# Conformation or Schutzhund for breeding?



## Stephanie17s

I'm not a breeder, and not even entertaining the idea at this point, I'm just curious about this. If you are a breeder, or plan to become one, what do you consider to be of more value, a conformation or a Schutzhund title, and why? I know there are different lines and purposes, so people are breeding for different things, I'm just interested to see what people have to say. Sorry if this is a silly question!


----------



## Amaruq

Personally I like the idea of both because you need both to produce the total package which is what the German Shepherd Dog is supposed to be. 

That said I think the working temperament is more important to be judged by an independent third party. Structure can be seen pretty much by any one who can interpret the standard. NOT saying that conformation is not AS important but if I had to pick one over the other it would be SCH. Nerve, temperament and working ability is best tested by an independent and objective party.


----------



## Andaka

I want it all!







Although I do not participate in Schutzhund, I still want a dog with a sound mind that can take life in stride. A top show dog is on the road a lot, meeting new people and performing in front of large crowds. But proper structure (and not necessarily what wins at a dog show) is important for being able to perform whatever tasks the dog is asked to do. Both are equally important -- just behind health.


----------



## Chris Wild

IMO, anything that tests temperament is more important than that which tests structure. While certainly both are important, temperament is of the utmost importance to me. A dog who is a less than ideal representative of the breed from a structural perspective can still have many, many uses from companion to working dog. A dog with faulty temperament can be a heartbreak, or dangerous liability, to anyone and everyone.


----------



## lhczth

> Quote:A dog with faulty temperament can be a heartbreak, or dangerous liability, to anyone and everyone.


Totally agree.

From a working dog standpoint structure is also important. Not show dog structure, but sound working structure. A dog that is built incorrectly will not hold up for a long working career. We need to look at both.


----------



## GSD4LIFE21

I am not a breeder but I would much rather prefer a sound dog over a conformational one.


----------



## LuvWorkingGSDs

Not a breeder either, but "form _follows_ function." That sums it up nicely for me.


----------



## Vandal

> Quote:"form follows function."


True but you should at least look back and see if it is still following.









I have to have a dog that looks like a German Shepherd. To me, structure matters and you can have both without losing working ability. What I do find disturbing is the working lines who are starting to look like the modern show dogs. Sorry, that structure is not correct, even if it is a working line dog.


----------



## Catu

> Originally Posted By: Vandal
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:"form follows function."
> 
> 
> 
> True but you should at least look back and see if it is still following.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have to have a dog that looks like a German Shepherd. To me, structure matters and you can have both without losing working ability. What I do find disturbing is the working lines who are starting to look like the modern show dogs. Sorry, that structure is not correct, even if it is a working line dog.
Click to expand...

Exactly my thoughts. I want a dog with a good functional structure, which is NOT what is getting ribbons in the show ring.


----------



## wolfstraum

FUNCTIONAL is the key word in defining Structure to me, not FASHION.

I come from horses. Conformation is oft over-exaggerated in horses, lending itself to new problems, both in health and performance - QH are the most widely bred in the US for example - conformation breeding and line breeding/inbreeding has led to navicular and HYPP in QH - conformation horses are not functional, they cannot rein or cut cows as they cannot MOVE correctly for those endeavours. This all translates to dogs as well.

I look at breeding as a triangle of priorities - you must have all three or have not bred correctly: 

Temperament (includes nerves, social and environmental soundness) 
Drive
Functional structure (including health ie hips)

These three must be in balance - a dog with 2 of the three cannot perform satisfactorily in all areas. 

Lee


----------



## Liesje

> Originally Posted By: Wolfstraum
> I look at breeding as a triangle of priorities - you must have all three or have not bred correctly:
> 
> Temperament (includes nerves, social and environmental soundness)
> Drive
> Functional structure (including health ie hips)
> 
> These three must be in balance - a dog with 2 of the three cannot perform satisfactorily in all areas.


I think this is a great, simple way to put it.

I have a working line dog and a show line dog. I do Schutzhund and I do dog shows, among lots of other things (both my GSDs do both). I will probably always have one or more of both "types". People can talk all they want about one type being just like the other but honestly I think it just boils down to personal preference. I like both types so I have both types. I like how my show line dog works and I like going to WDA dog shows. I like how my working line dog works and I like doing competitions. My show line dog I refer to as a show line dog. I don't need to add "...that can work!" because anyone is welcome to come watch him train and decide for themselves. My working line dog I call a working line dog....even though she has poor nerves and is a conformation champion, hehe. Individually, my dogs are what I make of them, but as far as type and pedigree, they are what they are and I'm not going to try to convince anyone otherwise.

Now I don't breed but if I did, I would sooner breed a working line SchH3 KKL2 with a sound temperament than a show line SchH3 KKL1 that has a twitchy temperament or is sliding off the sleeve during the protection tests.

I just try to bring out the best in my own dogs. I don't concern myself with bringing down other lines or types that I don't particularly care for. There are shitty dogs on all sides.

As for the original question, if I ever wanted to get into breedings I'd look at Koerungs. That requires SchH titles AND a conformation rating which can be G or better. Depending on what I was breeding for, the KoerKlasse (1 or 2) or what the conformation rating was might be more or less important but I don't see why any breeding dog from any line or type can't get Koer'd.


----------



## Liesje

> Originally Posted By: LicanAntai
> 
> Exactly my thoughts. I want a dog with a good functional structure, which is NOT what is getting ribbons in the show ring.


So you would pass on a dog that had a show rating, for having a show rating?

Do you think some of the nice working line dogs that have gotten their V-ratings and such are less valuable?


----------



## cliffson1

Every knows my feelings on what constitutes a good GS. Some am sure get tired of my rants, but I think thet Vandal is correct in stressing that good structure and working go hand in hand....but many many of us don't know good structure ot good temperament but your point of reference is either today's showlines or today's sch trials.JMO


----------



## Catu

> Originally Posted By: Liesje
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted By: LicanAntaiExactly my thoughts. I want a dog with a good functional structure, which is NOT what is getting ribbons in the show ring.
Click to expand...




> Quote: So you would pass on a dog that had a show rating, for having a show rating?


No, I do believe in körungs and I do believe more working people should koerclass their dogs. Less show line would pass with "pronounced" if the judge and the public has the opportunity to compare both at shows.

I would not breed a working line of mine with a show line, for reasons that deserve their own thread. 



> Quote: Do you think some of the nice working line dogs that have gotten their V-ratings and such are less valuable?


Most of them no, actually I want one of those as the father of my future pup. But yes, some of them are too heavy and angulated to my taste, you can see how the have the drive, but at the moment of the bite they don't do it with all their heart because they just can't.


----------



## Vandal

> Quote: Less show line would pass with "pronounced" if the judge and the public has the opportunity to compare both at shows.


Pardon me Lucia while I use your quote to say..... PFFFFFFT!!

The general public...and lots and lots of people involved in showing and SchH have no idea what they are looking at when it comes to the working/temperament side of the equation. Many of the judges do but have decided to ignore that knowledge.

My experience at the Breed Surveys I have attended has proven that to me. What the working lines were doing at the surveys I attended had no impact on how the show dogs were judged. Mostly, the working line dogs were worked correctly and were even hit with the stick, (as the rules require), unlike the show dogs who never saw much a threat at all and certainly not a stick hit. That didn't stop them from letting go, leaving the helper and still being awarded KKL 1 FOR LIFE! 

The judges I observed didn't seem to care WHO was watching.

Liesje, when you have seen what has happened over the years, the outright cheating and unethical behavior of judges and competators alike, it just becomes one more thing to be cynical about. That's a hard pill to swallow when you have devoted a huge portion of your life to learning about the dogs, how to train them, what they are 'really' supposed to be, only to watch people, (who have no business even being in the vicinity of a GSD), completely dismantle what the breed once was.

Not many people reading these boards has been a witness to it, so, it is a bit easier for some to accept. This is not a case about "bringing down other lines", it is only ONE breed....at least it used to be. You have to see some of these things for yourself I guess to appreciate how angry it can make you and why people like Cliff ( and me ), are "rantiing".


----------



## Liesje

> Originally Posted By: Vandal
> 
> 
> 
> Quote: Less show line would pass with "pronounced" if the judge and the public has the opportunity to compare both at shows.
> 
> 
> 
> Pardon me Lucia while I use your quote to say..... PFFFFFFT!!
> 
> The general public...and lots and lots of people involved in showing and SchH have no idea what they are looking at when it comes to the working/temperament side of the equation. Many of the judges do but have decided to ignore that knowledge.
Click to expand...

I don't know about that! I took my mother-in-law to the "protection tests" at the Sieger show this year (which I put in quotes because the performances were so poor that I actually had us pack up and leave) and after just a few she had figured quite a bit out and was asking questions out loud that everyone was asking in their heads but no one ever has the guts to point out (like "why did that one pass when it had to bite the sleeve three times?" "Why did that one pass when it was crawling on its belly?"). I was quite proud of my MIL, just for agreeing to come along in the first place since she does not like GSDs and has no interest in dog events whatsoever, but she did recognize the difference between how the working line and some of the best show lines performed and how the majority of the show lines performed. Maybe we need more general public and less people with agendas.


----------



## Liesje

> Originally Posted By: Vandal
> 
> Not many people reading these boards has been a witness to it, so, it is a bit easier for some to accept. This is not a case about "bringing down other lines", it is only ONE breed....at least it used to be. You have to see some of these things for yourself I guess to appreciate how angry it can make you and why people like Cliff ( and me ), are "rantiing".


I understand what you are saying and feel lucky that I am not a breeder. I love my dogs and I love doing a variety of activities with them. There is a ton of stuff that goes on in *every* venue I've trained and competed in that makes me sick, but I'd rather just leave myself out of that and do what I enjoy doing with my dogs. I'm not a helper or trainer or breeder, I'm just a "pet" owner with a couple of pets. I go to dog events even when I'm not showing or competing with my own dogs. I don't condone all the political crap and obvious favoritism but I admit I like going whether my dogs fit in or not. Heck, one of my dogs *does* fit that "type" and is still passed up because I'm not hosting the judge, my dog's breeder is not a kiss-ass, and my handler is just getting started so she is not gaining me places based on name recognition. I just go because I like to go. My dog was third from the last at the Sieger show but we had a great time in the ring.

My point about constantly juxtaposing one line vs. another comes from my own confusion about the role that genetics and selective breeding really play when it comes to generalizing "type". If I had to pick one "true" GSD obviously it would be the working line dogs but that said I have already seen plenty of spooky, nervy, and/or drive-less working line dogs. People go on and on about genetics but that just gets me all confused because I have a working line dog who in some situations is spooky and nervy and she won't tug on raw meat let alone bite a sleeve so what does that say about all the supposedly "great" dogs in her pedigree? The genetics are bad, but only when it's a show line dog? So that is what gets me wondering about generalizing one line/type vs. another because for me it just makes more sense to evaluate whatever dog is in front of us. But this is probably not relevant to this thread.


----------



## Vandal

> Quote:for me it just makes more sense to evaluate whatever dog is in front of us


I think that was my point. The dogs are supposed to be honestly "evaluated" in breed surveys but that is no longer happening. The breed surveys are now part of the PROBLEM vs being a tool to help serious breeders make smart decisions.
People are either lying or are too ignorant to see what is right in front of their eyes. They make up stories and have tons of "reasons" why their dog didn't too so well. The judges are looking the other way instead of dismissing dogs who have NO BUSINESS being bred, much less recommended for it....for LIFE. lol

None of that matters though because the dog is still SchH 3 V rated KKL 1.........all those things that no longer mean much of anything. What a shame and more people should be ashamed of their part in this mess....but most don't even give it a second thought. The titles are more about marketing than anything else now, they are not telling you much of anything about "the dog in front of you".


----------



## wolfstraum

I agree that I am rather disgusted with the koer system because of what Anne says - at my first koer - I watched a showline male barely bite, just hanging on get a KKL1 and the handler was jubilent that the dog managed a frontal bite...I saw a National champion do terrific bite work get a KKL1 - and was puzzled at the difference and even more puzzled that no one questioned it...I have seen gawd awful barely sufficient dogs go SG KKL1 as well - too much politics and agendas. My one dog was 1 cm under middle sized, Koer meister says too small - KKL2 - after giveing him an excellent conformation critique and him doing super bitework...yet dogs who were pure caca in the work got KKL1....

I *like *a good looking dog.....but my idea of a good looking dog is my Csabre....or Griff....not a black and red showline....

Yea, I can rant too....

Lee


----------



## Liesje

Well I totally agree with you all there! I can't stand what the Koerungs have become. It is so laughable and such a shame because it totally undermines those dogs that really deserve it. If my dog was as bad as some I've seen, I would be too embarrassed to even show up, and I'm not even that competitive!!


----------



## hudak004

It's too bad the judging is the way it is, it's really a shame. But it just means if you are looking for a dog for breeding, or buying a puppy, you really need to SEE the dog(s) and not just pictures and lists of their accomplishments. 

Anyways.. 
I wonder if there is a certain "type" of structure that maximizes working ability? Certain structural criteria breeders look at for producing fast, agile, steadfast dogs?


----------



## windwalker718

Long long ago I started in dogs raising Siberian Huskies. The one thing I could say about that Breed at that time (not now) is that almost every kennel of note had the policy that if they wouldn't work on a team they weren't shown, and weren't bred. The Breed standard didn't require it... the AKC sure as **** didn't require it... but the breeders themselves put the quality of the breed above the Blue ribbon. Course the breed was younger than the GSD... 

Sadly it's not a perfect situation... therefore each of us have the responsibility to do our small part to supervise what we do all the more carefully because of the absence in the US, and the imperfections everywhere.


----------



## Smithie86

"The general public...and lots and lots of people involved in showing and SchH have no idea what they are looking at when it comes to the working/temperament side of the equation. Many of the judges do but have decided to ignore that knowledge."

And that is the difficult part to swallow. True temperament that can even be displayed at a show. Gabor showed Dax (working line from Enzo, now a dual K9) in the 12-18 last Nov, there was a show dog in front of him and one in back of him. The one in front spooked for no reason 2x times - both times leaving the handler, leaving the field, running past the owner and straight into the van all the way across the parking lot. Dog was dismissed. Active show breeder in the area. So, you know that there was a lot of practice with lots of dogs on home field.

Needless to say, you will see this dog titled this summer, shown and koer'd and then bred as a excellent specimen of the the breed.

Structure needs to be sound and able to work. Not matter what line. I can appreciate a good working showline (but want one with solid temperamnet and works!) and would prefer a middle V one than a VA, but they are few and far between. The show dogs are slammed through their training or sent off for training and slammed through - focus being titled by 24 months at the latest.

Good structure is needed on the working field. Ones with better angulation, you can see part of that with the heeling and well as the jumping. Enzo is a great example - he heels like a walking horse; this being commented on by show judges that have seen him. And he was V rated with an excellent critique at the last show.


----------



## Liesje

> Originally Posted By: Smithie86The show dogs are slammed through their training or sent off for training and slammed through - focus being titled by 24 months at the latest.


Or they have absolutely no foundation. Plenty of real nice working GSDs and Mals title pretty fast and are great dogs, but they had a great foundation and train for the SchH3 the entire time while the show line GSDs have no foundation or the owners/trainers are just training for the minimum they need to squeak by a protection test. So many GSDs are bought/imported by people who don't have any interest other than breeding and showing, so no foundation is done, then they wait to see if the dog turns out OK for show and ship it off to Germany to be pressured into biting a sleeve and getting a title in a few months, if they even compete for it at all. Then they never do any more real training or competition. I can't believe we see dogs - even at the Sieger shows - that need a correction to _sit_. Gah!


----------



## cliffson1

Form and function go hand in hand, to achieve ultimate results. The problem is that the form is dictating to the function. Ideally, you take a function(like herding or policework), and you create the dog that is able to excel at these things with all the intangibles necessary.(mental and physical). The mental will always outweigh the physical because just like in real life sometimes an entity with less physical features will still excel if the determination is there. Great physical attributes with laziness or attitudes very seldom excel especially in partnership activities.(Most people forget that workingdogs must work WITH and AROUND other people and animals.)
What we have today is an ideal that we think is form pleasing...and to accomodate this ideal we have lowered standards of performance(which should be barometer of beauty), specialized physical aspects of this form ideal,(whether its extreme angulation or extreme prey drive), and created a dog that is split on the sides of the physical and mental. We lost our way when we let OBJECTIVE(opinions on pleasing form without testing first), outwiegh the SUBJECTIVE(the ability to work at the level that catapulted this breed to one of excellence and preference).
And as long as the emphasis is inverted we will not see change in the improvement of the breed overall. Actually, you will have to see, distorting the objective aspects of the breed(shows and Korungs), to continue to maintain this farce.( Is this what some people are complaining about in lowered standards in breed surveys) We are now trying to get the workinglines lines to "look" like the showlines with their flawed physical makeup. This is insanity....but the proof will be in the future as we see if the dog raises it statue in the working community as time goes on. After all, this is a working dog I thought, and work is never pretty or ideal.


----------



## Vandal

The other side of this is what has become of SchH. People are holding SchH dogs up as the gold standard as far as breeding goes and many are making that the goal of their "breeding program". I am not one to tell people what they should be breeding for. I leave that up to the many experts posting on these boards but if I were to state what I think we should be breeding for, I think I might say that you want a dog that is as close as possible to the standard. SchH should be something any GSD can do and do well but it should not be the goal, just like showing should not be the goal. I think it is evident to everyone where the breed to show mentality has led. It may appear to be different when someone's emphasis is on SchH ,(now referred to as "the sport"), but as Cliff eluded to, it is just as damaging only on the other side of the equation.

Now, don't get me wrong, SchH has been what has maintained the breed for generations but it has now shifted away from it's original purpose and is commonly referred to as a sport. I did complain about that label about 8 years ago, since I had a feeling where this was heading. When you change the words, you end up changing more than just letters. It changes the way people think about something and that is why you see politicians selecting the words they use so carefully. They know how your perception will change if they can just find the right words to convince you. SchH was not supposed to be a sport about points. It was designed to test certain working characteristics but now no longer does so. Why? Mostly because of the judging but also because of the advancement in training that has removed a great deal of the pressure and stress that was built into the SchH exercises. SchH was designed to highlight what was genetically inside the dog. Now it is about how well the trainer can manipulate things to get thru the routine with as little stress as possible placed on the dog. Of course, then we have the changes in the rules that has further reduced those stressors and what is left is a shell of what SchH once was. I will leave out the tracking and obedience but you can be sure those phases have been affected as well. 

When I started in SchH , the dogs were actually coming into that blind expecting to meet a bad guy. The blind was indeed a "defense exercise" vs what many have turned it into now, a prey exercise or maybe even play in some cases since the sleeve is used as a reward. The judges stopped asking that
the dogs to be working in the drive that matches the exercise. That means aggression in the blind where people watching are "convinced" that the dog is actually holding the Helper there with his aggression and presence. Oh yeah, they changed the name to helper also, the bad guy used to be called an agitator. The dogs should show aggression and fight against the stick hits, ( vs a dog that just hangs dead there on the sleeve with that full " grip"). Yep they also changed the word bite to grip as well and that is now what lots of dogs are doing. They are mostly gripping vs biting and let me tell you, there IS a difference in the two. "Sport dogs" grip, real dogs bite.

SchH was indeed a test when the dogs were bringing some real aggression to the work. It is stressful for a dog to work in aggression and if you think about the exercises in SchH and how it progresses, you can maybe start to understand how cumulative stress will impact the dogs nerves, courage and how he fights and make who the dog really is, much more evident. This is seen in his bite, how slow or fast he outs, how he is affected by the stick hits, how calm or hectic is when commanded to out, etc. The rules were intended to apply even more stress as the test went on since most dogs will start to show where their weakness with each passing exercise. Again, this would require that they are not simply playing, they should display all the drives they are supposed to possess genetically in the SchH test.

It requires knowledge about correct GSD temeprament and a very good dog to work the way I just described. The trainer has to be knowledgeable about what is inside their dog and the dog has to have the nerves to stand up to the pressure of working in this frame of mind. THAT was how SchH tested nerves, courage and fighting drive. You may recall that those three things are listed in the GSD standard under "Character".
When your dog views SchH as "a game", (another common term used nowadays), and thinks he is perfectly safe there on the SchH field, there is not alot being tested there. That's how the training has changed things and not for the better. Now people avoid the aggressive side of the dogs. They will say it is not required in SchH so why bother? Some actually realize that if you bring out this side of the dog you will see the cracks in the nerves and temperament so, they avoid it.
Many people don't seem to realize that some dogs, (not many of these left unfortunately), actually need to have that side worked or they look weak. That is who the dog is and when you try to avoid using what is in that dog you only see half of him. Many of these dogs, (who really fit the standard), are being eliminated because they do not fit today's SchH training style. These dogs require a bit more knowledge about what a GSD is and are many times not the dogs who will chase a rag off a cliff. That's another topic that this post is already too long to address but there was once a time that we valued this breed's ability to "think". Now we seem to want dogs with more drive than brains and that drive is also hiding many of the weaknesses that are now apparent to some of us. 

One last comment,.I was really struck by the Serious dog thread where almost everyone stated that most SchH dogs won't protect you. Someone else stated that very few could be police dogs. Well, I am not debating whether that is true but commenting more on the complete nonchalace of the posters. It was like that is normal and OK. It should NOT be OK. Dogs like that do not fit the standard. Titled or not and therein lies the problem. The attitude of the people is what is having the biggest impact. There are so few people that have done this long enough to see where these attitudes have taken things and fewer still who will stand up and try to change it.


----------



## lhczth

Anne, even if what you write makes me sad.


----------



## Lynn_P

> Originally Posted By: lhczth
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anne, even if what you write makes me sad.


I agree.. I see this all the time and I'm only a novice in the SchH.


----------



## GSDBESTK9

Excellent post as usual Anne!


----------



## Deejays_Owner

Anne, what's your feeling on the RSV2000?


----------



## Betty

Thought provoking post Anne. Thank you!


----------



## Smithie86

> Originally Posted By: KHudakIt's too bad the judging is the way it is, it's really a shame. But it just means if you are looking for a dog for breeding, or buying a puppy, you really need to SEE the dog(s) and not just pictures and lists of their accomplishments.


Good point. But it is also the point of not only seeing, but understanding what one is seeing. How is the dog, how is the helper, what do certains things or reactions (yawning, type of grip, etc) really mean? 

When I was on the field at the WUSV this year and in years past, being able to see up close how some of the dogs were, the grips through major telephoto lens and talking to the helpers would give a whole other perspective. A lot of the time, it would not jive with what another person was seeing in the stands.

For example: What one states as civil might be nervy to an experienced handler or experienced helper. How does the dog react in tracking - is it a style or forced tracking, etc.


----------



## GSDextrodinaire

I am not a fan of the whole show world. For me it is a necessary evil, something I do not enjoy at all. Surprising isn't it considering I have those "weak nerved" black and red dogs. I prefer, and always have the working aspect of the German Shepherd Dog. That does not mean I do not appreciate a nice looking dog that meets the standard or comes close to the standard. Don't tell my black and reds, but I actually prefer the conformation of the working line dogs, I also prefer their work ethic. I LOVE a deep dark black sable that has the heart of a lion. 

When I am looking for a breeding prospect,(usually a stud) or helping someone find a German Shepherd Dog, for me, temperament is paramount! Then I want to see the dog work, at play, in public, with children, and with strangers. A working evaluation of the dog in paper form is nice, looks pretty on a wall. However, you can tell a whole lot more about a dog by actually seeing that dog do what it is trained and evaluated to do, be it schutzhund, ring sport, herding, SAR, or LE. I have seen too many dogs over the years imported with these amazing titles only to find that when they are tested here, with a different helper or even put through simple obedience, the letters and numbers attached to their name are meaningless. Does that mean that is a dog I wouldn't breed to? no, it just means I need to see the dog more. I need to see stress put to that dog, and how that dog handles that stress. I am not likely to EVER EVER breed to a VA dog. I know they are worth too much money to actually see that dog be put to the test, with out that test for me there is non-existant proof that the dog is anything other than pretty. I would breed my V rated females to SG and G rated dogs, in a heart beat, if those dogs have the fortitude, AND were what I consider a German Shepherd Dog. Unfortunately, it is becoming harder and harder to find V rated "pretty dogs" that V in the work, and DESERVE it!!

I appreciate a breed survey, even have them on my dogs. Would I breed to a dog that didn't have a breed survey? if the dog met my criteria I certainly would! 

Would I breed to a dog with an HGH? certainly, but not without seeing that dog actually work. If there was a herding dog I was very interested in, I would find a way to get that dog to Ulf for an evaluation from him.

Would I purchase a puppy or recommend a breeder to someone looking for a puppy that only showed their German Shepherd Dog? absolutely not!! Showing no longer gives you important information about a dog other than how it looks, it tells you nothing about temperament, or possible working ability. I have checked too many tattooes and been in the ring too many times seeing dogs with questionable temperament get these stellar conformation ratings. It's like going to a car show and staring at the cherry red lamborgini up on the showcase. We ooooh and aaaaah over it, then the hood is lifted and there isn't an engine. Breeders who don't actually train and title their own dogs, I would never recommend either. I am tired of the excuses of why they can't work and title a dog, so off to Germany for a quick title and a rating, so it can come home and breed.

As guardians of the breed, the German Shepherd Dog, it is OUR responsibility to ensure that the dog remains true to the standard. Part of that standard is and SHOULD ALWAYS be, that the dog remain a working dog. It is time for us to stand up and point out the judges that hand out undeserved ratings and titles as if the dog deserves it just because it is a German Shepherd Dog. 

I know I have burned many bridges in the show world, because I refuse to accept that this is the way it is. I discovered that my dignity, intergrity, and love of the breed will win out over ever compromising my standards and the standards of the German Shepherd Dog. When I am asked what breed of dogs I have, I proudly say I have German Shepherd Dogs. For that is what they are, never mind their color, they earned their titles honestly and their temperament is correct.

Okay, my rant is over, for now.


----------



## hudak004

Anne, thanks for the post it is very enlightening. I wish there were more helpers who knew how to work those more serious dogs, and werent so quick to dismiss them. I also wish Id got the chance to see more of these dogs work, I am new to schutzhund, but I think thus far Ive only seen one dog working who is more serious about the work. My pups father (ive been told) is a very serious dog, but Ive never seen him work. He has saved his handler 2x that I know of as her police k9. Im hoping Hexe will acquire some of that from him but shes too young right now to tell. I do think a TRAINED German Shepherd should protect if needed. 

I wish I was able to train my Bixler in Schutzhund, I really think he would protect me seriously if he needed to, if he had been able to be SchH trained (by a helper who would and COULD) I think itd make it more clear for him as to when to protect and when not to. Im really curious as to how he would do if I was able to train him. Unfortunately he was washed out by the only helper currently available to me. One helper said I should pursue it with him, however this helper is no longer available for the time being atleast! 

On another note.. the last show I was at I saw 2 working line dogs cowering from the judge when inspecting tattoos and teeth. One of these dogs slipped her leash and bolted off the field when the judge tried to measure her. Went on to get a SG! I was really surprised. It really does go both ways as far as nerves go with both "types" 

I honestly don't have more faith in one type than another, I really like a lot of working lines dogs and I really like a lot of showline dogs. Of course my views arent always objective for breeding purposes, I know I have a lot to learn too. But we musn't forget to give every dog a chance until they show us what they're made of.


----------



## Vandal

> Quote:On another note.. the last show I was at I saw 2 working line dogs cowering from the judge ........


It's not really difficult to breed weak dogs and you can achieve that with any line..... and faster than you might think. So, the examples of weak working lines doesn't surprise me in the least. 

I expect that things will continue to decline with the working lines. Partly because what I said above and the type of dog being selected for sport and then being bred to the same type. These are mostly the more excitable dogs that are easy dogs to load. Easier to bring out aggression in those dogs as well and when these types are bred to the same type, that is when you can start to see those fear reactions you talked about. The breed has always needed those dogs with the really solid nerves and years ago, people seemed to be smart enough to recognize that fact. The nerves are the hardest thing to maintain and finding dogs who have those nerves, and the blood behind them to pass it on, are becoming extrodinarily difficult to find.


----------



## Doc

As mentioned, there was a time when one dog could do it all. Because of poor selection and shortsightedness, the German shepherd has been divided into various camps where extremism rules. The saddest part is that the common ground is lost - both the genetics and the bloodlines - where one German shepherd can excel at both conformation and work (how ever you define it). This decline started in the late 60's and has succeeded in destroying our wonderful breed. For one camp to dominate the political aspects of the breed has contributed to this pitiful decline.

A lack of appreciation from one camp to another has also caused the destruction of the original purpose of the German shepherd. I've been accused of living in the past, and that's alright. But the time has come for those who truly love what the German shepherd was/is suppose to be to unite if we want to save this breed. Otherwise, the German "all purpose" shepherd will go by the way of the dinosaur.


----------



## Liesje

So Doc are there any dogs working/competing right now that meet your standard? Andy Maly Vah? (ret. dual purpose police K9, SchH3, IPO3, PSA1, rally, obedience, dock diving, therapy dog int'l...heard nothing but compliments about him, his work, and his temperament) I'm trying to get a clear picture of what exactly in a dog you are breeding for.


----------



## Deejays_Owner




----------



## Doc

For example Lies, you have 2 dogs - one dog is good at this, the other is good at that. Years ago, when someone had a real German shepherd, they had one dog - not two. And that one dog did well in the show ring and did well in working. But you have to remember, the requirements today are not the same as yesteryear. As mentioned Scht. requirements are now a sport whereas it use to be working ability. And with a change in requirement came a "new" breed of dog - a "sports" oriented animal at the expense of conformation. The same with showlines. Over breeding on one titled "Champion" has lead to extremes in those lines at the expense of working ability.

Until judges and breeders display some integrity and real technical and working knowledge about the German shepherd, folks who promote a more balanced dog will never been seen in competition. 

Lies, the last real German shepherd in this country was Bodo Lierburg (IMO) - look him up. Unfortunately, he was not utilized in this country as a stud like he should of been and we therefore, lost our chance to dominate the breeding lines.

I want a dog that can do it all - not one that specializes in only one aspect.


----------



## Catu

> Originally Posted By: Deejays_OwnerAnne, what's your feeling on the RSV2000?


Good question...


----------



## Liesje

Well, in my dog's defense, she is titled in conformation, rally, dog sport, agility and certified for CGC, therapy dog, herding instinct, and temperament, and when I am finished she will probably be titled in AKC obedience, the BH for temperament and obedience, and the AD for endurance. That's quite the variety, no? But are all the other things cancelled out simply because she has a show title so ergo she must be a stupid dog? And my other dog is only 10 months so we can't really judge *what* he excels at at this point but he has a show rating, is training in SchH, will be herding in two weeks, started training for dock diving, and will be doing weight pull and flyball when he is physically mature (unhealthy to start training these at his age). I will put rally titles on him since that is easy enough for me to train at home, and do the CGC, temperament test, and therapy dog evaluation.

So I have one dog that is *supposed* to be good at one thing and one dog that is *supposed* to be good at another but that really makes no difference to me. I do with my dogs what I please and so far haven't had any real trouble, being that the GSD as a whole is smart, agile, and versatile.

I don't know what events you attend but I see plenty of dogs with half the alphabet on both sides of their name... If you can't find any dogs that meet your criteria I am curious which dogs you are breeding and why.


----------



## Deejays_Owner

Doc, how tall was VA Bodo vom Lierberg?
Or his brother VA Bernd vom Lierberg?


----------



## Vandal

Bodo was 63 cms and Bernd was 64. However, their father Vello was oversized at 67 cms and was not koered but used anyway because of his temperament and working ability.


----------



## Deejays_Owner

Thanks Anne!!

Lets put that into inches 24 3/4" (63) for Bodo, 25 3/16" (64) Bernd & Vello @ 26 3/8" (67)!!


----------



## Doc

Lies, you asked a question and I gave an answer. I am sorry if it upset you. From you own descriptions of your dogs, I'm not sure what exactly you are trying to find in a German shepherd. And according to a previous comment from you about dogs in my bloodlines from the past, you have never seen the German shepherd, nor care a great deal about the German shepherd dogs that once dominated competition in this country. To be blind and ignorant to dogs and bloodlines from LongWorth, Rocky Reach, Bauerhoffen, and San Miguel Kennels is a great oversight for anyone that loves this breed.

And because of the current mindset in the show and competition circles, dogs that resemble German shepherds from the 60's and early 70's will never be seen, rewarded, titled, nor recognized.


----------



## Liesje

Doc, I'm not upset, just once again confused because your posts are so vague and don't provide a clear picture of what you are breeding and why. You gave an example of a dog you consider great and he has the same sorts of show and sport titles that my dogs do and will have and many other dogs have. You're right I don't care a great deal about the past because those dogs are dead and we can't bring them back, we can only work with what we have in front of us. So you are telling me that no dog on this earth right now meets your standards, there is nothing you can work from to improve on? Then what are you breeding for? That is what leads me to believe that some people say one thing and do another. I don't breed dogs because I don't believe I currently have dogs worth being bred. So if you feel the same, that no dogs meet that golden standard of the 60s dog or whatever, how do you propose to bring that back and improve the breed? It seems that you are saying the conformation ring is bad and the Schutzhund arena is bad, but then you give me an example of a dog that excelled at both. Confusing...


----------



## Vandal

> Originally Posted By: LicanAntai
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted By: Deejays_OwnerAnne, what's your feeling on the RSV2000?
> 
> 
> 
> Good question...
Click to expand...

I don't know if my opinion matters, especially when it hasn't even gotten started yet. What will matter is if it makes any difference in the dogs. 
Just remember, things are not always as perfect as they seem and because a group of people have an idea, doesn't mean they are going to have lots of other's following. We also are already some miles down the wrong road. It will take more than a few people but the way things keeping splitting into smaller and smaller groups, not to mention the change in mentality about animals, ( just about everywhere in the world), leaves me thinking that nothing will make this easy.


----------



## Doc

He excelled in both; was one dog; and had the bloodline, character, mentality, health, nerves, and everything else in one package.

For your information, some of those old bloodlines are still around - but not accepted by the current ruling parties. I am sorry you find this so confusing. There are German shepherd breeders, owners, and even people in this form that will contend that the German shepherd has been on steady decline in this country for over 30 years. I agree with them. And the lack of appreciation and respect that is exhibited from the Kool-Aid crowd in this form is appalling. When I see the dogs of today, I do not see a German shepherd. And since you have no way to know a German shepherd the way they were, you can not begin to understand where I am coming from or what I am looking for. Ask anyone who has been around this breed more than a 30 years and I think they will agree - the Golden age of the German shepherd in this country was in the 60's - way long before you were born.


----------



## Liesje

So I'll ask the same question - what is your solution? No one under the age of X is allowed to own or breed? No dogs not coming from a very narrow scope of lines or predigrees be bred? No dogs over or under the sizes that Anne posted be bred? No dogs without the titles held by Bodo be bred?

I can think of plenty of dogs off the top of my head that are a total package. But they don't count because they aren't Bodo? Should I assume that the dogs you own and breed are basically his clones?


----------



## darylehret

> Originally Posted By: cliftonanderson1We lost our way when we let OBJECTIVE(opinions on pleasing form without testing first), outwiegh the SUBJECTIVE(the ability to work at the level that catapulted this breed to one of excellence and preference).


IMO, this is the real heart of the problem, that it centers around "judging". There are numerous successful sports that have no judges at all, based upon timed trials and completing the patterns required. Or, perhaps a panel of judges would be fairer, from a variety of disciplines. Not that I feel that schutzhund should be "the" single standard for work, either.

Similar to the comparison of faulty judging of showlines on their own distinct level, there is appearant appearant to me, poor judging even amongst a solely workingline trial. I've seen a few undeserved BH's awarded, more than a few dogs that could perhaps perform really well in protection, but were virtually uncontrollable by their handlers, perhaps dog aggressive, unable to control their drive, or somewhat generally "unstable". Regardless of having sufficient aggression and the courage to back it, some do not deserve to pass even the basic temperament test, before progressing.


----------



## Doc

I haven't ever said anything about who should and shouldn't breed, own, title, show, parade, brag, advertise, etc. about their dogs on this form. To the contrary, trying to enlighten and help better the bred in this crowd is impossible because most are closed-minded, arrogant, obnoxious, and have a limited knowledge base. And I have never said I cloned anything. It makes me wonder who you and others argue with when I am not on this form. It must be a very dull day.

You wouldn't give my dogs a second look Leis - they don't fit your paradigm of what a German shepherd is no more than today's dog fits mine.

Shows run by unqualified, crooked judges, dogs that have no more business in a show and winning titles than I do running the Boston marathon, and dog owners that are clueless and can't control there dogs have become the norm. It has become a gaming event where money rules and the dog is nothing more than bling.


----------



## lhczth

> Quote:You're right I don't care a great deal about the past because those dogs are dead and we can't bring them back, we can only work with what we have in front of us.


We can not ignore past dogs and still have an understanding of the dogs in front of us. Understanding where our dogs come from, what traits those lines bring to our dogs is what makes for an educated breeder and buyer.


----------



## Liesje

> Originally Posted By: lhczth
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:You're right I don't care a great deal about the past because those dogs are dead and we can't bring them back, we can only work with what we have in front of us.
> 
> 
> 
> We can not ignore past dogs and still have an understanding of the dogs in front of us. Understanding where our dogs come from, what traits those lines bring to our dogs is what makes for an educated breeder and buyer.
Click to expand...

Right, but I don't see how that means that all the current dogs are worthless because they don't quite meet the standards set by those dogs. If that is the case then why is anyone breeding or training dogs? We must have *something* worth training and breeding if the breed is so popular...


----------



## Deejays_Owner

Now Doc, if you are breeding dogs like Bodo & Bernd (Conformation, temperament & working ability) I would love to see.
I remember the sixties, SchH was not in North America back then.


----------



## Smithie86

Nope, not until the mid 70's and in the Bay Area.


----------



## Vandal

There was no organized SchH until the mid seventies but there were SchH titled dogs imported from Germany and shown in the American show ring... including Bodo.


----------



## cliffson1

The breeding of Bodo and Bernd v Lierberg was probably the greatest breeding in the history of the breed. Repeat breedings of this combination produced dogs like Dolf, Gin, Fello v Lierberg who also were WORLD class dogs. This breeding was the result of an oversized sire, Vello. Vello was one of the great sire of ALL times. Based on comments made here many people wouldn't have bred to Vello because he was oversized. But enough knowledgable people in Europe bred to him to make him an alltime great. Bodo came to the United States and the great knowledgable breeders of America basically shunned him. This dog was VA1 in conformation and temperament to equal any dog living. What I think Doc is saying is this mentality has hurt American breeders in the past and the mentality of not understanding a great dog both conformation and genetically is still lacking. This is due to people more caught up in the "parts" then the total dog.


----------



## Vandal

The Germans also bred away from the that B litter as well. So, mistakes are not exclusive to Americans. That has been more than proven by now.


----------



## Deejays_Owner

I know Anne









My Father was breeding & showing imported ones here in the late sixties & early seventies.


----------



## Smithie86

Same here - we had a son of Marko Cellerland.

Bob Hansen was very involved in the 50's with showing German titled dogs.


----------



## Liesje

> Originally Posted By: cliftonanderson1What I think Doc is saying is this mentality has hurt American breeders in the past and the mentality of not understanding a great dog both conformation and genetically is still lacking. This is due to people more caught up in the "parts" then the total dog.


True but I think when most refer to being disgusted with oversized breedings we are talking about dogs that are 28"+/120lb+. Sure Vello was "oversized" but I bet would still be considerably smaller and shorter than many of the dogs being bred and bragged about by the breeders who are intentionally breeding for oversize in every litter.


----------



## Vandal

So I guess it is possible that Doc saw some of those dogs also? 
Really, seeing a dog's character doesn't require you to watch him do SchH. So, not sure what that has to do with this. He said his dog was good at it. I know people here in the US who will tell you their imported SchH dog is good at it too but they have never worked it themselves.


----------



## Doc

Sounds like the role reversal to me. I didn't say the current dogs were useless, I just think they could be improved by some better bloodlines and out crosses. It sounded to me like the older dogs are useless - but then maybe my mind is playing tricks on me.

The problem today is less than quality dogs are being titled and bred. And folks put no value on older bloodlines.


----------



## Amaruq

Doc, could you please explain exactly what you mean by "older bloodline"? You reference it often in your posts but to me ALL pure bred GSD go back to Horand and every GSD has "older bloodlines" simply because they again can all be traced back to dogs of the 50's/60's (which is what I see you referencing as well). I guess I just don't see dogs of the 50/60 era as older bloodlines since all present dogs OBVIOUSLY have dogs from this era in their heritage. 

I understand AM lines, High Lines, DDR Lines, Czech Lines, Working Lines, etc. but "older lines" I am not quite getting. I am not trying to be argumentative it is just something you refer to many times an I never have been able to figure it out.


----------



## Liesje

> Originally Posted By: Doc
> The problem today is less than quality dogs are being titled and bred.


Well I don't think anyone here is going to disagree with that, regardless of whatever line or type they prefer. But now we are talking in circles. 

Since you have experience with older bloodlines and emphasize that type, I'm interested in knowing which dogs today fit that type and should be bred to. I guess I could post some examples and you could say yay or nay but surely you have some in mind....?

Personally I love Kirschental dogs because I am fascinated with herding and tending, and have personally seen several of these dogs also working in SchH and they are as hard as any. That type/level of herding takes courage and a real "thinking" dog and the dogs are trained in protection as well since they have that element in their herding trial and for the Koer (not that it means much for the Koer anymore...). Not to mention Karl has been using the same formula for breeding since before any "split" between work and show.


----------



## cliffson1

Anne, I think you mean the "German Show " bred away from the B litter. The German breeders who maintained strong working qualities used Bernd to the point that at one time he had the most progeny that had competed in the BSP. All of these progeny in turn produced many top working dogs which in effect still went back to Bernd. The East Germans used Bernd alot. The Scandinavian countries used dogs from same breeding later litters. It was primarily the start of the Canto/Quanto craze in the German show ring that excluded the Lierberg Dogs.


----------



## cliffson1

Many of the real herders(not competition herders) would tell you that Karl changed his formula from breeding basic herding lines early in his career, to incorporating the "Black and Red" showlines as sires in his breeding. That is not to denigrate Karl Fuller, but if you talk to top Herding breeders line Manfred Heyne I think you will find that they have stuck to "traditional herding lines" that still work sheep for a vocation.


----------



## cliffson1

Some of the older lines go back to dogs like Bodo v Lierberg, Troll v Richerbach, Hein v Richerbach, Greif v Elfenhain, Ernie Loeb's dog Bernd(can't think of his last name), Volker v Zollgrenschutz-haus. All of these dogs wer ROM(American Register of Merit) and thus had an impact on American dogs....not to mention Pfeffer v Bern and Odin v Busecker Schloss who was in pedigrees of many of the older lines.


----------



## Amaruq

> Originally Posted By: cliftonanderson1Some of the older lines go back to dogs like Bodo v Lierberg, Troll v Richerbach, Hein v Richerbach, Greif v Elfenhain, Ernie Loeb's dog Bernd(can't think of his last name), Volker v Zollgrenschutz-haus. All of these dogs wer ROM(American Register of Merit) and thus had an impact on American dogs....not to mention Pfeffer v Bern and Odin v Busecker Schloss who was in pedigrees of many of the older lines.


Thank you. I am familiar with dogs that go back in that era on the European lines but just hearing "older lines" I couldn't figure out what lines he was referring to. I will be the first to admit I know little to nothing about the AM/CAN lines.


----------



## Liesje

> Originally Posted By: cliftonanderson1Many of the real herders(not competition herders) would tell you that Karl changed his formula from breeding basic herding lines early in his career, to incorporating the "Black and Red" showlines as sires in his breeding. That is not to denigrate Karl Fuller, but if you talk to top Herding breeders line Manfred Heyne I think you will find that they have stuck to "traditional herding lines" that still work sheep for a vocation.


I think he has been very open about this, it's always how I see his program is summarized. Yet his dogs still herd with him every day. To me that is what counts. The titles and competitions are nice but above all he is a shepherd and his dogs work a daily job, not dabble in sport. I don't think there's a right and a wrong way, you can go about it different ways and still get great results. I can only base my opinions on what I have seen, and what I have seen is that Karl's dogs are as tough and as serious and as hard as any of the male working line GSDs and Mals in our club. They have a hardness and courage about them that you can just feel. Also I like that they seem more of a thinking dog, not so over the top with prey drive and ball drive, but just enough suspicion you can tell they are really using their own heads. And when they are not working, they are the most social, stable dogs I know as far as being comfortable and social with people in any environment.


----------



## cliffson1

I think that the Kirschental dogs are representatives of Karl Fuller's depth of knowledge of all German lines. These dogs tend to be very balanced and capable of doing very fine work. To me they are the best examples of the "Black and Red" type of dog. I was in a Sch club ten years ago that had three different Kirschental dogs all brought straight from Karl as the owner was a good friend of Marion Fuller. One of the dogs was as you desribed in that it had the drive of the top working lines,maybe not as resilent(hard), but a fine fine dog. The other dog was like a typical showline dog, could pass a club trial, but not a strong dog by any means. The third dog, a bitch out of Rikkor, was so weak she could not have gotten her titles. We spent a lot of time with her but she didnot have good nerves. As I say I think the Kirschental dogs tend to be very good working dogs. The genetics of the line causes me more concern than many of the actual dogs. Similar to Triumph's Guicci,a great working dog, but I have yet to see him reproduce himself. So, when a Kirschental dogs leaves the brillance of Karl and Marion, will the genetics be able to continue with the owner/breeders of less knowledge....I'm not sure but they are nice dogs.


----------



## cliffson1

PS...Lies, this is a good example(Kirschental) of what I try to convey when people bring up the question"What's the key to breeding", some say Titles and Certs, other say working the dog, other say combinationsof both, I always say the key to breeding is "knowledge" and Karl Fuller to me is an example of a person who can combine different types and still be successful because of his knowledge. But there are few Karl Fullers, and that's why I think you don't see many trying to 1) do what he does in mixing lines, and 2) do it successfully. JMO


----------



## Deejays_Owner

When I think the Sixties, I see Volker, what a dog!!!
I do believe he was behind Quanto.

*2X VA1 Volker vom Zollgrenzschutz Haus*


----------



## Liesje

> Originally Posted By: cliftonanderson1 To me they are the best examples of the "Black and Red" type of dog.


Yep, I agree.

I find that there is maybe a difference in the dogs he keeps and works and the dogs that he breeds and sells? One of my favorite dogs I know came from him and was purchased as an adult, one of his favorite dogs ever, having already been working with him and competing with him. But I guess this is the case with any breeder? There's going to be quite a range even in each litter. I'd like to judge the dogs and the program based on the best of what they are producing, working, and holding back for themselves and not so much on the ones they sell that maybe don't "turn out".


----------



## Liesje

> Originally Posted By: cliftonanderson1PS...Lies, this is a good example(Kirschental) of what I try to convey when people bring up the question"What's the key to breeding", some say Titles and Certs, other say working the dog, other say combinationsof both, I always say the key to breeding is "knowledge" and Karl Fuller to me is an example of a person who can combine different types and still be successful because of his knowledge. But there are few Karl Fullers, and that's why I think you don't see many trying to 1) do what he does in mixing lines, and 2) do it successfully. JMO


Yes, I totally agree. I'm not saying I like *all* of his dogs and every single one is the same caliber, but lets face it the man has been breeding and _working his dogs daily_ for decades. He is a shepherd and his dogs are tough and know how to work with him or independently. They are courageous, thinking dogs or they would not be able to do the work. I just hate to see people write him off because he's bred to "show line" dogs.


----------



## cliffson1

Brian, you are right about Quanto going back to Volker....Volker was known as a structurally very pleasing dog and it had a big input in his being awarded VA1 twice. From people i have talked to over the years he was not the strongest working dog by any means but certainly brought a lot to the table.


----------



## Brightelf

The Fuller (Kirschental) dogs are super. Marion is now running the kennel, I believe. Schweinfurt was my original "hometown here," and it's about 20 minutes from me now. 

Some folks at clubs have Kirschental dogs, and sometimes in the downtown market square (or even on the bus) I will see one. You know it ahead of time because they look like what I think of as a "West German show dog", and they even have the same warmth of character often found in those lines, but they have really tough environmental soundness. I saw a tiny waddling porky little puppy from Kirschental lines being walked over a metal grating that was above a 14 foot drop. (we have those in the sidewalk here in Germany, underneath is a storage room) Little waddling black and red pup didn't even flinch, let alone balk. 

Some of the Kirschental dogs are much more drivey than I usually think of when I think "showlines." Some are not as zesty.







I really admire these dogs. Anybody coming over to visit Kirschental? Can stay on my sofa. It's old but comfy.


----------



## Liesje

Patti if I had $$$ I would take you up on that so fast! Nikon's breeder is friends of theirs and is always going to their house and kennel. I am jealous, that is an understatement. I'm so fascinated by herding but there's only a few comparable programs here in the USA and not near me.


----------



## Brightelf

Lies (hey, I have a Tante Liesje!) if you ever do decide to come, while I'm yet here, we'd definitely enjoy seeing those dogs! Actually my village has a sheep herd that gets moved from field to field here all summer long. They have a dog tending them too-- but it looked like a bi-color to me. 

I keep drooling over the dogs on the Kirschental site. NICE.


----------



## darylehret

Personally, I'm rather young (mid 30's) to truly know what the "old dogs" were really like, never grew up among them, and have experienced too many different variables in the current breed to be wary of generalizing anything. I can say for example, dogs from these working venues or geographic origins "tend to provide" this or that trait or combination of characteristics, or in regard to dogs from particular bloodlines or major families. If the dogs of old were typically equipped with strong drives, solid nerves, athletic ability etc., that's wonderful. And if these type dogs were more readily available today, that would be even better.

On the other hand, dogs that prove too stubborn will have limited future with me. Some people are impressed by a "tough" or strong temperament for work, even when accompanied by a difficult task in handling, from result of a less guideable temperament. While that combination can and may frequently be true, it's not any sort of rule that should be found acceptable. So what needs to be valued in equally high priority, are the temperament characteristics that can offer attentive, swift, willful and eager compliance toward the handler, otherwise those featured traits will mean so little in regard to any kind of work.

Some of that described can be attributed to the dog-handler bond, imprinting, early development and the like, but to a large extent I'm of the opinion it is rather heritable as well. Just as a dog's inherent potential for character strength is derived from an inborn baseline to develop from, to be either enhanced or diminished if only marginally, so too I believe, is it's aptitude for a "biddable" temperament.

And being "the problem today is less than quality dogs are being titled and bred," then the judges are not truly safeguarding the breed as they should be while condoning "lesser" dogs, and the SV loses credibility in its stewardship by sanctioning these judges. At this point, so far along, radical results will only come from radical changes. The SV has had plenty of time (and money) to react in accordance to the needs of the breed, if it were in their true interest. My opinion is, it isn't.

Conformation matters are really simple to comply without the use of a judging system, and there are various ways to measure performance and character without the use of SUBJECTIVE opinions as well. So why are judges needed at all? Because when it boils down to it, breeding takes TWO. And it's not the individual dog producing a litter, but a COMPLIMENT of a variety of characteristics that the BREEDER has decided on.

So a judges job then becomes not unlike that of a movie critic's, whose influence will inform the public that a particular movie may or may not be worth visiting in the theatres. So, they push the market, and designate a particular dog "VA", so that everyone will bring their breeding females to this particular sire, regardless of being a decent breed match or not. And that's supposed to be good for the breed?

A breedworthiness test or system NOT involving subjective human opinions, will tend to be freer of the negative influence of politics and money, and more focused on actual produced results of the breed.


----------



## lhczth

It all boils down to the breeders, IMO. They are the ones that must make the decisions as to whether or not a given dog is good enough to breed. They are the ones that must hold themselves and their dogs to a high standard and not waiver. They are the ones that often lower their standard for easier marketing and the almighty dollar. They are the ones that often wear the rose colored glasses or ignore faults to sell puppies. A trial, a show is only a flash in time, a glimpse of the real dog and the judge's opinion is just that, but also based only on that 1 day that he sees the dog. It is the breeder that is the guardian of the breed.


----------



## TRITON

I couldn't have said it better, excellent post Lisa


----------



## darylehret

I strongly disagree, if you're saying that titles and points awarded by the judge make no difference. And no single breeder can hardly safeguard more than a single bloodline. That's where breed clubs and registries come in. An alliance of likeminded breeders working toward a unified goal. This is where the SV has severely fallen short, and needs to lose the rose colored glasses. If the standards set by judges weren't so disproportionately low to their particular fancy for the moment or crowd they're with, breeders on the whole would generally be utilizing better producers with titles who really do meet the requirements.


----------



## Vandal

I guess the question is, if you need someone else to tell you what a good dog is and if he is suitable for breeding from a temperament and conformation standpoint, maybe you shouldn't be breeding dogs.

I understand what you are saying about the judges and clubs and different bloodlines but that still leaves a great deal left up to the breeder that no judge or club can control . Lisa is right, the bulk of the responsibility falls to the breeder. 

Too bad they don't have a title for the breeders where they are required to raise and title a certain number of dogs before they are allowed to breed. Similar to the Judges program in USA but maybe a bit more strict. Something that somewhat ensures that people who want to breed at least have a basic understanding of German Shepherds and possess not just the ability to read paper but the ability to read the dogs and understand what they are seeing.


----------



## Smithie86

> Originally Posted By: VandalToo bad they don't have a title for the breeders where they are required to raise and title a certain number of dogs before they are allowed to breed. Similar to the Judges program in USA but maybe a bit more strict. Something that somewhat ensures that people who want to breed at least have a basic understanding of German Shepherds and possess not just the ability to read paper but the ability to read the dogs and understand what they are seeing.


Anne,

That is funny because another breeder made a comment to me about their better experience as a breeder as we were just starting out. Basically stating that they were more qualified with 5 years in the breed and breeding right off versus Gabor's (at that time) 30 plus years in the breed, with his military background in k9s, training, competing, working with lines/dogs that people just heard of/talked about and with trainers that people just heard talked about.

That floored me.


----------



## darylehret

But nevertheless, the judges influence the buyer's choice moreso initially, and on a broad scale of impact. That is somewhat the point I'm making. When a system of judging fails to be consistent across the board, what's the point of participation? The breed could persist without judges, and probably best if it did. I have never implied that breeders couldn't make better choices, and perhaps they would, without a corrupt or unfair system condoning the choices that have been made.


----------



## Liesje

> Originally Posted By: Smithie86
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted By: VandalToo bad they don't have a title for the breeders where they are required to raise and title a certain number of dogs before they are allowed to breed. Similar to the Judges program in USA but maybe a bit more strict. Something that somewhat ensures that people who want to breed at least have a basic understanding of German Shepherds and possess not just the ability to read paper but the ability to read the dogs and understand what they are seeing.
> 
> 
> 
> Anne,
> 
> That is funny because another breeder made a comment to me about their better experience as a breeder as we were just starting out. Basically stating that they were more qualified with 5 years in the breed and breeding right off versus Gabor's (at that time) 30 plus years in the breed, with his military background in k9s, training, competing, working with lines/dogs that people just heard of/talked about and with trainers that people just heard talked about.
> 
> That floored me.
Click to expand...

*snort*

I'm more likely to take dog/training/breeding advice or own a dog from my uncle who has never owned a GSD but has always owned a working dog that works with him every day than take advice or own a dog from many of the "top" show line breeders. Sad, but true.


----------



## Smithie86

Lies - this was a "working" line breeder


----------



## Liesje

Yeah sounds like there's some bad eggs in every bunch huh


----------



## Andaka

> Quote: Ernie Loeb's dog Bernd(can't think of his last name),


Ch. Bernd von Kallengarten ROM. He was half of some of the most successful crosses in American show lines -- Bernd/Lance and Bernd/Hein.

And one of the reasons (but not the only one) that Bodo was not used more at stud was that he lived in California at a time when air travel was not as prevelent. Much harder to breed to him than say Lance of Fran-Jo who was standing in Ohio.

But yes, American line show breeders more than others tend to fall into the "popular stud" trap and breed to the flavor of the day rather than think out a long term plan that may or may not be best served by that stud dog.


----------



## cliffson1

Yes Daphne, he was a very popular sire and did set up several good "clicks". Ernie brought some nice imports in the country in the mid to late seventies but the Lance/Mike craze was on and top bitches were not sent to these dogs. He brought a dog in 1977 named Yvan vom Wisenborn. Dog was shown 4 times and finished but Ernie sent him to San Paulo, Brazil because Americans wouldn't use him. I had a bitch puppy from Ernie and Yvan that had fabulous temperament and beautiful international conformation. She lived with me til 13 when she passed. Once this type was set in America then outside genetic diversity was difficult to achieve in the American show world. This was a complete turnabout from the past as America always had successful German Imported dogs in the showring prior to the Lance onset. History has shown whether this was productive or not.


----------



## trudy

my 2 cents for what it is worth, I want a dog who still looks good, I want some conformation. That is why standards are written. I don't want a great schutzhund dog who looks like a Mal or rottie, or any other perhaps combo. So temperment and health are the most important but you can't throw out conformation, and while I don't personally like lots of what wins I do feel the importance of conformation should also be stressed. German Shepherds have a standard and the dog should always be bred to look like it.


----------



## Chris Wild

> Originally Posted By: trudymy 2 cents for what it is worth, I want a dog who still looks good, I want some conformation.


Agree. I want a GSD that looks like a GSD. Functional, correct, sound working structure is also important.

The problem is that what is functional and what wins in the conformation ring are often two very, very different things and unfortunately that means that the structure that does well in show is often UNsuitable for working endeavors. The standard hasn't changed, but people's interpretation of it sure has.


----------



## cliffson1

Trudy, I agree with you...that's why I feel so good when I take my GSD's to AKC events and people flock around and tell me that my dogs are the type of German Shepherds they were brought up seeing. "Out of the mouth of Babes".......the strong noble majestic look is what turns people on.....I don't need to comment on my dogs temperament.


----------



## hudak004

Another problem is, the best structure for herding (endurance trotting) is not always the best structure for fast, agile, powerful schH dogs. The features of some showlines, like the croup angle and position, is "supposed" to be more conductive for more EFFICIENT herding. Not saying the dogs without that structure cant herd, but for an actual working herding dog (not just someone doing herding for fun) some of the features of the showlines are "supposed" to be geared more for efficient herding.

Problem is MOST of the showlines participating in these shows arent herding dogs. 

I say "supposed" because Ive never tested this theory, but it is what I have heard.


----------



## Chris Wild

It's interesting that the "structure for herding" has been the excuse used for decades for the increasingly extreme angulation seen in the show ring. Yet #1, as already mentioned, these dogs as a rule don't herd nor do the people using this excuse to justify the angulation know the first thing about herding in most cases. #2, the GSD is supposed to be an *all purpose* working dog, not specializing in any one thing, so when overall speed, agility and athletic ability is compromised in favor of extreme trotting, that goes against the vision of the breed and does the breed an extreme disservice. #3, the idea of extreme trotting needed for herding has taken on almost mythical proportions and no longer meshes with reality. Look at actual herding dogs who do this for a living, or those who dog tending style competition herding (lots of HGH videos on Youtube) and it's obvious that those dogs spend *more* time running, cutting, stalking, and standing still than they do trotting around in circles.


----------



## Liesje

Yeah if I want to see "herding structure" I look at dogs and handlers who actually herd and ranch, all day every day, for a living. People who own the dogs out of necessity. Not ones that train and dabble in sport/competition, where the dogs are great fun but not a necessity to do the work.


----------



## Doc

"The true and most noble job of the German shepherd dog is of course looking after the herds and, as the name says, specifically the sheep herds." Max von Stephanitz

An interesting statement from "the founder" don't you think? I might also add that good herding dogs are not trained to herd but rather it is an inborn quality and performed by instinct, not taught. This is often referred to as "genetic obedience". In other wordds, a good herding dog does not need praise and rewards for doing his job. He does it because he likes it and the work itself is reward enough. 

An old-timer once told me that "you can "train" a dog to do and perform just about anything. But what he (the dog) excels in isn't trained, it's already inside him and he doesn't have to be told to do it". He went on to say that "command/response training is done so a dog can perform tasks that he wouldn't normally do without being taught, unless of course these tasks were genetically programed into him".


----------



## Deejays_Owner

Here is an Article from Ulf Kintzel ----> Herding dogs and the golden middle 

From the Structure section.

*He said that Sheep Herders in Germany don't use dogs with angulation.
They don't think it is necessary, and from his own experience less angulated dog trot pretty well.
Also goes on to say that dogs that have too much anglation often do have a problem to
run fast enough when sheep bolt, & problems jumping high livestock fences.*


----------



## Chris Wild

> Originally Posted By: Doc"The true and most noble job of the German shepherd dog is of course looking after the herds and, as the name says, specifically the sheep herds." Max von Stephanitz
> 
> An interesting statement from "the founder" don't you think?


And one commonly taken out of context as it relates to the history of the breed, and Max's own writings.

While it was indeed the traditional herding dogs of Germany that the founders fell in love with, the reality was that there was little future for such dogs as the changes of the late 19th and early 20th centuries brought about a global movement from pastoral life to industrialization, and they knew it. The GSD breed was formed to produce a dog who would be of value in the modern age, to prevent their beloved herding dogs from going the way of the Dodo. Thus the concentrated effort to develop a breed FROM those herding dogs that would have a future as an all purpose working dog that could not only still function in it's traditional role tending the ever shrinking flocks, but would also prove to be of value in a variety of areas important in the modern world: police/military, service work, search work, etc...


----------



## Doc

And in what context is this taken from? There is no discussion about the ensuing development of the German shepherd and why Max felt it had to change. The topic in discussion was herding and his comments indicate Max's early knowledge and respect for the herding aspect of the dog.

I do not need an abridged historical account of the development of the German shepherd. It seems as if someone has an opinion in here, others can not wait to counter attack. I thought the purpose of this form was to have dialog about the German shepherd - all aspects of the breed. It is real clear that a great number of people in here only want to see and read information that agrees with their own mindset. What a pity and a good way to turn dialog into a debate. Why can't anyone present a different perspective without being put in front of the firing squad?


----------



## Deejays_Owner

Doc here is a pedigree of a very good herding dog SG Fiona vom Quasliner Moor 

Note: all the SchH titles along with the HGH titles in the pedigree!!!
You will see the two do go hand & hand!!


----------



## Chris Wild

The context I was speaking of is the mental flow that goes like this:

GSD = Herding dog (not exclusively true, hence my comment)
Herding = Trotting (also not entirely true)

Therefore the better the dog can execute the "flying trot" the more it is suited to it's original purpose of herding. So we can alter structure in favor of the "flying trot", even if it means that structure is detrimental to just about everything other than the "flying trot" and intereferes with the dog's ability to serve any utilitarian function. And we can do this because it supposedly makes a dog more suited to herding.

This is a very wide held belief (or excuse that's been repeated so many times people do believe it) and it is based on two very false assumptions. #1 that the GSD is supposed to be primarily (and in the minds of many exclusively) a herding dog. #2 that such a trot is beneficial, or a requirement, of fulfilling that function.

My comment about the love and appreciation of herding dogs being taken out of context was in relation to #1 above... in the effort to justify the extreme angulation that has developed in the past few decades in some lines of dogs people will latch on to anything in the history or historical writings of the breed that refer to herding, and ignore the rest, the bulk of which clearly says the GSD should be about more than just herding. So yes, such statements ARE often taken well out of context.


----------



## Doc

A beautiful dog I might add. And a good balance between SchH and HGH. Thanks! I see there are some siblings also.


----------



## Doc

I was under the assumption that you meant it was taken out of Max's context. I could care less about a "flying trot" or extreme angulation - the older herding dogs didn't have either as far as I know. I have no control over how other people interpret form and function - I just think mother nature has the upper hand on that and knows best. And I also think that some lines have genetic obedience to herding.

I could be wrong and often am, but at least I have an opinion on it and everyone knows where I stand.


----------



## Chris Wild

> Originally Posted By: Doc And I also think that some lines have genetic obedience to herding.


I agree, though I would say some lines have genetic obedience, period. It is not specific to herding. Some lines have better affinity and instinct around livestock than others, but I see this as a separate from genetic obedience in general. As far as genetic obedience goes, it takes many forms and can be found in many dogs. While certainly the best herding dogs have it, it is not exclusive to herding dogs.


----------



## Deejays_Owner

> Originally Posted By: DocA beautiful dog I might add. And a good balance between SchH and HGH. Thanks! I see there are some siblings also.


Also note she is a working farm dog that has German working & show dogs behind, with a Conformation title.



> Quote:Ulf Kintzel
> White Clover Sheep Farm
> 
> Future Breeding:
> I will breed SG Fiona vom Quasliner Moor, HGH in 2010 again.
> Fiona is out of my Anton vom Quasliner Moor and Farah vom Dolderbrunnen, a herding dog that worked on large sheep farm in Germany, bred and owned by my colleague and good friend Manfred Voigt.
> I also titled Fiona and she is now a regular “employee” on my farm.
> I will choose a stud that has pronounced drives, good nerves and is willing to obey and work for its owner.
> I will neither choose a male to soft or too hard headed.


Looks like Ulf is looking for a stud in the US


----------



## Doc

I never said genetic obedience applied only to herding. I think it can apply to other areas as well. Again, the topic being discussed was herding, so my statement pertained to genetic obedience in herding - which is discussed in detail by Manfred Heyne.


----------



## VomBlack

> Quote:Von Stephanitz's motto for the breed was "Utility and intelligence," a statement which underscored his commitment to the creation of a first class german working dog. He cared little for physical beauty, and the exceptional working characterstics of many German Shepherd Dog bloodlines are often attributed to his dedication to function over form.


It's too bad that some lines favor extreme form over utility, the versatility being one of the reasons I love the breed so much. I've considered trying conformation just for fun with Odin even though he's from working lines, figure it can't hurt.


----------



## Doc

> Originally Posted By: VomBlack
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:Von Stephanitz's motto for the breed was "Utility and intelligence," a statement which underscored his commitment to the creation of a first class german working dog. He cared little for physical beauty, and the exceptional working characterstics of many German Shepherd Dog bloodlines are often attributed to his dedication to function over form.
> 
> 
> 
> It's too bad that some lines favor extreme form over utility, the versatility being one of the reasons I love the breed so much. I've considered trying conformation just for fun with Odin even though he's from working lines, figure it can't hurt.
Click to expand...

I think that is a great idea!


----------



## Xeph

> Quote:It's too bad that some lines favor extreme form over utility


It's also too bad that some lines favor extreme utility over form...equally as bad IMO

I love the breed for both its form and its function, and one or the other seems to suffer between lines, with some exceptions


----------



## Liesje

> Originally Posted By: Xeph
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:It's too bad that some lines favor extreme form over utility
> 
> 
> 
> It's also too bad that some lines favor extreme utility over form...equally as bad IMO
Click to expand...

Which lines are these, do you have any examples? Just curious. I'm no expert by any means, and am most familiar with German show lines so I'm out of the loop as far as extreme flying trots and extreme utility. I've seen some icky looking utility type dogs but at least so far it's been pretty marginal, compared to the popularity at the other end of the spectrum. Does utility actually sacrifice form?


----------



## Catu

> Originally Posted By: Xeph
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:It's too bad that some lines favor extreme form over utility
> 
> 
> 
> It's also too bad that some lines favor extreme utility over form...equally as bad IMO
Click to expand...

But those can save lives, the firsts no. Bad, but not _equally_ as bad.


----------



## Xeph

I guess I must disagree...they may save some, but how quickly will they break down because things aren't proper?

I'm not talking about show extremes/standards or anything of the like, but seriously improper fronts that won't be able to take much heavy work for long, and rears with improperly ligamentation and musculature.

Offers good power and stride enough for a routine....but not a ton of consistent work work. Just saying.



> Quote: I've seen some icky looking utility type dogs but at least so far it's been pretty marginal, compared to the popularity at the other end of the spectrum. Does utility actually sacrifice form?


I think that it can to some degree Lies, in perhaps an almost subconcious spite/aversion to the show angles.

I will always think that Puck Grafental and Eagle Eichenluft are some of the most beautiful and structurally sound working line dogs I've ever seen.

But there are some dogs that are just so conformationally incorrect, they are more coyote than Shepherd. The lack of angles makes me wonder how they avoid constant injury, and how they can really do their jobs.


----------



## Catu

> Originally Posted By: XephBut there are some dogs that are just so conformationally incorrect, they are more coyote than Shepherd. The lack of angles makes me wonder how they avoid constant injury, and how they can really do their jobs.


There are many working breeds without angulation, and I don't even mean show angulation. Wolves have no angulations, yet they do not get injuried. The proper angulations are part of the breed and I don't mean they shouldn't be there, it just makes me wonder how much dogs really do need those angulations to prevent injury or it is something we want to believe.


----------



## Doc

I will have to concur with Jackie - Eagle Eichenluft is a very fine specimen.


----------



## phgsd

I think that the idea of a dog breaking down because of its lack of angles is ridiculous. Do wolves have angles? Nope, and they run all day. How many malinois and dutch shepherds break down due to their structure? They are some of the most athletic, hardiest dogs out there. They may not be the prettiest dogs in the world, but to me there is something incredibly beautiful about dogs that quick and agile.

I have spent time with plenty of showlines, several american and many german. These dogs sure look pretty when they trot, but my working line dogs can run circles around them all day. 
I have seen many working line dogs doing national-level schutzhund at 8+ years old. To do that they train pretty hard, just about every single day. 

I like pretty dogs just as much as the next person, but if I have a choice between a V rated dog with a mediocre temperament and an SG or G rated dog with an outstanding temperament, I will take the latter any day.


----------



## crackem

> Originally Posted By: LicanAntaiit just makes me wonder how much dogs really do need those angulations to prevent injury or it is something we want to believe.


humans can rationalize anything


----------



## VomBlack

> Originally Posted By: phgsdI think that the idea of a dog breaking down because of its lack of angles is ridiculous. Do wolves have angles? Nope, and they run all day. How many malinois and dutch shepherds break down due to their structure? They are some of the most athletic, hardiest dogs out there. They may not be the prettiest dogs in the world, but to me there is something incredibly beautiful about dogs that quick and agile.


I agree. I don't mind a little bit of an angle, but not when it interferes with the dog's ability to do the job it was intended to do, just my personal preference.


----------



## Chris Wild

> Originally Posted By: phgsdI think that the idea of a dog breaking down because of its lack of angles is ridiculous. Do wolves have angles? Nope, and they run all day. How many malinois and dutch shepherds break down due to their structure? They are some of the most athletic, hardiest dogs out there. They may not be the prettiest dogs in the world, but to me there is something incredibly beautiful about dogs that quick and agile.


Agree.

I also find it very telling that the majority of those who prescribe to the idea that tons of angles are good, or needed for fear the dog will break down without them, etc.... are people who do not work their dogs in any sort of physically stressful venue, much less day in, day out, for years on end. 

Whereas the folks who do work their dogs in physically stressful venues on a regular basis tend to share their lives with dogs of much more moderate structure and angles.

Structure certainly IS important for utility as well as the dog's ability to hold up to the work long term without breaking down, and an understanding of structure and certain amount of focus on structure is important for the breeding of dogs who can work well and have long working lives. But this is a very different type of structure, and much less angulated, than what is preferred in the show ring or what would be considered desireable to many coming from a show ring background.


----------



## Xeph

I'm not prescribing to tons of angles. But you can't tell me that a dog with an incorrect front will be able to take the punishment of constant jumping etc will take it as well as a proper front (note I am not talking about MOVEMENT, but impact).


----------



## hudak004

Can someone PLEASE post a picture of a correct front, and an incorrect front for comparison??


----------



## Xeph

Incorrect front:
















I'll try and find a correct front for you...much harder...in any of the lines

Shows nice pasterns, but his upper arm is incorrect, and there's little angle through the shoulder blade...he's a good dog, but good for working with me, but if he had an everyday job where he was jumping over things, he probably wouldn't hold up.

I've always liked his rear though. Not overdone at all


----------



## phgsd

Well let's take the dogs of the 30's and 40's for example? These dogs were NOT extreme in any way. They were very leggy, with little angulation, and looked very little like the dogs of today.
My memory of the exact details of schutzhund are foggy so correct me if I'm wrong, but I know there used to be a vertical wall at least 6 feet high. It may have been higher - 8'? 10'? again I forget. But the dogs had to be extremely athletic to hold up to that kind of jumping.
They still do vertical walls in ring sports which are mostly dominated by mals and dutchies since MOST of the GSD's just aren't athletic enough anymore. IMO that is very sad.
Schutzhund used to be much more demanding than it was today, and this was before the show/working split. Then people started complaining that it was too hard on the dogs, and the vertical walls were replaced with A-frames and 1 meter hurdles (and btw I have seen many showlines who have a hard time clearing the hurdle). Eventually the breed split to the point where most showlines couldn't even make it over the original jumps anymore.

I just don't get how people insist that a few degrees of angle in the shouder, or a shorter upper arm, is going to make a dog break down. Again look at mal or dutch shepherd shoulders - very little angulation, no regard to structure at all in many lines, and they are very sound working dogs for their entire lives. I am not saying people shouldn't have any regard for GSD structure but "functional" and what wins in the show ring are 2 completely different things.

What about border collies? Working BC's are intentionally bred to be cowhocked so they can turn more quickly. Show breeders have bred dogs with straight hocks and are being shunned by the working BC people for ruining their breed. 

How about JRT's? Same thing - the JRTCA fought tooth and nail for their breed to NOT be recognized by the AKC. Why? Because they are made to be working dogs, and when you start putting standards on structure, you start losing that working ability. There are also different types (size, bone, strength, etc) of terriers for different quarry, and that will be lost in the AKC show ring where all the dogs should look the same. The JRTCA DOES have its own conformation shows, but the most important classes are the ones where the dogs have hunting certificates whcih means they have gone hunting with a judge and worked a specific type of game. Without a hunting certificate the dogs can only compete in the smaller classes. 

JRT's, BC's and GSD's were all founded on utility, and that has been lost in the show ring


----------



## Catu

> Originally Posted By: XephI'm not prescribing to tons of angles. But you can't tell me that a dog with an incorrect front will be able to take the punishment of constant jumping etc will take it as well as a proper front (note I am not talking about MOVEMENT, but impact).


But if they ARE able, and had been for generations, who we are to say that theoretically they should not?


----------



## Xeph

I don't understand your question LC (the wording), could you rephrase?


----------



## Liesje

> Originally Posted By: phgsdI think that the idea of a dog breaking down because of its lack of angles is ridiculous. Do wolves have angles? Nope, and they run all day. How many malinois and dutch shepherds break down due to their structure? They are some of the most athletic, hardiest dogs out there.


That's basically how I feel as well. I asked a question before about why all the angles, why the rectangular angle when the Mal does not have the angles and is square, and I really did not get a direct answer. Maybe SOME angle is ideal, but I have to wonder if most of it is really marginal, does it *really* make a difference? I guess the only way to prove one way or another is put the dogs to the task, see who holds up.

My Kenya has an icky front/shoulder but that doesn't stop her from agility and she will do the AD at age 6 if/when I get around to it. When we went for her HIT she spent over a half hour in the ring with the judge running the sheep and the judge (who I believe breeds American lines) said she was perfect structure for the work - small, agile, and balanced with good hips.

I think what really matters is balance. When I see dogs that move really bad, like they can't do more than a lap in the show ring, it's not because they are too this or too that in the rear, they are not balanced. The front and rear angles and reach don't match. Beyond that it seems like it's really personal preference.


----------



## Catu

Xeph
You tell that a dog with incorrect angles wont be able to take the punishment of constant jumping etc as well as a proper angle one.

But we see everyday several breeds that do that. Thousand of dogs doing mondioring, police work, SAR, military, herding, mushing, hunting, etc, etc. without having what you call a proper front, and they survive. Wolves have managed to hunt large animals in the past thousands of years without injury too.

Then who we are, with our theories, to say that they cannot do all those things because their angle is not what we consider "right"? They prove us wrong everyday on the field.


----------



## Xeph

I'd like to take x-rays of dogs, both with correct fronts, and incorrect, and see which ones have more stress damage done to them.

Not that that's really possible.

I personally think there is something to our "theories", and will stay with them


----------



## trudy

Has anyone read the standard for Belgians? Mals are just one variety of the same breed so teh description is for ALL:

Shoulder long and oblique, laid flat against the body, forming a sharp angle (approximately 90 degrees) with the upper arm. Legs straight, strong and parallel to each other. Bone oval rather than round. Development (length and substance) should be well proportioned to the size of the dog. Pastern medium length, strong, and very slightly sloped. Feet round (cat footed), toes curved close together, well padded. Nails strong and black, except that they may be white to match white toe tips.
-Length and substance well proportioned to the size of the dog. Bone oval rather than round. Legs are parallel to each other. Thighs broad and heavily muscled. The upper and lower thigh bones approximately parallel the shoulder blade and upper arm respectively, forming a relatively sharp angle at stifle joint. The angle at the hock is relatively sharp, although the Belgian Sheepdog does not have extreme angulation. Metatarsus medium length, strong and slightly sloped. Dewclaws, if any, should be removed. Feet slightly elongated. Toes curved close together, well padded. Nails strong and black, except that they may be white to match white toe tips.


That is the AKC and here is the FCI standard, or European standard:

Shoulder: Shoulder blade long and oblique, well attached, forming a sufficient angle with the humerus, ideally measuring 110-115 degrees.

Notice shoulder angulation, and the rear should have some angles


----------



## windwalker718

I know it's from the GSDCA, but this is a rather handy thing to check out when understanding conformation http://www.shawlein.com/The_Standard/Index_Page/Index_Page.htm 

It goes thru all the portions of conformation correct and incorrect and shows the results of each...


----------



## trudy

that is my personal bible. Check it all the time, confusing when comparing to lots of big winning conformation dogs, especially since that is one of my interests.


----------



## cliffson1

If I really wanted to know what was good working conformation, (and since the dog is a working dog, then GOOD conformation), I would poll some 5 to 10 real Shepherds that have used German Shepherds for over thirty years to tell me what they found to be the structure that was correct for excelling at their vocation. Given a choice of real life practitioners and theoretical postulating, I think the real practitioners would be right. Afterall over a thirty year period they will see many dogs that work well past 10 years of age and they would also see the dogs that break down from poor structure. But most importantly, they would KNOW the type structure it takes to work all day and well into latter years. I wonder what these dogs would look like???????


----------



## gsdsrule

I have enjoyed reading thru this whole topic.
I was born in 1960, so those dogs are the ones I fell in love with
as a child.

The last time I went to a GSD show, I was appalled at what I saw.
Sorry, those ski slope backs and wobbly back legs are just plain ugly. I would venture to say, not very sturdy either. Most of them look like they can't get out of their own way.

The roached back hyena look is pretty unattractive also.

Like I say, I'm just a person who likes German Shepherds, but not the "modern" type.

I too was into horses, and it always seems to me that when people start showing, common sense flies out the window. Appaloosas that are nothing but QH's with spots. (sometimes) QH's dragging along with their nose on the ground, TWH's with built up shoes and the cruelty that goes along with that. Arabians with shaved faces and make-up.


----------

