:thumbup:


LaRen616 said:


> Droopy ears is different than being bred to be taller. Droopy ears drastically changes the way the GSD looks, being a couple inches taller does not.


----------



## FredD

:thumbup:


LaRen616 said:


> Also..... I have NEVER heard that the GSD is a medium sized breed. NEVER. Siberian Husky's are considered a medium sized breed and they are 2-3 inches smaller and around 20 pounds lighter than a GSD.


----------



## Samba

From the FCI standard...

"The German Shepherd Dog is medium sized. With the hair pressed down, the height at the withers is measured by stick along the vertical as it follows the line of the elbow from the withers to the ground. The ideal height at the withers is 62.5 cm for males and 57.5 for females. An allowance of 2.5 cm over or under is permissible. Exceeding the maximum as well as not meeting the minimum diminishes the working and breeding value of the dog."

FCI German Shepherd Breed Standard


----------



## JKlatsky

LaRen616 said:


> Also..... I have NEVER heard that the GSD is a medium sized breed. NEVER. Siberian Husky's are considered a medium sized breed and they are 2-3 inches smaller and around 20 pounds lighter than a GSD.


Perhaps not medium to conventional thinking, but CERTAINLY not giant. Check the AKC standards for the Giant Breeds. Mastiffs start at 27.5 inches, The tallest breeds Great Danes and Irish Wolfhounds at 28 and 30 inches reprectively. 

Keep in mind that when you deal with the standard you are working within a range already. When you are starting to push the standard to 30" you are half a foot taller than a dog within standard. That's more than just a couple inches.


----------



## codmaster

LaRen616 said:


> Droopy ears is different than being bred to be taller. Droopy ears drastically changes the way the GSD looks, being a couple inches taller does not.


Actually, it is not a couple of inches - a 30" dog is 4 inches over the standard for male GSD's.

And it is the same- deliberatlly breeding against the standard. If one thinks that the standard is not right - then work to change it, don't have an ego so big that you think you know better than everybody else.

How about if I wanted a change in the "aloof but approachable" part of the standard - I assume that you think it would be a ok to breed for a different temperament - we can breed for a Gloden Retriever like temperament or maybe a very very aggresive to strangers temperament if i wanted to. After all this wouldn't change their appearance at all.


----------



## Liesje

UKC Standard



> *General Appearance
> *
> 
> The German Shepherd Dog is a *medium-sized*, well-balanced, *muscular dog*, slightly longer than tall, with a medium length coat, erect ears, and a low-set natural tail that normally reaches to the hock and is carried in a slight curve like a saber. *The outline of the German Shepherd Dog is made up of smooth curves rather than angles*. The head is in proportion to the size of the body, strong without appearing coarse or fine. Gender differences are readily apparent.* The German Shepherd Dog should be evaluated as an all-around working dog, and exaggerations or faults should be penalized in proportion to how much they interfere with the dog's ability to work.*​


​


----------



## Liesje

Also, the UKC standard gives a "desirable" range of height, but does not list specific faults or DQs with regard to height, just lists faults that effect correct movement and ability to work.


----------



## AbbyK9

> Also..... I have NEVER heard that the GSD is a medium sized breed. NEVER. Siberian Husky's are considered a medium sized breed and they are 2-3 inches smaller and around 20 pounds lighter than a GSD.


I have never seen the German Shepherd referred to as anything other than a medium-sized breeds. The only place where the word "medium" is not used in the breed standard is in the AKC, which specifies the dimensions, not the "medium" size specifically.

Below are some of the standards that specifically mention "medium":

_FCI German Shepherd Breed Standard_

1) General Appearance 

The German Shepherd Dog is *medium sized*. With the hair pressed down, the height at the withers is measured by stick along the vertical as it follows the line of the elbow from the withers to the ground. The ideal height at the withers is 62.5 cm for males and 57.5 for females. An allowance of 2.5 cm over or under is permissible. Exceeding the maximum as well as not meeting the minimum diminishes the working and breeding value of the dog.

_
UKC Breed Standard_

General Appearance 

The German Shepherd Dog is a *medium-sized*, well-balanced, muscular dog, slightly longer than tall, with a medium length coat, erect ears, and a low-set natural tail that normally reaches to the hock and is carried in a slight curve like a saber. The outline of the German Shepherd Dog is made up of smooth curves rather than angles. The head is in proportion to the size of the body, strong without appearing coarse or fine. Gender differences are readily apparent. The German Shepherd Dog should be evaluated as an all-around working dog, and exaggerations or faults should be penalized in proportion to how much they interfere with the dog's ability to work._
SV Breed Standard_

GENERAL APPEARANCE : The German Shepherd Dog is of* medium size*, slightly elongated, strong and well muscled, with dry bone and of firm overall structure.​

_
Max von Stephanitz_ (in his book "The German Shepherd Dog in Word & Picture)

The breed type allows about 24" average height for dogs and bitches, with about 2" allowance either way. These dimensions are to be aimed at for all *medium-sized* service breeds as correct, whether the dogs are used for the flocks or for any other service.


----------



## Samba

Most German Shepherds in the world are in the FCI. North America is not an FCI participant so does not have a standard that is inkeeping with the larger world organization membership.

The AKC GSD standard is:

Ranging in size from 22 to 26 inches tall at the shoulder.

I would call that medium to medium-large sized.

AKC Siberians:
Ranging in size from 20 to 23 ½ inches tall at the shoulder and 35 to 60 pounds.

The two standards do overlap significantly in height standard, so these two breeds are not very disparate in size.


----------



## LaRen616

Funny that they appear in every large breed dog book I own. 

*"And it is the same- deliberatlly breeding against the standard. If one thinks that the standard is not right - then work to change it, don't have an ego so big that you think you know better than everybody else."*

I certainly hope that you are NOT talking about me! I am NOT a breeder and I do not have a big ego and I do NOT think I know better than anyone else. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

*"I assume that you think it would be a ok to breed for a different temperament - we can breed for a Gloden Retriever like temperament or maybe a very very aggresive to strangers temperament if i wanted to. After all this wouldn't change their appearance at all." *


No, temperament wouldn't change their physical appearance. Did you think before you made that comment or were you typing as fast as your mouth??

Also from what I have heard, in a recent study they found that Golden Retrievers are the number one biters these days. So take that


----------



## Samba

I would never condone breeding for a temperament or character that is outside the standard for a breed.

There is some natural variation within a breed, but at some point we might say that something has ranged way out... pretty far out.

The German Shepherd is considered a medium size breed throughout much of the world. If some consider 25-26 inches large, then they place them in a large breed category. Where they are catagoized is one thing, how they measure at the whither is another.


----------



## LaRen616

*Wikipedia*
*"German Shepherds are a large-breed dog which generally are between 55 and 65 centimetres (22 and 26 in) at the **withers** and weigh between 22 and 40 kilograms (49 and 88 lb).[16] The ideal height is 63 centimetres (25 in), according to Kennel Club standards.["*


----------



## crs996

Samba said:


> I would never condone breeding for a temperament or character that is outside the standard for a breed.


That's what I have a problem with, not just that they are large.
Here is a quote from one of these "Oversized German Shepherds" sites.

"They are intelligent, like to work, and can easily be trained in obedience, agility, and search and rescue.

However, we breed dogs with *low drive* (emphasis added) which are not suitable for Schutzhund or attack work. Instead, (name deleted) are bred to be very intelligent and willing to please so they are quick to learn obedience and *fun jobs like agility*. (emphasis added) 

Does this describe a GSD anymore? Should _"are bred to be very intelligent and willing to please"_ really come after "Instead"? This is GSD trait, and linking these qualities to a low drive dog seems disingenuous. Are dogs of this size/build really suited to agility?


----------



## Liesje

LaRen616 said:


> *Wikipedia*
> *"German Shepherds are a large-breed dog which generally are between 55 and 65 centimetres (22 and 26 in) at the **withers** and weigh between 22 and 40 kilograms (49 and 88 lb).[16] The ideal height is 63 centimetres (25 in), according to Kennel Club standards.["*



Fixed  Especially since the source cited there says "medium" (http://www.germanshepherddog.com/regulations/breed_standard.htm)



> German Shepherds are a medium sized dog which generally are between 55 and 65 centimetres (22 and 26 in)


----------



## AbbyK9

I would seriously caution anyone against using Wikipedia as a source for information because ANYONE can edit it. Which means you could go to the page, see "medium-sized" and replace it with "large-sized". Or I could do the opposite. Information posted on Wikipedia is only valid when it can be verified using other sources, such as the breed standards posted further up in this thread. Of course, those all say "medium-sized".


----------



## Liesje

Yep, Chris, I already fixed it. It should read "medium" since the source that was already quoted there states "medium".


----------



## AbbyK9

> Does this describe a GSD anymore? Should _"are bred to be very intelligent and willing to please"_ really come after "Instead"?


IMHO in good German Shepherd breeding, there is no need for the word "instead" at all. A well-rounded German Shepherd should be intelligent, willing to please, easily trainable, and possess natural working instincts and working drives. A good Shepherd should be all of the above, not just parts of it.


----------



## AbbyK9

> Yep, Chris, I already fixed it. It should read "medium" since the source that was already quoted there states "medium".


You must have posted your message while I was writing mine. Mine was in response to LaRen.


----------



## Samba

Yes, it is disingenuous to me also. A high drive dog can be very intelligent and amazingly biddable. They can also be appropriately "low drive" when in the house and all is relaxed. I have one at my feet right now. The dog is ridiculously responsive to the appropriate energy to display. 

This is what I am saying... often I read these ads that seem to say these supersized large dogs have something in temperament and biddability that say a PPD dog wouldn't have. It just isn't so. They don't have a corner on desirable temperament traits like this. But they actually are quite genuine when they emphaSIZE the size because they can claim that.

Stephanitz mentioned that the temperament of the GSD, the home protection dog and the police dog were the same. Forward ability to challenge and bring a fight when necessary was valued in the breed. Protection work or schutzhund work really isn't more than than displaying these characteristics which should be genetically in the dog as a German Shepherd.

Now, that is not to say some of these dogs, regardless of size don't possess such characteristics. I would applaud it over and above size! I just don't see many examples of this type of make up in the dogs, in fact they seem to claim "anti" shepherd properties sometimes.


----------



## Samba

Wikipedia? The open site with the disclaimer as to the veracity of its content vs the FCI standard??


----------



## LaRen616

Hunch.com

*"The German Shepherd Dog (GSD), (German: Deutscher Sch√§ferhund) is a breed of large-sized dog that originates from Germany."* 

They are under the large breed directory on Largedogbreedz.com

Dog-breeds.net has them listed under large dog breeds

Justdogbreeds.com has them listed under large dog breeds

Bigpawsonly.com has them listed under large dog breeds

Petplace.com has them listed under large breed dogs

Hmmmmmm


----------



## onyx'girl

Any site can put up any information...the wonders and detriment of the internet.


----------



## Samba

Some interesting internet sites trump the world standard,sure. People can call them what they like, the size is in inches, or centimeters for most of the world.


----------



## Liesje

LOL I've never heard of any of those sites or what they have to do with German Shepherds....


----------



## crs996

LaRen616 said:


> Hunch.com
> 
> *"The German Shepherd Dog (GSD), (German: Deutscher Sch√§ferhund) is a breed of large-sized dog that originates from Germany."*
> 
> They are under the large breed directory on Largedogbreedz.com
> 
> Dog-breeds.net has them listed under large dog breeds
> 
> Justdogbreeds.com has them listed under large dog breeds
> 
> Bigpawsonly.com has them listed under large dog breeds
> 
> Petplace.com has them listed under large breed dogs
> 
> Hmmmmmm


I think these sites over simplistically lump dogs into easy to grasp size categories for John and Jane Doe. They often classify dogs like a St. Bernard as "Giant". I doubt you would find the word Giant in their official breed standard.


----------



## LaRen616

I think the websites said the breed most top 25' inches and 50 pounds to be considered a large breed dog


----------



## FredD

Even this site


----------



## holland

Yep...


----------



## Samba

Unfortunately, many of these dogs don't even fall within the large breed arena if one wants to claim that designation for the GSD. They have moved to the size range of the giant breed. I can't find the GSD referred to as a giant breed. 

Here is an internet site, not a scholarly or definitive work. It places the GSD in large-medium category. The sizes of their giant breeds are congruent with the sizes of many advertised OF GSDs:

Dog Breeds Size Chart 

Is the GSD a giant breed? We can talk about whether gross teminology should be this or that, the size ranges remain the same. The large and oversized GSDs don't even fall in a reasonable large breed category. 

Whatever you call 25-26 inches top... medium or large... that's kinda the deal with a bit of leeway as reasonably allowed by the standard.

In the most widely utilized standard for breeding it is described as medium and the centimeters that comprise that medium are defined.


----------



## Chris Wild

This is gotten to be a very silly argument. The standard size is hardly open to interpretation as the standard lists it in actual *measurements*. What the heck does it matter if an individual person's opinion considers that size to be medium or large or anything else???


----------



## Samba

It was so funny my coffee got cold though!


----------



## Doc

Mrs.K said:


> Can somebody tell me what is so old-fashioned about superlarge and oversized German Shepherds?
> 
> *Link removed by Admin*


Did we get this question answered? I think we all understand the difference between "superlarge" and oversized dogs as far as height and weight? From a breeding standpoint there are at least two breeders in here that admit to breeding German shepherds out side of the standard and would/will breed the same dogs that produced "out of the standard" sized pups again. I think this shows that some dogs that are bigger than the standard still exhibit the characteristics wanted in a German shepherd.

Are all "old-fashioned" German shepherds catagorized based solely on size or does it include more than just being larger than the standard?

A German shepherd dog is a German shepherd dog first and foremost - some just happen to be "over the standard in height and weight" while others are extremely "supersized" - two very physically different dogs.

I have not come across any comparisons on the health, biddability, work ethic, show ring savy of larger German shepherds (not supersized) when compared to dogs that fall within the Standard. To associate size with the above mentioned traits is a leap. Even Standard German shepherds can suffer the same disorders, it's not just associated with large dogs.

There are much more serious issues facing the German shepherd dog than if it is within the Standard as far as height and weight is concerned. What we should focus our efforts on are the numerous health issues that afflict this breed regardless of the height and weight of a dog. We all have to pick our battles - the debate between how tall and how much a dog should weigh will never end. And in the meantime, the breed suffers from EPI, SIBO, allergies, poor hearts, mega, cancers and the list goes on and on.


----------



## Liesje

To me, the "old fashioned" dogs seem to have a range of sizes and colors/patterns, look to have a shorter tighter coat and far less angulation, sometimes more square in proportion, many seem to have finer bone and less depth to the chest. I see lots of the bumps behind the withers or a curve inward on the back, rather than perfectly smooth toplines that are straight or rounded of today's dogs (but who knows how many of these are photoshopped!) so it seems less emphasis on topline as a whole.

Health....I am interested in this, mainly how do we even compare? Was EPI, SIBO, bad allergies, Mega-E diagnosed 60+ years ago? It seems even now many of these major problems are complicated to diagnose and treat.


----------



## Samba

Health issues might constitute another thread and topic.

I wonder how my neighbors up on Nifong are coming along with this database:

Canine Health Information Center


----------



## FredD

Chris Wild said:


> This is gotten to be a very silly argument. The standard size is hardly open to interpretation as the standard lists it in actual *measurements*. What the heck does it matter if an individual person's opinion considers that size to be medium or large or anything else???


 Your 100% right. Have a nice day.....


----------



## Samba

DM Genetic Testing

OFA: DNA Test Statistics

What would be a breeders consideration upon test results?


----------



## Doc

Leis
I have had this questions for many many years. It may have well been around 60 years ago and no one knew exactly what it was called. Through conversations with other working line DDR and East German breeders, vets, and vet techs, many of the SIBO, EPI, allergies are not as pervasive in these lines as other lines. I can't say they are not in the "old lines" or DDR/East lines but they do not show up as often - according to those I have talked with. From experience, again with my line, I haven't seen SIBO, EPI, or allergies. I would hope if any of the pups I have produced was diagnosed with these, the owner would contact me. They aren't shy about telling me everytime their dog has the runs! LOL

So I think you ask a good question. I can only answer it from my experience and conversations.


----------



## Melissa

Liesje said:


> There's always going to be dogs with health/structural problems in any line, so I'm not sure what "style" you are referring to, other than implying that anyone who breeds anything other than a gigantic "straight back" (what does that mean anyway?) dog is cruel. No more cruel than packing 30 extra pounds on a dog to market it as "oversize and heavy boned".
> 
> Here is my dog last night
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can assure you he has NO trouble getting around


im talking about to the extream this dog was struggling to keep itself up its legs and thighs were so weak it was shaking and at some points was walking on is hocks!! thats how angulated this poor dogs back was..
this wouldnt be happening if people didnt change the breed standard to suit the perfect "show dog" they know what they judges want and are breeding to it and its wrong.

i have been in and around the ring for years and seeing this sickened me, back years ago these extremities were not around both in straight back and angulated back dogs.

i am not saying that straight back dogs which are way over breed standard are correct. but i am deffinately saying that changing the breed into what its scarily becoming isnt that it should be either.


i may actually go back to this club tomorrow and get some photos for you and see if you agree


----------



## Xeph

> thats how angulated this poor dogs back was..


I'm sorry, but it bothers me a LOT when people say this. A dog's back cannot be angulated. It is not physically possible. It is the hindquarter that holds the angles, and it sounds to me like the dog was both overangulated and loosely ligamented.

Every GSD should have a straight back, but not all of them have backs parallel to the floor. Straight and parallel are two different things.


----------



## Samba

Usually the rear angulation results in a sloping topline starting at higher withers, but the back should still be "straight" as you say.

We have to admit to seeing dogs with an angle in their back though. That is a different thing.

I am not for extremity myself. I don't enjoy an extremely angulated dog with crossing wobbly hocks or extremely over sized dogs either. Extremity does not serve a working breed except extreme desire to perform one's tasks.

I just saw a GSD who was reported to be 170 lbs. I am amazed in an odd way.


----------



## Lin

The majority of so called "straight backed" GSDs I've seen have actually been sway backed...


----------



## mjbgsd

> Will the trend change overnight? of course not. is there a chance of turning the tides? hopefully. But the only way to do that is by education. I'm not saying spend $20K to campaign a working line dog to BIS at Westminster. But maybe we can make a difference a little at a time. If nothing else, by letting the world see that there ARE other dogs out there.


And this is why I had Akbar shown in January because I wanted other people to see him. He's moderately angulated and was placed 2nd in his puppy class, not the best but not bad at all either. The only way to change a judge's view is to start showing more moderate angled dogs, get them german dogs out there! 
Akbar, pictured at 6 months


----------



## LaRen616

*He's handsome! :wub:*


----------



## Mrs.K

mjbgsd said:


> And this is why I had Akbar shown in January because I wanted other people to see him. He's moderately angulated and was placed 2nd in his puppy class, not the best but not bad at all either. The only way to change a judge's view is to start showing more moderate angled dogs, get them german dogs out there!
> Akbar, pictured at 6 months


I love him. 

I wonder if I can show Yukon and Zenzy, even though Yukon is missing half an ear and Zenzy mising half her nose.



















With him it was an accident and she had an infection as a puppy. It's not like it is caused genetically.


----------



## Samba

Lin said:


> The majority of so called "straight backed" GSDs I've seen have actually been sway backed...


I noticed that also. When there is exclamation as to a straight back it is too often a disconcerting sway back.


As far as missing parts and showing, I don't know all venues, but I have seen dogs with parts of ears missing and toes missing due to accident show quite well.


----------



## FredD

Very nice!


----------



## Mrs.K

The only thing I find weird is the way you have to hold them. You know, the collar is so high in the neck that it looks weird to me. Never seen that over here.


----------



## Samba

Yes, that is an all breed show. The rings are small and often the dogs are kind of held up that way. Some all breed shows the rings are a bit bigger and I have seen the shepherds get out ahead of the handlers a wee bit.

A German Shepherd specialty show is different. It is a large ring and the dogs are out front gaiting on the end of leads.


----------



## crs996

mjbgsd said:


> And this is why I had Akbar shown in January because I wanted other people to see him. He's moderately angulated and was placed 2nd in his puppy class, not the best but not bad at all either. The only way to change a judge's view is to start showing more moderate angled dogs, get them german dogs out there!
> Akbar, pictured at 6 months


Good for you!!! I really applaud someone taking a beautiful dog like that (a sable even!) to a show. The judges must have been scrambling.. lol
If I saw a dog like that at an AKC show I would stand and applaud.


----------



## onyx'girl

I think the working lines need to represent more in the ring...but most WL owners find it too boring to hang out all day in such a venue, at least I did when I showed Karlo. I am too ADD to wait around like that! At least when doing sportwork, the observing is much more entertaining! And most WL people get their dogs for sport activities.

I hope Akbar goes far in the conformation phase! The judges probably find the WL's as a breath of fresh air, even though they wouldn't admit it...


----------



## Samba

I'll show mine! Too bad we can't all get together and slam a show with the entries. That would be fun.


----------



## Raziel

My dog is about 27 1/2 inches.
His parents & grandparents are from Germany.
I dont think anything is wrong with him at all!!!
A few ppl on this forum have called him "OVERSIZED".
I think he looks better than almost ALL of of the "american" bred shepherds I have seen in my town.( Badly tempered dogs as far as I have seen.)
No offence to anyone of course.
But he is vibrant, alert, friendly, protective, kind, affectionate, and VERY intelligent.
I think it has more to do with HOW they are raised.
But certain dogs will always be a bit skiddish & its up to the owners to notice when their dog is uncomfortable in a situation.
To me, who cares how big your dog is? As long as you love him & he loves you!!!
Nobody is perfect & neither are dogs!!!

AND i forgot to add EVERYONE thinks their dog is perfect! So im not trying to brag or anything lol
LOL. Im done.


----------



## Miikkas mom

*I’ve been following this thread for a few days now. I’m not a breeder and don’t ever intend on becoming a breeder. If I understand this thread correctly, there appears to be a discussion on whether it is acceptable to breed GSD’s larger than the “norm”. *

*This is probably going to sound like a stupid comment :blush: but here goes (keep in mind, I am not a breeder and know NOTHING about the craft)….*

*Are there really ANY “purebred dogs”? For example, let's take the German shepherd; I know it was several decades ago but wasn’t the “original” GSD a mix of several different types of dogs? Then, the guy that first created the GSD, fine-tuned the dog to what we have today, pretty much anyway. It probably took him a long time, to get the dog he wanted. I’m willing to bet that when he first started out creating his new dog there were a lot of naysayers too….bad for the other breeds involved, fooling around with dna, or genetics, blah, blah, blah.*

*I’m not for or against breeding dogs for particular outcomes, as I dont know enough about breeding to have much of an opinion. Who’s to say that 50 years from now the larger GSD won’t be the number one dog in the world? I DO know that I am very thankful to the person that first decided to “create” a GSD, because if it was not for him I would not have my beautiful little girl, Miikka.*

*One more comment; I just read an article that ALL dogs can be traced to 3 breeds (plus wolf), the Chow Chow, the Shar pai (spelling) and one other, I can’t remember. So maybe those 3 breeds are the ONLY true purebreds. *


----------



## Xeph

This is a misconception. If a dog breeds true to it's type, it is a purebred. The argument that all dogs are/were mixed breeds just doesn't hold a lot of water. And that is a myth about those three breeds, as there are breeds much older than the Chow and Shar Pei


----------



## Mrs.K

Samba said:


> I'll show mine! Too bad we can't all get together and slam a show with the entries. That would be fun.


Who says, we couldn't?

We would just have to get organized and see who is in the region and who would be willed to travel that way. 
Or we will create our own show and send pictures and articles to dog magazines.


----------



## holland

Umm if you are really in Germany that might prove to be a little difficult


----------



## RubyTuesday

Lies, some older books analyzed specific dogs & provided detailed commentary regarding health, temperament & conformation issues seen in the offspring. Some were known to throw digestive problems. Even without a medical diagnosis, such dogs should have been bred with particular care, if at all. Unfortunately breeding became all about winning for the sake of winning regardless of the cost to the dogs themselves. *sigh*A breeder who's extraordinarily careful about all the wrong things will reap only grief.

Doc, you've said it well. I wish GS breeders could 'agree to disagree', find common ground & unite to solve the health problems undermining the breed. Additionally, breeders, pet owners & their beloved animals are increasingly under attack by toxic extremist AR groups. IF they succeed, the size of the GS (or any dog) will be moot. BS legislation, speuter laws & increasing controls on breeders indicates their agenda is succeeding. 10-20yrs ago they were advancing by mm, then inches. Lately they seem poised to surge ahead on several fronts.

Chris, I agree that the discussion was getting silly. But as an admin surely that beats flatout nasty...BTW, I'm still curious to know who made the inflammatory statements about SchH dogs. I prefer my big guys (obviously), but preferring *my* kinda GS doesn't preclude admiring other GS. My preference for large GS is only one trait I'm interested in & it's far from the most important.

Jane, I doubt most conformation judges consider WL a breath of fresh air. The general public probably does, but judges have been instrumental in getting SL where they are. I can't fathom why so many SL prefer extreme angulation or banana backs, but these GS apparently appeal to many SL people in their respective countries. (Will we eventually improve the breed to give us a dog that has it all, ie both the angulation & a banana back??? I've seen some German SL that appear to be headed in that direction. Can the USA be far behind???)


----------



## AbbyK9

> this wouldnt be happening if people didnt change the breed standard to suit the perfect "show dog" they know what they judges want and are breeding to it and its wrong.


Just to point out - the breed STANDARD has not changed. 

I don't think for a minute, that what goes into the show ring at the big shows, specifically in AKC shows in the US, represents the breed adequately. Just like the breeders specifically producing giant dogs to meet the demand for the masses, there are show line breeders who are producing dogs just for show and ability and temperament come secondary. That's where those roach-backed German showline dogs and those over-angulated American showline dogs are coming from.

There are happy mediums, of course. There certainly are well-bred showline dogs that have great temperament and working ability. I think Liesje's Nikon is a good example of a dog that hasn't been bred "for show only".


----------



## Liesje

RubyTuesday said:


> Lies, some older books analyzed specific dogs & provided detailed commentary regarding health, temperament & conformation issues seen in the offspring. Some were known to throw digestive problems. Even without a medical diagnosis, such dogs should have been bred with particular care, if at all. Unfortunately breeding became all about winning for the sake of winning regardless of the cost to the dogs themselves. *sigh*A breeder who's extraordinarily careful about all the wrong things will reap only grief.


And I think the point that several people have made is that health is not the ONLY priority when it comes to breeding, at least not for many breeders. I personally would rather have a dog with hip dysplasia than one with a poor temperament. I really don't see anything in your statement that conflicts with how good breeders are still breeding. Yes, there are breeders who breed unhealthy dogs that are known to throw unhealthy dogs, but that doesn't give us the right to make blanket assumptions that show line people only care about shows or working line people only care about Schutzhund. Your statement about breeding for the sake of winning may not even apply to the majority of the breeders, maybe only the large commercial kennels that earn the most show success and PR, but they do not represent me or my dogs or you or your dogs.



> Jane, I doubt most conformation judges consider WL a breath of fresh air. The general public probably does, but judges have been instrumental in getting SL where they are.


This statement is too broad. In the UKC, working line dogs routinely champion and win. I personally have had a judge approach me about a working line dog (Jane's dog) and tell me that there's no reason why the dog would not do well in shows as long as the dog and handler had more training. When I took Kenya out for the altered class, the Best in Show judge said it was a shame she was altered. My German line dog has beat an American Line dog in the AKC ring. I've seen a white Shepherd win Best in Show at the largest, most prestigious UKC show of the year. Last year, a working line dog beat out several well known German show line dogs for a high V-rating. There are countless working line dogs with V or high SG ratings and KKL1.

All of this is just assumptions and speculation until you (not you personally, but a general you) put your dogs out there and see what happens.


----------



## Samba

I just don't see working line breeders in general breeding unhealthy dogs for a winning sport dog. It is probably happening somewhere, but I would say not generally. If you are supplying dogs to work and if you have that kind of approach to the dogs you well know how important health and longevity is to the breed. Working line breeders I know have pulled dogs out of the breeding pool because of genes they carry that I was shocked they would be so conservative. I just have not found these prolific "sport" breeders pumping out unhealthy sport dogs. There isn't even a demand for the type.

The show ring, I have seen more compromise in the health arena as far as breeding choices. In order to show there is not as much requirement for health and longevity . This is another reason the working aspect of the breed is so important to preserving its health. It is not all breeders though. Some have very careful strategies and put the dogs above the venue. 

In this breed, it is true, that to eliminate completely all undesirable genetics would be very difficult to do and retain important characteristics. Genetic testing is making great strides and someday we may be able to test for a plethora of genes, maybe even some responsible for temperament traits. Even then, we may not be able to simply toss the carriers out of the pool. It will be interesting to see what develops.

In the end, it is the individual breeder who makes all the difference. Participating in a venue does not make one a compromised breeder any more than non-participation makes someone a conscientious one. Truly well rounded breeding is very difficult and those who do not have the need to produce so many balanced characteristics may have the luxury the breeders going for the well-rounded dog do not have.


----------



## Chris Wild

RubyTuesday said:


> Chris, I agree that the discussion was getting silly. But as an admin surely that beats flatout nasty...BTW, I'm still curious to know who made the inflammatory statements about SchH dogs.


Much of it is from discussions on the same or similar topics in the past, claiming that working lines or "SchH dogs" can't be pets, etc.... And it is very often touted on the websites of those breeding the "old fashioned" and "pet line" type dogs. Sometimes they outright state it, but almost always there is some reference to something along the lines of "our dogs don't do SchH/bite people/attack" or "our dogs aren't crazy and high drive" but "unlike those dogs they make great pets". The implications there being obvious; that working lines/SchH dogs are crazy, unsuited to family life, etc...

But some specific examples from this thread (and I can't believe I just wasted a half hour of my life reading through 30+ pages to pull them out):

That GSDs can no longer work (with the implication that attempts to preserve such by those who focus on it are futile), and completely ignoring 2 key facts. One, that many organizations still do consider the GSD as the breed of choice. Two, that there are many, many reasons that have caused some organizations to move away from the GSD that have absolutely nothing to do with GSD working ability. The comments about Mals in military work, which are not entirely true, and comparing the GSD to a Mal, for anyone who knows squat about Mals, indicates GSDs aren't crazy enough.




Doc said:


> Some one explain this to me. Why are there so few German shepherds being used as "seeing eye dogs" when they were the breed that started the whole movement? Why are german shepherds being replaced daily as dog of choice for police work when at one point, German shepherds were called German Police Dogs?





KayElle said:


> Doc is right that GSDs are not used as much in police work. The ULTIMATE police work is the US military---they now breed their own Belgian Malinois at Lackland AFB in San Antonio, Texas. So much for the superiority of those "titled" "sporting" "working" line GSDs. They are no longer used by our military!


The granny, cat, kids, etc... comments that imply these things are lacking elsewhere, that "elsewhere" being in the context of this discussion, past discussions, and what I read previously on a certain website, being working/SchH/whatever lines can't do those things. 

Also stating that "SchH breeders" don't care about health or temperament, which is complete BS.





Doc said:


> Perhaps size is mentioned first because that is what is always asked for by the buyer? Maybe a great deal of potential and current German shepherd owners don't place a high value on the dogs "working ability" - however you define it. Maybe they want a "big" German shepherd that is "good" around the house; will alert when something isn't normal; whose rear end isn't "messed up and dragging the floor"; that they can trust not to knock down Granny and bite her; and be good around cats and small children. Different people prioritize their wants differently. Different breeders select different segments of the population to sell to. Is it marketing? Perhaps. But don't try to convince me that SchH. breeders and showline breeders aren't doing the same in their marketing efforts - they flash ribbions and titles around but rarely mention health and temperament. When was the last time you saw a breeder of SchH. or showlines list SIBO and/or EPI as a common illness that runs through their lines?


And the accusation that "SchH breeders" are the ones (and apparently the only ones) who obsess about size. Something completely untrue, and you don't have to take my word for it just look at the dogs and lines those folks have and you will see far more variance in size than in any other subset of the breed and any other competition venue.



RubyTuesday said:


> IMO, it's sport enthusiasts(esp SchH) who are obsessed with size & seemed determined to convince all of us what we oughta like, seek, breed.


----------



## Doc

AbbyK9 said:


> Just to point out - the breed STANDARD has not changed.
> 
> I don't think for a minute, that what goes into the show ring at the big shows, specifically in AKC shows in the US, represents the breed adequately. Just like the breeders specifically producing giant dogs to meet the demand for the masses, there are show line breeders who are producing dogs just for show and ability and temperament come secondary. That's where those roach-backed German showline dogs and those over-angulated American showline dogs are coming from.
> 
> There are happy mediums, of course. There certainly are well-bred showline dogs that have great temperament and working ability. I think Liesje's Nikon is a good example of a dog that hasn't been bred "for show only".


*The breed Standard has not changed?* Are you positive?


----------



## Samba

I just read another OF site denigrating show dogs and something they call "sport" dogs as the reason to buy the dogs on their site. Even mentioned poor treatment of these other types of dogs. It is almost as if the dogs are not sold on their own merit but advertising is focused on other lines often.

Fascinating to me as the intent seems to be to try to point out extremes in other breedings and then they also exclaim their own extremity of size of their own as a selling point. 

If I were to begin concentrating on my mini shepherd apartment dog line, then I could forgo concern for working character, hardness, scenting ability, balanced drives etc. I could say my dogs were not for show or protection activities or man trailing, etc. They would be mild mannered small living space appropriate guys. Now, I could surely get to some health in these as there are now so many genetic traits I can ignore having to keep in balance. 

Then I could advertise their health and mild manners. I could probably get some folks to support me and my personal "vision" even. I would treat them very well and be able to be called a careful breeder. 

Somehow such a scenario just does not ring right to me. I am not sure why this is, but while I eschew many extremities in currents breedings it just seems like I would be like Don Quixote out there on my own vision quest. Why not spend time breeding appropriate dogs more consistent with the German Shepherd breed ? One could do this and avoid extremes even today.


----------



## Doc

The granny, cat, kids, etc... comments that imply these things are lacking elsewhere, that "elsewhere" being in the context of this discussion, past discussions, and what I read previously on a certain website, being working/SchH/whatever lines can't do those things. 

Also stating that "SchH breeders" don't care about health or temperament, which is complete BS.

I have never stated that working line breeders do not care about health and temperament. I read a ton of information about its "full, hard grip" and "ability to hit the sleeve hard and not let go" more often than any health and temperament description. Or terms such as they "have an off switch; they are civil; they have the "right" temperament;" all of which could mean a hundred different things to 100 people.

Those comments about granny, cats, and kids were overheard from a family with small children after they watched "working police German shepherds" in a demonstration. 

One's perception is one's reality.


----------



## Samba

I am sure the written standard has had revisions over the decades. Non-FCI countries have their own versions of a standard also.


----------



## Doc

I think I will show my dogs again. Of course they will be entered in the "mutant" category. Or perhaps a new breed - The Large Welsh Corgie breed. Surely i will have award winning dogs since I seem to be the only one that has this rare breed! BIS and BOB on the same dog - totally awesome. I'm in there.


----------



## Samba

I read on one service animal site:

"CCI is moving away from using German Shepherds for two reasons: first, a lot of the public view (and fear) German Shepherds as "police" or "guard" dogs, and second, German Shepherds bond very strongly to people and the program is difficult on them because first they form a strong bond to their puppy raiser, then to their trainer when they go back to CCI, and then to their eventual handicapped owner." 

Service Dogs

Neither of these reasons bespeaks a failure on the part of breeders or lines to me. Perhaps the opposite in fact.


----------



## Jessiewessie99

I think if the dogs is healthy, in shape, well-behaved, and well trained, has good lucks. then thats ok. The sloping of the backs can get kinda ugly though.


----------



## robinhuerta

Why is it that the breeders, whom choose to compete with their dogs either in Conformation or in Schutzhund....are commented on as "only wanting medals & titles" to be able to sell puppies and caring less about health..etc...???
But for the breeders that are "breeding" for "loving family companions"...(the red carpet!?)
For those whom do not put in the time, blood, sweat, $$$ & tears it takes to accomplish these things...how can you even assume such a thing?..WHY would any breeder or owner invest so much of their lives to it...and breed/compete un-healthy animals??? on purpose, no less??!... It does not make any sense to me.
Reputation is everything, and it's extremely hard to maintain a respectable one in this business.
Maybe someone can elaborate for me...?


----------



## Doc

robinhuerta said:


> Why is it that the breeders, whom choose to compete with their dogs either in Conformation or in Schutzhund....are commented on as "only wanting medals & titles" to be able to sell puppies and caring less about health..etc...???
> But for the breeders that are "breeding" for "loving family companions"...(the red carpet!?)
> For those whom do not put in the time, blood, sweat, $$$ & tears it takes to accomplish these things...how can you even assume such a thing?..WHY would any breeder or owner invest so much of their lives to it...and breed/compete un-healthy animals??? on purpose, no less??!... It does not make any sense to me.
> Reputation is everything, and it's extremely hard to maintain a respectable one in this business.
> Maybe someone can elaborate for me...?


Well somebody is breeding crap dogs. Why have the incidents of SIBO, EPI, allergies, wonky nerves etc. skyrocketed over the past 30 years - particularly in show lines? Are you going to blame it on line breeding? Are you going to blame on the environment? Are you going to blame the breeder who knows full well his/her Champion produces poor quality dogs but breeds them because they are "Champions"? There's a sucker born every day. And now since everyone is a breeder, the ones who have spent there money, blood, and their life with the breed are all shysters.


----------



## Samba

Yes, Doc, I too think someone or two is breeding such. I have seen breeders of long standing years and investment breed....

but, I ain't namin' names.


----------



## Doc

I ain't naming no one nuttin. Just da facts.


----------



## Mrs.K

And because of one bad apple everybody is like that? I've said it before and I will say it again. There are lots of reputable working dog breeders out there that care about health, socialization, education, training and put a lot of effort into the dogs. 

You can put these working dogs into any situation, use them as SAR, military working dog, police working dog, service dog, schutzhund, agility, obedience... you name it. 

These dogs are still out there.


----------



## robinhuerta

Ya know Doc.......you are the first person to continually degrade "breeders" other than yourself. You seem to put yourself on quite a high pedestal above "most of us". You condemn those that are successful, and that their achievements mean nothing....but then...you feel as though...your achievements are solid. 
This thread started because of opinions on breeding "specifically for over-sized, old fashioned looking"?? GSD......and a nerve must have been hit.
Because once people (including myself) defended, breeding to the official "standard" of the GSD (including all aspects of it).....you have done nothing but try to "trash" accomplishments of other breeders, and belittling achievements of most all, whom do not agree with your personal breeding theories or practices. You continue to accuse many of creating the "health issues" of this breed..? How does being successful in any "venue", create that? So...if more choose "not" to accomplish anything, and breed specifically to promote solely "family companion dogs"....this breed's health issues start to amend itself.??
The health issues in this breed have become what they are "today", because many breeders hadn't thought enough about them "yesterday"....and some will think even less "tomorrow". 
People that continue to promote this breed for everything it was supposed to be....are not the people that are creating it's demise.
It's sad, how you continue to "direct" digs to some of us....but become agitated when someone disagrees with you.
I guess, I'll choose to "ruin" the breed my way......and you can choose to "ruin" it your-way.


----------



## Jessiewessie99

robinhuerta said:


> Ya know Doc.......you are the first person to continually degrade "breeders" other than yourself. You seem to put yourself on quite a high pedestal above "most of us". You condemn those that are successful, and that their achievements mean nothing....but then...you feel as though...your achievements are solid.
> This thread started because of opinions on breeding "specifically for over-sized, old fashioned looking"?? GSD......and a nerve must have been hit.
> Because once people (including myself) defended, breeding to the official "standard" of the GSD (including all aspects of it).....you have done nothing but try to "trash" accomplishments of other breeders, and belittling achievements of most all, whom do not agree with your personal breeding theories or practices. You continue to accuse many of creating the "health issues" of this breed..? How does being successful in any "venue", create that? So...if more choose "not" to accomplish anything, and breed specifically to promote solely "family companion dogs"....this breed's health issues start to amend itself.??
> The health issues in this breed have become what they are "today", because many breeders hadn't thought enough about them "yesterday"....and some will think even less "tomorrow".
> People that continue to promote this breed for everything it was supposed to be....are not the people that are creating it's demise.
> It's sad, how you continue to "direct" digs to some of us....but become agitated when someone disagrees with you.
> I guess, I'll choose to "ruin" the breed my way......and you can choose to "ruin" it your-way.


I don't know anything about breeding, but this seems the most logical thing in this thread.....as of now.


----------



## GSDElsa

Gawd, threads like this irritate me more and more every time I read them.

If you want a 120 pound dog, then get a "giant" breed the is supposed to be bred that big.

Seriously. How many 120 pound GSDs are actually WORKING. I'm not talking just SchH. I'm talking herding. Agility. Tracking. SAR. You name it, you just don't see them (I'm sure sometimes, but NOT the majority by any means). Could it because these big boned, huge dogs just are not athletic and have more overall health problems due to added weight to their joints? 

GSD's were bred to be athletes that can do high impact activities and be quick on their feet. They were not bred to pull carts through the mountains.


----------



## crs996

GSDElsa said:


> Seriously. How many 120 pound GSDs are actually WORKING.


I guess they never really worked then, only the modern smaller GSD's do. After all, many of the "Old Fashioned" breeders are going for exactly this weight category, or bigger, and one even said that they breed GSD's "you remember as a child". I assume this means long, long ago, so maybe the working GSD is actually a modern invention.


----------



## Mrs.K

crs996 said:


> I guess they never really worked then, only the modern smaller GSD's do. After all, many of the "Old Fashioned" breeders are going for exactly this weight category, or bigger, and one even said that they breed GSD's "you remember as a child". I assume this means long, long ago, so maybe the working GSD is actually a modern invention.


I don't remember GSD's being that big when I was a child and my parents don't either. In fact there haven't been many dogs around when my parents were born because people ate them during WWII so they wouldn't starve to death. Nobody wants to talk about it though... 

However, the GSD I know was always a working dog and there are still professional Shepherds out there that is using the GSD instead of a Border Collie...


----------



## codmaster

Or maybe sombody's imagination?


----------



## Mrs.K

Think about it. For a five year old a GSD is HUGE. Maybe that is why some people remember the GSD to be so big because GSD's seem bigger than they are if you are just one head bigger than they are.


----------



## Samba

Well, it seems there is nothing new under the sun, as my mother always said.

von Stephanitz had his issues with people breeding oversize dogs and he was not in praise of the practice. He even noted its occurrence in those with a propensity to use it as a marketing tool.

"General breeding experience suggests that there is no danger of generating a generalized exceeding of breed accepted size limits by repeated use of these large dogs; this is especially because our breeders luckily seem to be less affected by the previous “need for size”. Even previously, this generally affected only those breeders that thought large product was more marketable, and even then oversize was generally only on paper (i.e. in the for sale classifieds)"

from this interesting article

Lothar Quoll Part 1 German Shepherd Dog Forum Ireland

You can see where some of these old lines had a propensity to largeness but you can also note that large then was not overly large at all. I am still looking for the gentle giants in these founding dogs....

While M v S may be spinning in his grave about many of the issues with the breed today, he can give a turn or two for the return of the desire for the ever bigger, incorrect but "marketable" dog. He thought this practice had been given up by the majority of breeders and that is still true. But for some.... it's baaaaack!


----------



## mjbgsd

crs996 said:


> Good for you!!! I really applaud someone taking a beautiful dog like that (a sable even!) to a show. The judges must have been scrambling.. lol
> If I saw a dog like that at an AKC show I would stand and applaud.


Showing is not my first priority as obedience, agility, and herding are but I will continue to have him shown in the future, I'm just going to wait until he has a more adult look to him as right now he looks funny, lol.
The funny thing was, so many exhibitors were like, "I want that color in our lines we never see such dark sables!!" It's funny how they mostly cared about his coloring and not his steller ability to walk on concrete and not slip all the time....lol


----------



## Doc

robinhuerta said:


> Ya know Doc.......you are the first person to continually degrade "breeders" other than yourself. You seem to put yourself on quite a high pedestal above "most of us". You condemn those that are successful, and that their achievements mean nothing....but then...you feel as though...your achievements are solid.
> This thread started because of opinions on breeding "specifically for over-sized, old fashioned looking"?? GSD......and a nerve must have been hit.
> Because once people (including myself) defended, breeding to the official "standard" of the GSD (including all aspects of it).....you have done nothing but try to "trash" accomplishments of other breeders, and belittling achievements of most all, whom do not agree with your personal breeding theories or practices. You continue to accuse many of creating the "health issues" of this breed..? How does being successful in any "venue", create that? So...if more choose "not" to accomplish anything, and breed specifically to promote solely "family companion dogs"....this breed's health issues start to amend itself.??
> The health issues in this breed have become what they are "today", because many breeders hadn't thought enough about them "yesterday"....and some will think even less "tomorrow".
> People that continue to promote this breed for everything it was supposed to be....are not the people that are creating it's demise.
> It's sad, how you continue to "direct" digs to some of us....but become agitated when someone disagrees with you.
> I guess, I'll choose to "ruin" the breed my way......and you can choose to "ruin" it your-way.



I have never endorsed 150 pound German shepherds, Shiloh/King Shepherds, or 30"+ dogs - never. Over sized, yes. Females between 75 and 90 pounds, males between 90 and 120 (if healthy, in shape, not fat) is over the Standard. Females that range from 24 to 26 inches and males from 26 to 28 are over the standard. Are these "giant" German shepherds? Perhaps in some peoples eyes they are. Dogs this size are not genetic "giants"; they are just "big" German shepherds that are outside of the Standard. They maintain all the mental and physical qualities of any other German shepherd dog.

I haven't trashed any breeders unless what I have said can apply to them. I don't make this crap up, the records are full of it. Poor nerves, missing teeth, poor genetics, yellow eye color, and the like have all been faults of Champions as far back as the 1930s and probably earlier. It's documented in several places by someone other than me. Read Willis' book. Yet even then these dogs were bred because they were "Champions" and passed along these issues. And it continues today. Did/do *all* breeders of German shepherds do this? I never said they did. If the shoe fits wear it.

Were the German shepherd dogs actually "bigger" when someone was a child? From a genetic standpoint, it would not be unheard of that there were "big" German shepherds around during one's childhood. But how big is big? It's anyone's guess. Words like "big", "large" "huge" are all relative terms with no assigned quantitative value - particularly when talking about one's childhood. 

There are no requirements that state that a German shepherd dog must be tested, titled, or shown in anything or event for it to be an acceptable representation of the breed. Some people place a value on titles and ribbons, others don't - that is a fact. 

Much like back in the beginning, someone must play the role as the devil's advocate - even in the German shepherd world - so we can constantly strive for the golden middle.


----------



## robinhuerta

Doc...you are wrong about "requirements" not being needed to test this breed....Max himself started the ball rolling when he introduced the "Conformation Shows" and created the "temperament" & "structural" standard set forth for the GSD......his followers then created the test of Schutzhund. Schutzhund was created to actually "test" the dog's worthiness of continuing the gene pool for breeding. It was "originally" created to "test" the instincts and temperaments of the GSD breed that Max created.
There were Breeding Surveys & Herding Tests that were also introduced for breed "worthiness".
The "tests" of today are NOT how they were originally designed, today they have become a Sport. But there is still requirements for breeding in Germany today.
Everyone likes to quote Max, and pick & choose "phrases" as they seem fit......but the truth is....he started/created the breed AND it's (so called tests).
You have no idea at what applies to anyone.....records of whose dogs?
Straw grasping at it's best.
Poor nerves, eye color, missing teeth etc etc....whose dogs?....
Breeders & owners that compete in "breed worthiness" tests would be hard pressed, to do well with dogs that exhibit such obvious faults.
I own & have read many books on this breed, but reading books is one thing...and living it is another........I've chosen the way of "practise what you preach".
You constantly throw the word Champion around....like the plague.
What Champions?...where are these Champions of the Schutzhund Sport that continue to cause the fall of the breed?....ruining it from within?
You speak like a bitter person who loves his/her dogs, but when confronted on their "beliefs in breeding" & contributions in keeping this breed strong.......you lash out with accusations & woes against others.
Big dogs....come on! There are many dogs that range in the 65cm to 68cm, that have done extremely well in both Schutzhund AND the Conformation ring. A wonderful dog of over-height or under-height, is just that.....a wonderful dog of over-height or under-height.
Most quality German judges would not "throw the baby out with the bath water."
But if these specimens were not a good representation of the breed in other factors.....*not breed worthy* would be their label. 
As for the "shoe fitting".....I'll try your shoe on the day you can wear some of ours...or even mine.
Your responses are becoming shallow.


----------



## onyx'girl

I would much rather support a breeder who is showing, working with their dogs than just breeding them. 
Anyone can purchase a "champion" "world class" and breed. 

Those that work to title and put the best possible match together to better the breed is where I would place my hard earned $. 
And those breeders would take that $ and put it back into working, showing, health testing and proving their program is sound. Knowing what they have produced because they don't have puppies going every which way so they cannot keep track of them. And those pups are probably being worked and titled too!

Yesterday I heard a quote on Dave Ramsey~
_A business makes money, otherwise it is a hobby._ 
I would rather support the hobby breeder who is breeding to better the breed and within the standard.


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN

Mrs.K said:


> Think about it. For a five year old a GSD is HUGE. Maybe that is why some people remember the GSD to be so big because GSD's seem bigger than they are if you are just one head bigger than they are.


YES. I love these pictures - early 70's, NY, NY. My grandma's neighbor, King. :wub: 

I thought he was GIANT:









Not so much!


----------



## Doc

Read the recorded history of the champions. Even the ones von Stephintz awarded. 

And show me where in this country, testing and showing your dog is required in order for a dog to be a German shepherd?? Where? Show me? Even all the German shepherds in 1900's were not shown nor tested - they were if they wanted titles but I'm sure the farmers were still breeding German shepherds without a review from the SV.

My knowledge is found in the written history of this breed - something you have obviously have not read or you wouldn't ask such questions. I don't make up the history - go read a book or two about the history and the past Champions of German shepherd dog, you might learn something. I can even point out a blue German shepherd that was awarded the Champion title.

You don't want to wear my shoes, your feet may get dirty.

I'm way past the bitter stage - if I ever had one, I'm basking in the twilight of my years.


----------



## robinhuerta

One learns from reading, *AND* doing......maybe YOU should try DOING.??
You obviously cannot "teach" me anything.....I prefer to be taught by those who have also obtained their knowledge "hands on" and through "trial and error".
Since you have not....?
Your response is exactly as anticipated......carry on.
I'll continue "doing" in this breed ( those useless breed worthiness things), and choose carefully my breeding dogs from them......and you can continue...whatever you do..?...and continue to make accusations about the dogs & practises we are all doing wrong.


----------



## GSDElsa

At this point, I would say the "burden of proof" lays on the fans of the "huge" GSD. If people think 120lb dogs can routinely be competitive and excel at agility, Schutzhund, SAR, and other GSD "jobs", then bring them out there and compete them. The great thing about sports like agility and jobs such as SAR is that talent trumps looks. 

I mean, really, just PROVE to people that these dogs are as athetic and versitile as those within the breed standard. 

I will say that the occasional 100lb male isn't so much the issue--it's those ones that start pushing 110, 120 lbs on a routine basis that are out of control. That people strive to that is a mystery to me. 

I did a home check a few weeks ago for a family that had GSDs. We walked into the house and were greeted my a monstrosity and we thought HAD to be a 13 year old--it was obviously difficult for the dog to get around. I commented on what a "big boy" he was. The owners proudly declared "he's 130 pounds. But he's nothing compared to his 'brother'. He's 140. Now THAT'S a dog." And we found out he was only 7. 

Come on! Show me how that dog could get around a sport course.


----------



## Samba

That breedworthiness proof s not required in this country is not necessarily a good thing. 

People are not at all required to breed dogs according to standard here. I can't think of anyway that this lax approach has been a real good idea.


----------



## GSDElsa

Samba said:


> That breedworthiness proof s not required in this country is not necessarily a good thing.
> 
> People are not at all required to breed dogs according to standard here. I can't think of anyway that this lax approach has been a real good idea.


 
Oh, I agree. But for the people who say the dogs who are outside the breed standard are JUST AS GOOD and SHOULD be included in the breed standard. Fine. Prove it to all of us.

No doubt that people will ALWAYS breed outside of the standard--for any trait. But for those that want to cry about their dog not being included because it's just as good as the others. Show us.


----------



## robinhuerta

I do not "trash talk" other breeders....not my personality. But I do have a problem with people who constantly belittle others.
People will always agree to disagree...it is the human way.
Facts will always lie in the "burden of proof" for any worthwhile belief.....and for many "issues" within this breed, ...it is proven.
We need to be more selective in breeding practises as a whole, and continue to strive to protect this breeds attributes.
Large dogs are not the only problem, there are many problems within this breed today..The problem lies when our goals are limited, and we breed for an extreme of any kind.....omitting the founding basics of the breed. (health, temperament & structure).
One can never "read enough" or even "do enough"...to be _ignorant_ in thinking that they need *not* do better......we *ALL* need to do better.


----------



## abby

It would be so much easier if there was no such thing as fad animals designer "dogs" such as teacup dogs and oversized large breeds, I could be wrong but weren't all dogs bred for a job and shouldn't they be able to still do that job? I agree with robinheurta health, temperament and structure! 
Oh i dont know could rant on but just seems to me that there a lot of people out there that want extremes and people that are willing to supply whatever the costs to the animal.


----------



## Samba

Yes, there are and have been so from the beginnings of the breed! After my research, I can say that their approach is truly old fashioned. Even in the founders lifetime such extremity breeding for money was a problem.


----------



## Vandal

Samba gets it right, it has always been this way and it probably always will be. However, showing and "competing:" has indeed led to problems and pretending it hasn't is just not honest. It was not to many years back,( two maybe), the German Show males were easily over 70 cms and being awarded Vs and VAs when the people in charge of the measurements got "creative". I have stood in the shadow of those dogs with my little working line dog......who was 63.5 cms. The dogs ahead of us were easily 3 to 4 inches taller at the wither but the judge didn't seem to notice. My male, ( who could never be mistaken for a female), was criticized for lack of secondary sex characteristics instead. lol. The conformation of the show line dogs is bordering on perverse. 
SchH competition is changing the breed for the worse as well. I am talking temperament here. 
As for health I actually think in some regards, it has improved while of course in others it is worse. I do hear more about stomach problems and it does make me wonder where that is coming from. It was said that some of the lines coming thru Canto had these issues. Working lines have him in their pedigrees as well and of course, you can't just blame one dog. It does seem that the American lines have separate issues concerning health, like Mega E and things of that nature. So, of course, it is related to bloodlines. That is a no brainer. You have to realize when you concentrate on producing dogs from certain lines you will have a higher chance of seeing these things. 
One last comment. IMO, the GSD has always had issues with their immune system. The problems we see most are usually auto-immune. I can't say it is any different than years ago. I saw dogs with health issues way back when and many of those dogs were from some of the very best bloodlines. Trying to say that health is related to showing or competing would be a stretch I think. It is about breeders ignoring it because they like something else about the dog, be it size or structure or even temperament. However, if you eliminated every bloodline that ever produced a problem, there would be no more GSDs. That's just the facts.

Lets get real here. There are problems and it is not being caused from one breeder who likes big dogs. Those people have always been there and they will always be here, unless of course, the AR groups have their way with all of us.


----------



## robinhuerta

Anne,
I can relate to your "size" issue within the German Show-line dogs.
My "best friend" is truly 65cm in height.....and when he was being shown and trialed (back in the day/ 7-10 yrs ago)...he looked smaller than many dogs in the ring.
He was smaller in size and *larger* in temperament! 
Being over-sized is not the most prolific fault.....it can be a "small" fault, if considered as a whole....you need to weigh your (checks & balances).
If ALL other attributes are there.....I wouldn't limit that specific breeding because of it.
Our breeds health issues have always been an issue.
German Show lines have gone to the extreme of angulation and lack of nerves.....the German Working lines have also gone to the extreme of insufficient structure and immense drives. 
However; in the past few years....I have seen a great deal of change being made on BOTH sides of the spectrum. Show dogs being made to prove themselves to a higher temperament standard....and Working line dogs, being bred with beautiful sound structure. It is happening because more people are "trying" to preserve the breed.
People...(breeders & owners alike) are requiring more from our dogs....and other breeders....at least, I would like to think so.


----------



## Vandal

Well, I have an issue with how LONG it took for people to see the problems. Now that things are about as bad as they can get, they think it's time to adjust. How they are chosing to adjust will , IMO, only make matters worse. 
Not only did people ignore the problems, they made excuses for them. I personally , have been commenting on the way things are for the last ten years. Am I some kind of a psychic? No, anyone who WANTED to see, would have been able to understand where things were heading. Plain and simple, people ignored all of it because their was fame and money to be made.

As for structure in the working lines, they are starting to look like the modern show line dog and THAT is not correct IMO. The drives are overriding the dog's ability to think as well . Also, the show dogs are far from fixed as far as temperament. I remember people claiming how much better things were about five years ago and it has continued to decline to a point that I personally find dangerous for all breeders. As I said in the "fat lady" thread, the looks and the temperament displayed at the Sieger Shows will be used by the AR groups to prove their point. It has already started with the UK documentary.
As for SchH, it has become about style and points and only last year did they talk about changing things back to the way it used to be. Well, it just might be too late. Dogs with the nerve strength to restore the working lines are becoming exceptionally hard to find. People who understand good nerves, ( or GSD temperament for that matter), are almost extinct. SchH people have allowed Malionois trainers to tell them how to train a GSD. PFFFFFFT. The lack of understanding about what a GSD was intended to be and how to work with those qualities is contributing to the further demise of the breed's temperament.

You have both sides now trying to combine two problems. How anyone thinks that is going to fix this mess is beyond me. Unfortunately, many people involved in both showing and SchH never saw GSDs with the right temperament. Now we have GSDs who resemble circus animals in the obedience portion and haven't an once of a protective instinct in protection. Show people who refuse to understand that the structure they promote is simply hideous. Sorry, that is my take and will remain the way I see things. The extremes continue and combining the two will only make things much worse.


----------



## Samba

Unfortunately, in the "knowing" part of me, I sense Anne is quite right. She is not the only one saying such though. Myself not around long enough to have seen what was as compared to what is. That situation will only become more common.

It may be too late. I wouldn't know. 

This morning I was just saying thank goodness I found this Catahoula dog. It is a fine thing to work with a breed still so close to its working roots without having suffered the vagaries of breeding influenced by show or sport competition. When I am around him, it really makes me think about what turns the German Shepherd breed has taken over the last few decades. 

It's the fat lady thing again. Have we come to the last verse?


----------



## GSD07

Vandal said:


> ... haven't an once of a protective instinct in protection.


 I think like a lot of people are afraid of the protective instinct and believe that this trait has to be exterminated. How often even on on this board it's labeled 'thyroid problem' or 'fear aggression' right away and instead of working with it everyone comes up with ideas how to suppress it. Being called 'Golden retriever of German shepherds' is taken as a compliment for a dog ...


----------



## Vandal

Yes, now the protective instinct has been added to the long list of health problems . lol. It's so sad it is amusing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jS45_8JFG_s

Here is a nice video of some modern show line dogs. I will be happy to embed it if someone would tell me how. These are all progeny of the 2007 German Sieger. 
Big or small, "old fashioned" looks better with each passing year. The title of the song playing is QUITE appropriate. "Fix You"....

BTW, for those in this thread confused about sloped backs etc. This video is an EXCELLENT example of what is causing it. Look at the rear leg on just about every dog in this video. The rear leg is much longer than most normal looking GSDs. The bottom of the stifle, ( curve in the rear leg), runs parallel to the ground for about 2 to 3 inches. It is not supposed to do that. That is a big contributor to the "slope" you are talking about but since that didn't seem to do enough for these breeders, we now have the rather significant drop off right in the middle of the back. 
This video I find to be exceptionally sad.


----------



## Samba

I couldn't get the video to open. Perhaps that's best.


----------



## Vandal

Try again? Oh, and not the Sieger...VA 2


----------



## mysablegsd

I don't know nothin 'bout nothin, but I can say of all the dogs I have been around, from WFT as a small child on up to the dogs we had when our boys were young and to now, the 3 GSDs we have had ALL had sensitive stomachs. Thank God none of the things I read about , but sensitive none the less.

Vandal, your posts are spot on in my opinion.


----------



## Samba

It is just as I suspected. The WGSL have selected for the longer femur bone resulting in a large bend of stifle and a femur that is parallel to the ground when stacked. They will now have the coveted transmission that the ASL have enjoyed for years. There is the particular and peculiar shape of the back that they can call all their own though.


----------



## LaRen616

Those poor dogs!! They look terrible. It looks like the next thing they are going to do is walk on their hind legs


----------



## JOSHUA SAMPSON

leisje - great pics i love the action shots!!


----------



## Doc

Vandal said:


> Well, I have an issue with how LONG it took for people to see the problems. Now that things are about as bad as they can get, they think it's time to adjust. How they are chosing to adjust will , IMO, only make matters worse.
> Not only did people ignore the problems, they made excuses for them. I personally , have been commenting on the way things are for the last ten years. Am I some kind of a psychic? No, anyone who WANTED to see, would have been able to understand where things were heading. Plain and simple, people ignored all of it because their was fame and money to be made.
> 
> As for structure in the working lines, they are starting to look like the modern show line dog and THAT is not correct IMO. The drives are overriding the dog's ability to think as well . Also, the show dogs are far from fixed as far as temperament. I remember people claiming how much better things were about five years ago and it has continued to decline to a point that I personally find dangerous for all breeders. As I said in the "fat lady" thread, the looks and the temperament displayed at the Sieger Shows will be used by the AR groups to prove their point. It has already started with the UK documentary.
> As for SchH, it has become about style and points and only last year did they talk about changing things back to the way it used to be. Well, it just might be too late. Dogs with the nerve strength to restore the working lines are becoming exceptionally hard to find. People who understand good nerves, ( or GSD temperament for that matter), are almost extinct. SchH people have allowed Malionois trainers to tell them how to train a GSD. PFFFFFFT. The lack of understanding about what a GSD was intended to be and how to work with those qualities is contributing to the further demise of the breed's temperament.
> 
> You have both sides now trying to combine two problems. How anyone thinks that is going to fix this mess is beyond me. Unfortunately, many people involved in both showing and SchH never saw GSDs with the right temperament. Now we have GSDs who resemble circus animals in the obedience portion and haven't an once of a protective instinct in protection. Show people who refuse to understand that the structure they promote is simply hideous. Sorry, that is my take and will remain the way I see things. The extremes continue and combining the two will only make things much worse.


:hug: Amen. It has been a very hard and long 30 years watching this decline. How much further can we go?


----------



## Samba

I believe the pendulum will swing far out before it comes back, if getting back is possible. Seems to be the way things go.


----------



## RubyTuesday

> Originally Posted by *Liesje*
> Health....I am interested in this, mainly how do we even compare? Was EPI, SIBO, bad allergies, Mega-E diagnosed 60+ years ago? It seems even now many of these major problems are complicated to diagnose and treat.





> Originally Posted by *RubyTuesday*
> Lies, some older books analyzed specific dogs & provided detailed commentary regarding health, temperament & conformation issues seen in the offspring. Some were known to throw digestive problems. Even without a medical diagnosis, such dogs should have been bred with particular care, if at all. Unfortunately breeding became all about winning for the sake of winning regardless of the cost to the dogs themselves. *sigh*A breeder who's extraordinarily careful about all the wrong things will reap only grief.





> Originally Posted by *Liesje*
> And I think the point that several people have made is that health is not the ONLY priority when it comes to breeding, at least not for many breeders. I personally would rather have a dog with hip dysplasia than one with a poor temperament. I really don't see anything in your statement that conflicts with how good breeders are still breeding. Yes, there are breeders who breed unhealthy dogs that are known to throw unhealthy dogs, but that doesn't give us the right to make blanket assumptions that show line people only care about shows or working line people only care about Schutzhund. Your statement about breeding for the sake of winning may not even apply to the majority of the breeders, maybe only the large commercial kennels that earn the most show success and PR, but they do not represent me or my dogs or you or your dogs.


My response to your post was to provide historic information that indicates digestive disorders have been present in the breed for many years. It wasn’t intended as an argument. Personally, when I speak of a ‘healthy’ dog I mean physically robust, constitutionally sound & mentally/emotionally strong & stable. I don’t consider a dog with a poor temperament to be ‘healthy’ although one could qualify the dog as physically healthy.

You are correct that the latter part of my statement was too general. I was speaking specifically of the AKC conformation circus. While I realize there are exceptionally good AKC show breeders, what I’ve seen suggests they’re overwhelmingly the exception to the rule. GS, IMO, are a notable example of this, but there are many other breeds it applies to as well.

I believe that breeders of all *types* of GS, whether SchH, companion, SL or WL, err here & there in their emphasis & focus, but far too many AKC show breeders undermine strength, ability & natural conformation in the quest to make (or match) the next *hot* thing.


----------



## cliffson1

Forty-one pages and I haven't said a peep!!! Woowee!! I did it for all my haters out there...LOL. 
The only thing I will say is that I agree with EVERYTHING that ANNE,(Vandal), said and I also concur with her assessment of the breed at this point....peace!


----------



## RubyTuesday

> Originally Posted by *robinhuerta*
> This thread started because of opinions on breeding "specifically for over-sized, old fashioned looking"?? GSD......


Actually, it was started to bash a specific breeder yet again, but the link to that breeder was (in accordance with board regs) removed this time. I like the breeders dogs & happily live with two of them. Despite that, I’ve never requested the threads bashing her be edited or removed. IMO, a decent breeder can stand the heat. She’s not perfect, but she has successfully bred healthy, sound, long lived GS with terrific temperaments for decades.

Hello, Cliff...I haven't gotten as far as that yet. I learn a great deal from Anne. Whether I agree with her or not, I always enjoy her posts, so that's something to look forward to. I still think you, Anne & Khawk should collaborate on a book. What if I promised to buy a hundred copies(or at least a dozen)???


----------



## RubyTuesday

> Originally Posted by *Chris Wild*
> Much of it is from discussions on the same or similar topics in the past, claiming that working lines or "SchH dogs" can't be pets, etc.... And it is very often touted on the websites of those breeding the "old fashioned" and "pet line" type dogs. Sometimes they outright state it, but almost always there is some reference to something along the lines of "our dogs don't do SchH/bite people/attack" or "our dogs aren't crazy and high drive" but "unlike those dogs they make great pets". The implications there being obvious; that working lines/SchH dogs are crazy, unsuited to family life, etc...
> 
> But some specific examples from this thread (and I can't believe I just wasted a half hour of my life reading through 30+ pages to pull them out):
> 
> That GSDs can no longer work (with the implication that attempts to preserve such by those who focus on it are futile), and completely ignoring 2 key facts. One, that many organizations still do consider the GSD as the breed of choice. Two, that there are many, many reasons that have caused some organizations to move away from the GSD that have absolutely nothing to do with GSD working ability. The comments about Mals in military work, which are not entirely true, and comparing the GSD to a Mal, for anyone who knows squat about Mals, indicates GSDs aren't crazy enough.


Chris, thanks for your response. IMO, you’re being more than a little unfair. You originally stated,
_According to various comments in this thread, the "SchH breeder":_
_Is obsessed with size and only wants small dogs._
_His dogs can't be family companions._
_His dogs aren't good with kids._
_His dogs will eat cats, small dogs, livestock or anything else that moves._
_His dogs will knock down Granny._

_One side claims these dogs are crazy nutjobs, can't live in the house, can't be companions, and are a danger to every living creature (especially kids, cats and Grannies)._

Only Doc made a statement here that could be construed as ‘anti SchH dog’ but he also stated here (& elsewhere) that he admires your dogs so I think it’s obvious that wasn’t his intent. Anti-SchH, anti-WL statements made on the board are usually made by new members woefully inexperienced with GS in general, & SchH or WL in particular. To prove a case with their statements is (IMO) making a weak case. Ditto using statements made on some breeders' web sites, some of which are inferences rather than outright remarks. There are numerous web sites for WL breeders which claim only their GS is the *true* GS & make ridiculous & erroneous remarks about companion lines, over sized GS or SL GS. In fact there are numerous erroneous remarks _in this thread_ that again raise the tired & inaccurate assumptions that oversized GS are unhealthy, short lived, especially prone to HD, can’t & don’t work. 

The view that SchH GS can’t work is surely a minority view. I don’t believe they’re the only GS capable of working. In some venues, they might not even be the best GS for the task, but I don’t think statements from 1 or 2 members indicate a general dissing of the SchH GS.



> Originally Posted by *Chris Wild*
> And the accusation that "SchH breeders" are the ones (and apparently the only ones) who obsess about size. Something completely untrue, and you don't have to take my word for it just look at the dogs and lines those folks have and you will see far more variance in size than in any other subset of the breed and any other competition venue.


IMO, clearly SchH (& to a lesser extent SL) enthusiasts, *are * obsessed with over sized GS. Also white GS & until very recently LC GS. I’ve yet to see any of the many members who _prefer_ oversized GS (or LC or WGS) starting threads to slam & spread misinformation on those GS they don’t prefer.

In this thread it seems that attitudes are softening just a bit, but is that genuinely the case, or have some heavily favored breeders thrown too many outsized pups for it to be otherwise?


----------



## Samba

I have not seen outsized dogs rejected out of hand by working dog folks. They are the first to accept variation in favor of work ethic. The show folks obviously don't mind an over sized dog as I think they may finally have been required to wicket as the dogs were getting so large. 

But I think this is a somewhat different thing than the type of grossly outsize breedings for generations for what appears very much a market niche.

Of course there can be criticism of types of show breedings and working breedings. It is not necessarily a bad thing or everyone will just drink their respective koolaide and sit happily in their world with their fellow groupies and the breed be darned.


----------



## RubyTuesday

Samba, there's is a huge difference b/w reasoned disagreement & the bash&trash crud that proliferates in these threads. Criticism is one thing. All breeds (IMO) benefit from impassioned discussions about what is best or right for the breed. The GS needs such discussions as much as most breeds. However, piling on with misinformation, inaccuracies, innuendo & gross generalizations is not at all the same thing.

Oversized dogs are outside the standard. Period. They are not necessarily fat, lazy, clumsy, inept, unhealthy, short lived, prone to HD, weak nerved, excessively soft or incapable of working. Nor were they always outside the standard.

For numerous reasons, both practical & aesthetic, many people including myself, find these GS attractive & desirable. Trashing&Bashing doesn't change that. Most members who prefer the oversized GS either fade away to friendlier corners of the board or all too often leave entirely. Now that's sad & (IMO) accomplishes very little. Perhaps others disagree.


----------



## Vandal

I have a friend who has been breeding for almost 50 years now. She likes her dogs larger and these are some of the best German Shepherds I have ever seen. More agile than most smaller GSDs, and they basically walk upright....always on their rear legs when in their runs and walking with their front paws on the fencing. Not only are they great looking dogs, they work better than almost all of the dogs I see nowadays. These are some serious and no nonsense dogs, true GSDs in every sense. Older bloodlines , so, yeah, "Old Fashioned".
Here is one of her males.


----------



## Castlemaid

RubyTuesday said:


> For numerous reasons, both practical & aesthetic, many people including myself, find these GS attractive & desirable. Trashing&Bashing doesn't change that. Most members who prefer the oversized GS either fade away to friendlier corners of the board or all too often leave entirely. Now that's sad & (IMO) accomplishes very little. Perhaps others disagree.


I don't agree that these discussions are nothing but trash and bash. Many people have said over and over and over, that if someone likes the large sizes, that is fine. If a breeder wants to breed oversized dogs, that is their perjorative. The issues that are at the forefront, is the claim by some breeders that the oversized dogs are "old fashioned" (worthy of discussion), the unsubstantiated claims by many breeders of oversized dogs for working ability (if a breeder does breed oversized dogs and claims working ability and can subtantiate their claim other than "I know my dogs", that is fine), and the focus on size and weight as the main selling point (like those are the things that matter the most?). 

And I doubt that many people know which particular breeder's site started the thread. I don't think it matters as there are a zillion breeders of oversized GSDs out there if you do a google search, and all the sites are pretty similar in pictures, breeding philosophy, and content.

And if someone posts that in their view, the oversized, and often overweight dogs is not what they feel a GSD should look like - (and I'm not saying that the breeders and owners who own breed and own these dogs have overweight dogs, but there are many examples of oversized dogs all over the 'net that are clearly overweight) - then they are bashing for stating the obvious. 

I mean, I have a Sable Working line dog, with plenty of working drives, no issues taking a sleeve (haha, I think he surprised the helper yesterday by how hard he hit! -). My dog is what I believe the epitome of a GSD should be. That is what I wanted, that is what I am happy with. So if someone posted: 
"I don't like working line dogs. I don't like the Sables especially, they look weird. In my opinion, a GSD should be a classic Black and Tan, and should be easy enough to manage and excercise to make a good pet for the average family, and should never ever even think of grabbing a person's arm, even if they are wearing a bite sleeve". I'd say fine, I understand, I don't agree, but I am sure that you can find a good GSD that will have the lower drive levels that you are comfortable with, and be what you would like and feel is correct. I would not feel offended, I would not feel that I, as the owner of a Sable working line is being bashed. I would not feel that the breeder of my dog, whom I hold in high esteem is being belittled for breeding goals that this person feels is producing GSDs that they just "don't agree with" . 

Yet everytime such a discussion comes up about the oversized dogs, those that have a different view of how GSDs should look and be are bashing and slinging crud. _That_ _*I*_ find offensive. I find the language and the accusations offensive, belicose and inflamatory.

To be fair, there may be some posts that are bashing - but in general, this whole thread has been a good back-and-forth between different camps, and to dismiss the whole discussion, the whole thread as nothing but crud and bashing of a specific breeder (which it isn't), is not a fair.


----------



## robinhuerta

If one only complains and does nothing.....then they are at as much fault, as the ones that continue to create the problems within the breed.
The dogs of _yesterday_ are gone.....the dogs of _today_ need our help....so the dogs of _tomorrow_ can be better.
The complaints and excuses have gotten old.....it must be easier for some to just stand on the side and do nothing. It's easier to point fingers and shake fists....
*We can't "fix" yesterday.*
If one believes that this breed has become so awful & hopeless....then why not find another breed.? 
Hopefully, there will be some....that share the passion, to continue & fight. 
These discussions seem to always end the same way.....(show people ruined the breed, working folks wrecked the breed, others created the health problems, & people that believe in the standard, are killing the breed)......I guess? those who do nothing are "saving" the breed??........._whatever helps you feel better_....pretty hypocritical sounding to me.
As mentioned before.......I'll continue to ruin the breed my way....and others can ruin it their way....
You may have your topic back,.. what an enjoyable (stick poking, finger pointing, blame basing, excuse making) time we all shared!

Cliff....first time, you've actually disappointed me....


----------



## RubyTuesday

Castlemaid, my remarks were over generalized & possily unfair. Note please that I said the trash*bash crud proliferates on these discussions which is not the same as saying they are "_nothing but trash & bash"_. Your rebuttal largely ignores the many, many posts which arbitrarily link oversized GS with dogs that are inherently fat, lazy, clumsy, inept, unhealthy, short lived, prone to HD, weak nerved, excessively soft & incapable of working. Rarely does anyone say, _"that if someone likes the large sizes, that is fine. If a breeder wants to breed oversized dogs, that is their perjorative."_(Freudian slip there???)

GSDElsa proposed that anyone wanting a 120lb GS should get a giant breed. I like Great Danes. I love Irish Wolfhounds, which I've had & will have again, however I will *still* want dogs with the discernment, biddability, analytical prowess, mental strength & work ethic of the GS. I like em big, but that's not all that I'm looking for.

FTR, my little Djibouti was ~92lbs at a year. He’s probably a bit heavier at 2, but not much, so is he an acceptably ‘large but not giant sized GS’??? (In fact he probably weighs less than some of the SchH GS).

Another thread posted numerous examples of oversized GS working in LE, SAR etc. Khawk has worked many oversized GS, including some that were over 120’. Dogs that actually work provide the ultimate proof. 



> Originally Posted by *GSDElsa*
> Oh, I agree. But for the people who say the dogs who are outside the breed standard are JUST AS GOOD and SHOULD be included in the breed standard. Fine. Prove it to all of us.
> 
> No doubt that people will ALWAYS breed outside of the standard--for any trait. But for those that want to cry about their dog not being included because it's just as good as the others. Show us.


_Crying_??? Pffft. Opposing misinformation is the only thing I’m interested in doing. Nor do I give a ratz patoot about being _included_ in the standard since I have no interest in conformation showing or SchH. I would like to see breed tests that specifically test for all the qualities I want/need in my GS but until that happens titles, ribbons & awards simply don’t resonate with me. IF I was interested in SchH or showing I’d think differently.
 
Anne, that is a seriously gorgeous, gorgeous guy! And what an expression! IF he's half the dog he looks to be, he's something very special.


----------



## cliffson1

Ruby Tuesday, thanks for the kind words but if I am a coauthor on the book it may bomb!! Robin, Robin, Robin, youth has its passion and this is very good. Age has its experience and usually tempers the passion somewhat.(hopefully). Now how could I have disappointed you when I haven't weighed in on this thread with MY thoughts. One of the reasons I haven't weighed in because the topic was about old fashioned German Shepherds and many people were going to give replies who weren't even born when old fashioned GS were around. So to me they can only state read facts or hearsay as they don't have a point of reference.(Kinda like yesterday when a 16 year old kid in our club with two left feet was telling me why his showline DOBE isn't doing long bites like other dogs is because John and I won't move him along fast enough. Dog has horrible nerves. And John looks at me after he left(John has trained dogs for a living for 42 years, I only have 38), and said Don't you love it when a 16 year old is telling you how to train a dog!!!) I know some people get tired of me talking experience, so I've cut back instead of arguing with the sixteen year old. 
But as to my statement, if you read Anne's statement, Everything she wrote in that post is accurate to my way of thinking. These are the same things I've experienced as a person who has bred and WORKED dogs for many many years. I honestly believe the conformation ring and the sport world has had a profound negative impact on the breed in the past twenty years. Anne has a profound love for the breed and is doing everything she can to help the breed by posting on this forum and maybe some people will recognize the value of her post and change some of their perspectives on the breed. I have learned a lot from Anne on this board in training and on the breed and in personal conversations. I KNOW she knows what she is talking about!! She just tells it like it is and that is what the breed needs but it has to be from somebody who has bred and worked dogs to be able to know what to breed for. Sch and conformation is no longer conducive to supporting true German Shepherd temperament, and I have said this for a long time on this list and I can't change to what I don't believe. Really read what she wrote and you will see good information...don't worry about the breed is past saving part, as I believe Anne is only trying to convey the dire situation the breed is in. Nobody loves the breed any more than her, you, me, Doc, Chris, RT, Samba, Lies, Fred, Lisa, etc. But some have a wider point of reference in action and experience and I choose to listen to them if it rings true...JMO..peace!


----------



## Dainerra

I think the main complaint is breeder's who say that they are breeding "what the public wants" Sorry, but John Q Public doesn't KNOW what he wants. 

"I want a giant GSD like I remember from childhood" umm you do realize that you were 3 feet tall so EVERYTHING looked big to you, right?? My daughter is very petite; a 5 years old she and Rayden could look eye to eye (her standing, him sitting) So should people breed a dog big enough to look her in the eye because that's what she remembers?? At 9, she isn't a lot taller! So when she finally hits a growth spurt, should we breed 5 foot tall GSDs?

"Bigger is better" SUVs, houses, dogs, meals, french fries, soda.. if a little is good, bigger is better, right??

"My dog at home weighs 130lbs" I doubt it. Rayden weighs 83 lbs. Sure he's got a lot of hair so looks bigger, but not that much! Then they tell me "oh he's the same size as my dog at home and HE weighs at least 140" Then people look at Freya and say "OH, she's just a baby, what's she weigh 30-40lbs?" umm wrong again, she weighs 70. Sure she looks delicate and petite beside Rayden, but she's a GIRL. Not to mention that people are used to seeing dogs that look like beer kegs with legs anyway...

"Oh he's beautiful! I want a dog just like him" minus the exercise, training, protectiveness, of course. I want him to love all people and all dogs. I want a dog that acts like a lab, but looks like a GSD. of course, minus the people that act afraid - I don't want anyone afraid of my dog. 

"I like smart dogs" no, John Q. Public likes OBEDIENT dogs. smart dogs can be a pain in the rump for the average owner. They need a job or they WILL make their own. and most likely you won't like it.

About schutzhund not testing for the qualities that you want, what is it that you are looking for? (I'm too lazy to go back and read) I want a GSD that is protective. Loyal. Smart. Obedient. Works well with me. Has an off-switch. All of those are easily tested for with schutzhund. Though it's not the titles themselves, but the knowledge of the person working the dog that I want to hear. 
I see ads in the paper all the time for GSDs. "Great pets. beautiful colors" "old fashioned" "giant" "quiet and gentle" All they want is a dollar. I've seen some of the dogs that they are selling. They barely look like shepherds! but, people buy them by the dozens because thats "what the public wants"

The public wants a cheap, no training/housebreaking/work required dog. One who's hair will match the furniture. That magically knows if the person about to knock on the door is Aunt Betty that hasn't visited in 20 years or an annoying vacuum salesman. That loves everyone and every animal. But is scary and will eat bad people. But that everyone else would NEVER be afraid of. 
and then, of course, you don't want the dog to herd the cat. or the running screaming kids. 

I don't mind people who breed over-sized GSDs that ARE GSDs. People like Doc who are breeding what THEY believe that a GSD should be.

I DO mind people who are breeding huge dogs that mostly look like GSDs. but don't act like them. And the only reason they are doing it is because they sell.


----------



## Samba

It is an interesting situation and will exist in all we do , I guess. In my career, I can tell you that nursing and medical care are not what they were 30 years ago. Some things are great improvements, but many are not. When I talk about old systems and approaches to younger practitioners it is difficult. I think they feel I am an older person talking about something they haven't seen and can't relate to. They think I am not as passionate and must have idealistic memories of the "good 'ol days". 

Experience is not everything in and of itself either. It matters very much "who" is having the experience. What is their ability to really synthesize and understand what it is they are seeing and experiencing?

I too know that people like Anne has experience and knowledge that is worth listening to and trying to grasp. I don't know Cliff so much, but the things he speaks of makes me sense his experience is well "experienced" also. But, like my younger professionals at work, I and others are at a distinct experience and understanding challenge through no fault of our own, of course. 

The dog pictured in Anne's picture from her friend is a magnificent specimen. The dogs looks are the least of what is so impressive in him , I am sure of it. I know he is not the exception in those dogs either. Can such be preserved? Are there enough breeders and dogs to do so? Are there dogs today that resemble them? Would we know one if we saw it!? Heck, I am almost to the point of thinking if I had some dogs with more of the "older" traits, would there even be anyone around who knew how to work them??

Also, I think it is so that people like Cliff, Anne, Doc and others... they did not grow up with "ScH" dogs,or "show" dogs, or "pet"dogs so much. 
They were introduced to German Shepherd Dogs. The split was much less, the variation in the dogs obviously less. I do know that because of this, they really are proponents of the breed and not so much any "lines" or venues.


----------



## Vandal

> About schutzhund not testing for the qualities that you want, what is it that you are looking for? (I'm too lazy to go back and read) I want a GSD that is protective. Loyal. Smart. Obedient. Works well with me. Has an off-switch. All of those are easily tested for with schutzhund.


I have been working dogs in SchH as the handler and the helper for my entire adult life. I have also witnessed and entered more than one "dog show". So, before anyone gets the idea that I am just "sitting on the sidelines", let me make that point clear.

The above comment is simply not accurate. Maybe it used to be but overall, SchH is not testing protectiveness and a person can pass the protection portion, ( with a very high score), with a dog who doesn't have a protective bone in his body.

As for an "off switch", ( another term I am learning to not like), SchH is not testing that either, not that it should really. What SchH should test is the dog's ability to remain clear under stress and pressure. Many people are claiming this is the case but I am talking about a dog who can work in aggression, mean business in protection but still be able to hear his handler and comply. Asking a dog to stop gripping the big toy and asking him to disengage from a fight are two TOTALLY different things. Mostly the former is what is going on in SchH and that alone is one of the biggest reasons that SchH no longer does what it was intended to do. You can read that a few times if you do not understand what I am saying because it is a very important point. 

Also, as I said on this board maybe about 7 years ago now..... one type of dog is being promoted over the other. There is a lack of balance in what dogs are available for breeding in that many are simply too driven, possessive and excitable. Continuing to breed these types of dogs together is going to lead, (and already has), to problems. That being weaker nerves and problems with fear/unprovoked aggression. The more solid dogs with the unshakable nerves are becoming extinct in SchH. Used to be those dogs were held in the highest regard but now they are too slow in obedience, not edgy enough and require real knowledge from the helper to work . That's just too much trouble. People want dogs who will light up with very little provocation. Again, that's not a German Shepherd. GSDs are supposed to be a thinking breed and a breed that can discern a threat from a non-threat. The helper used to be a "bad guy" not a "sparring partner" or the dog's friend.
SchH itself was once a very good test of German Shepherd temperament. Then people got too cleaver with the training because they just had to have a trophy or ribbon. The focus shifted away from testing the dogs to looking at who the trainer is. It is the lack of understanding by the people training in SchH that is leading to the problems. Most do not have a clue what SchH was testing for way back when. It is now a sport to most people and they train with points in mind. It has moved away from it's original purpose in more ways than most people can understand. Most people don't seem to want to understand either and that is a real tragedy.


----------



## cliffson1

Samba, your last paragraph has a lot of truth in it. I have said a hundred times on this forum, when I started out Show dogs were working dogs were pet dogs in homes!! To me that is what the breed is all about...why would I want to encourage this separation mentality of show lines vs working lines. They are here at present but that does not mean my training regiment or my conformation dog has to conform to these new separations. 
The biggest problems with the breed today is nerve strength...as Anne stated most people don't know nerve strength to evaluate it. Conformation dogs and sport dogs don't need nerve strength to be successful anymore. Nerve strength allows the same dog to be able to be a pet, military dog, herding dog, or seeing-eye dog depending on who's hands he went to. Now we have one camp with more drive than nerve, another camp with more pretty than nerve, etc. 
I also think that Dainerra wrote a very good post that has a lot of truth in it. 
As for oversized German Shepherds, when I was in the military we had 250 dogs at the kennel and some of them were definitely oversized. They were military working dogs and were acceptable to me. Lrt me state MY position on oversized GS. I would breed to an oversized German Shepherd if he possessed the genetics and physical characteristics that I need for my female. I would not breed FOR oversized German Shepherds specifically, not because they are oversized, but because to continually do it would narrow the genepool from a phenotype position and eventually a genotype position. (Pheno being physical expression of dog, and geno being bloodlines of dog) And everyone knows how I feel about narrowing the genepool. JMO


----------



## Doc

Thanks to Anne and Cliff for you knowledge, years of experience and devotion to the German shepherd dogs we use to have. I appreciate both of you sharing your take on today's German shepherd.

I guess if one has never seen or been around the dogs from yester-years, then they really have no clue what we spent most of lives with or the love and appreciation we gained from these special dogs.


----------



## RubyTuesday

Dainerra, I live in a bad neighborhood. Too often the nervous nellies who buy guns & shoot at shadows also acquire snarling, snappy unreliable curs. These so called PPD menace the many innocent people (including young children) that live here. In even the worst neighborhoods the vast majority of people are innocent & don't deserve to be at risk from the 'good guys' as well as the baddies. (Note, these ill bred, poorly trained dogs are not to be confused with legit PPD. Please don't think I'm confusing the two)

I want a tough minded, discerning, deep thinking, well reasoned dog. IF s/he's appropriately protective that's a plus but it's imperative the dog have a solid, stable disposition that doesn't spook easily or react without thinking. My dogs must be over all reliable with people, good with other animals & excellent with children. 

The GS from my childhood were larger than the medium sized dogs promoted by some SchH enthusiasts. IF it was simply a relativity thing, then Goldens, Labs, Collies would also appear significantly smaller today, but they don't. My parents, uncles & aunts, who were adults when I was a child, would remember GS as medium sized rather than larger, yet they too remember the GS being a large rather than medium sized dog. Larger in & of itself is neither good nor bad. I like 'em big (tall & lean), but that's simply my preference. And as I've also stated, size is not my prime consideration.

There are good, bad & indifferent breeders of all 'types' & lines. Some SchH breeders select for a GS that's for my taste excessively sharp, hyper reactive & not enough of a thinker. Some oversized GS breeders prefer a GS that IMO is too soft, overly dependent & lacks spark. True byb of all types simply produce whatever comes about following essentially random couplings. Judging good breeders by the dogs produced by poor to middling breeders is simply unfair regardless of type.

Samba, that's an excellent post. IMO, GS people should be aware of an increasing need for working dogs of all sizes. MvS looked to the future when developing the breed & envisioned a working dog that would not become an anachronism with the inevitable decline of pastoral canine jobs. It seems that even as the world of working dogs is expanding, the world of working GS is contracting. That simply shouldn't be.

Cliff, I stumbled across some very interesting articles from a Seppala Husky breeder. I was in the middle of a 15" work break & didn't get into it very far but he's clearly an independent thinker. Although the Seppala Huskies are his passion, most of the info is generally applicable to anyone breeding. Have you seen it? I thought of you while perusing the material.


----------



## Samba

Here are some old fashioned German Shepherds ( and a few other breeds) doing some old fashioned training. Some are largish some are smaller.


----------



## Raziel

they look very diff. More like a doberman face.........more thin
maybe thats just me.....?


----------



## Raziel

I love my big ass GSD!!!!!!!
27 1/2 inches.


----------



## Samba

From Koos Hassing:

"Some dogs fight very hard with the helper due to nervousness and some due to dominance. For some judges it is very hard to see the difference, because they have not enough knowledge to see it. In the protection phase, how many judges can see that the dog is confronting the helper or begging for the sleeve? And than dogs get high points, use for breeding and produce worse dogs. On this way of judging they kill the working abilities."

CanineSquad - Koos Hassing

Aaargh, even the judges don't see it sometimes. How is a lesser skilled person to know?


----------



## RubyTuesday

> Originally Posted by *Vandal*
> SchH people have allowed Malionois trainers to tell them how to train a GSD.


Anne, could you elaborate on this a bit. Specifically, where is the error in that & how should the training approaches/goals differ?


----------



## Jessiewessie99

when people talk about old fashion i think of King Shepherds and the very big Shiloh Shepherds.


----------



## cliffson1

Samba, In regards to your comment from Koos...oldtimers refer to dogs that bite and are just holding on as "Finding comfort in the sleeve"". They will grip and hold on for dear life. Often they will grip very hard and many handlers and even trainers think this is a very hard dog. WRONG! Dog shows no dominance of his situation. Dog is really weak nervewise, but has the prey drive to give the good bite and impression of strength. When that dog has to release and sit underneath the bad guy awaiting the next command you will see signs of the unsureness. These are the type of things that Sch used to test for and people could see the dogs that were good for owning and the ones that were good for breeding. There is a difference, yet today you ee many of these dogs in Sch and then we wonder why the protection part of the Seiger show is so pitiful. Because people are breeding these dogs even though their strength of character is suspect.


----------



## cliffson1

As an addendum to the above post tying in with this topic. The issue isn't the dog biting as some of you will focus on that don't do protection work, the "issue" is the dogs unsureness when placed in a stressful situation of releasing the sleeve. This inability to handle stress in CORRUTIBLE. Back in the day the breed was known for being "INCORRUPTIBLE". If you have a dog of ninety-five pounds that is incorruptible, i will take that any day over a standard size dog that is corruptible in temp. But alas, many of the oversized dogs I see today are not incorruptible and if they are oversized must be held to the same standard of mental acuity to be worthy of the breed. This doesn't have to manifest itself in Sch training, but it must manifest itself in protective instincts that are present when needed...or else it would be a golden with ears that stand erect. And some form of training with the dog is needed to determine the ability to handle stress. , when there is no stress everyone can function...but I have never lived in a world with no stress, so the need for these traits in this breed.


----------



## Vandal

RubyTuesday said:


> Anne, could you elaborate on this a bit. Specifically, where is the error in that & how should the training approaches/goals differ?


 
All breeds are different. There 'should' be a more distinct difference in the temperament of a Mal and the temperament of a GSD. That difference requires different training methods. The GSD is now swinging towards Mals in temperament. Certainly dogs have been selected to fit the training methods. Used to be people who trained German Shepherds were the ones people looked to for training advice and to learn to read a GSD. Now, maybe because of the success they have had in trials, people look to Mal trainers. That is not , IMO, what the breed needs. We need more people who really understand GSDs to be teaching people about GERMAN SHEPHERDS. More focus in understanding the breed and what it is SUPPOSED to be would go a long way to improve things. Perhaps people would start to understand that a GSD was never intended to look like a Mal does in SchH and it is OK. Please don't tell me these Mal trainers understand GSDs. You have to work with them consistently to really understand and when you do that, you are constantly reminded of things you may have forgotten. This is not an insult to Mal trainers, it is just a fact that they are "experts" on their breed, not GSDs.

Also, in protection, Mals are motivated differently that GSDs. They have more drive as a general rule and are easier to bring into drive. An easier dog to reach overall. A 'good" GSD needs more and the work needs to be capable of reaching " inside" the dog in order to really see who that dog is. Working GSDs on the "surface" is what happens now. We don't see the same power and aggression in the dogs because very few helpers are capable of bringing it out and very few handlers are capable of seeing that their dog is not really bringing all he has to the work.

GSDs are a thinking breed. They were always intended to be a breed that thinks first before they act. It takes a certain kind of helper, with very good knowledge of the breed, to work with that kind of dog. The same work that might be totally appropriate for a Malinois leaves the GSD looking like a lesser dog . The better GSDs need a "reason" to work in protection. As a breed known for it's ability to differentiate between a threat and a non-threat, they do need to see a "bad guy" vs just someone to chase. People maybe don't know why but when they see their dog worked the right way, they do notice. GSDs look totally different when the helper is playing the role and what is inside that dog is brought out. That is when you see the real temperament of a GSD and that is when people really start to have fun training. 
Yesterday the helper I am training was able to see the difference when he worked my dog the "right " way. The bark, the grip, the fight all came out when he figured out how to present the right challenge to the dog. A GSD has to see that challenge coming from the helper or they will just kind of fall asleep. My fear is that many of the really good dogs are being discarded because they never see this kind of work. When you work a good GSD the wrong way, they do not look good at all. People will claim they just "don't have it". Usually, it is just a little deeper in the dog than inexperienced helpers can reach. We see this quite a bit in the way a GSD barks. That is the first indicator that the work is not appropriate for the dog. People want to call it a prey bark but there is more to it than that. When the helper does not tap into what a GSD was intended to work with, it leaves the dog looking weak. I think this is probably a "you have to see what I am saying" kind of thing. Most people now think the kind of training I am talking about means their dog will be "reactive". The way people have misunderstood that concept has led to huge numbers of BORED GSDs who are never worked at the right drive level. 

Years ago, the two people I trained with went over to Germany to train with Helmut. My friend has a video of Helmut "talking" to our helper after he worked Helmut's Bundessieger. He is holding up his little finger and pointing to the tip of it with his other hand. He says, "this is how much you mean to my dog". His point was that our helper didn't reach the dog in the slightest. He was no challenge , no opponent, basically a joke to the dog. I see people like our helper was then just about everywhere now. They may be athletes but they do not bring the right attitude to the helper work.


----------



## LaRen616

*Raziel*
*"I love my big ass GSD!!!!!!!
27 1/2 inches."* 

I love mine too! I think I am measuring correctly
Mine is 27 inches.

He just turned a year old. Will he continue to grow or is that it?


----------



## AbbyK9

The more I come back to this thread, the more I'm becoming certain that my next dog will be another Malinois.


----------



## Emoore

You know, I feel so fortunate to be a rescue foster. If I want a big dog, I can adopt a big dog. If I want one that's got a stable temperament and loves kids, we're up to our ears in those. If I want one that's a little overly suspicious of strangers and barks a lot I can get one. I can have a black, a white, a sable, a longhair, oversized or undersized. . . all without worrying that I'm supporting a non-reputable breeder or jeapordizing the breed.


----------



## Samba

Well, yes, as Cliff pointed out, there are dogs to own and there are dogs to breed. The rub is in the methods utilized to determine the later. 

I am digesting what Anne and Cliff have written and am trying to find examples, retrieve from memory of seeing work and think of how the correct work and testing plays out.

I have experienced the work where the helper is mostly a delivery system. A moving body to create prey delivery and also reward with sleeve delivery system. The importance of the helper themselves ever so diminished. Also, thinking about the malinois wearing their heart on their sleeve so to speak and how easy to activate. Also, seeing easily activated German Shepherds but what is activated in them is not necessarily a balance of drives and often little serious fight coming from confident power. I am also thinking of some helpers not knowing exactly what to do with a more serious thinking dog and one that doesn't have its trigger on the surface.

What is really the old fashioned GSD that is in danger of being MIA is not straight backs and large size.....


----------



## Doc

Samba said:


> Here are some old fashioned German Shepherds ( and a few other breeds) doing some old fashioned training. Some are largish some are smaller.
> 
> YouTube - Schutzhund in Germany 1936


I think I was at that taping .....


----------



## Samba

I tried to pick you out in the crowd! I see one old fashioned tradition remains...beer after training.


----------



## Vandal

Doc said:


> I think I was at that taping .....


LOL..... 

When I was watching that I remembered that when I first started in SchH.....which was actually a few decades later...four to be exact.....we used to do that group obedience stuff.


----------



## Doc

I think "old fashion" is much more than size and weight - although others in here has/will accuse me otherwise. I miss the "old fashion" German shepherd that exhibited a different mentality than we see today. If you haven't seen it, experienced it, or touched it, it is almost impossible to put into words.

Beer? After training? With German shepherds? Surely not ... LOL


----------



## Jason L

Wow back then the helpers really got into it with the handlers! Those did not look like "pretend" shoves.


----------



## Samba

LOL True attack on the handler! I saw the one fellow really struggling to get back up.


----------



## Doc

I stagger like that all the time. My swagger turn into stagger. It's hail getting old. LOL


----------



## Samba

I say getting old is not for sissies!


----------



## Doc

I'm old but I'm not ready yet.


----------



## Jessiewessie99

These people claim they breed the old fashion, they have videos on youtube:

***Links removed by Admin. Once again, if the discussion is going to continue keep it general to the type of dog. Leave individual breeders and bashing them out of it.***


----------



## Jessiewessie99

They are hobby breeders.But there site is kinda eh.lol.


----------



## crs996

They are going for the St. German Bernard look?


----------



## Doc

crs996 said:


> They are going for the St. German Bernard look?


The what!? hehehehe


----------



## Samba

Oh dear, not another breeder "named". We will need a moderator soon.


----------



## JoJo1234

Nothing at all,

Mine are between 68 and 125 lbs and are healthy.

Just like people, they come in different sizes.


----------



## AbbyK9

I find it interesting that so many "old fashioned" breeders cite their dogs' weight before they cite their heights, health tests, or accomplishment. There is a big difference, no pun intended, between being large and being heavy. 

A lot of "old fashioned" dogs I see on these websites - do a Google Search for "old fashioned Shepherd" or "old fashioned GSD" and see what comes up - are not just big, they are also very commonly overweight, with their weights touted as "xxxx pounds" when it's obvious that the dog may be a bit over the standard but his weight is more due to the fact that he's fat, not the fact that he's overly large.


----------



## crs996

"WHAT ARE THE RISK FACTORS FOR DEVELOPING BLOAT?

Dogs weighing more than 99 pounds  have an approximate 20% risk of bloat"

This is from from http://www.marvistavet.com/html/bloat.html

Interesting, has anyone seen a correlation?


----------



## London's Mom

I like large male GSDs. My London is very tall at 14 months (27.5 inches - 28 inches depending on how much he is moving about) and weighs 90 lbs. He will certainly get bigger as he ages to 2 years old. He is very agile and athletic; runs with me every morning for about 4 miles+. My last male, Lugar, was 100 lbs and lived to be 12 years old. THe bigger they are, the more I dog I have to hug! :0)


----------



## Samba

The larger breeds I personally have known seem to have increased risk of bloat... seen Danes, Swissies, St. Bernards, Labs and Pyrs bloat. 

As far as German Shepherds, my personal experience, I have seen large and even smaller dogs bloat and torsion. It seemed to me that these dogs did have a generously deep chest. I don't know how much size... how much conformation....genetics.... who knows on this dreadful condition.


----------



## Jessiewessie99

Samba said:


> Oh dear, not another breeder "named". We will need a moderator soon.



I was just on youtube looking at videos and they listed videos they recomended for me and that one showed up.lol.I just posted wondering if this is what people mean by old fashioned.


----------



## kiwixlshepherd

Anyone know who breeds these large strong nerved dogs?


----------



## carmspack

did you read the whole thread?

they are not "olde fashioned" and size has nothing to do with being strong nerved.

breeding for BIG as an exclusive takes the keen attention to all the other important elements of the GSD essence away.

what you are looking for is a leonberger or old English bull mastiff type of dog .


----------

