eliminate extreme show dogs from the breeding pool
make temperment and working ability more important then overall good looks
ZTP
change standard

BINGO!

Great F-ing post Mike!

<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

thAn overall looks, got a little excited typing.

Hey Richard, do you think it would be ethical to eliminate the whole American GSD FANCY from the breeding pool?
That would make a BIG difference.


(just kidding)

Richard you can harp on all you like about the standard not being the problem. But, if by some miracle it was modified in a way that would FORCE a change in show judging as well as institute some type of working test you would see change. You are right about one thing though, it ain't gonna happen because none of us (working types) care one iota about conformation shows. It would take every single one of us showing our working dogs to get the type of exposure to make people think that THEY are the cool ones.

Van Camp,

And the name of this thread was....?

My point is the Standard already favors, in fact REQUIRES the working type. It isn't followed now. We working types lament the loss of the true Working Dog from the base population. And by the way at the last working trial you went to how many dogs did you see that had poor conformation? We complain that the majority of dogs shown and bred don't meet the standard, we just won't DO anything to change the situation. There are some of us willing to make a change. I know my new puppy will be titled in both Conformation and Protection. I know several others doing the same thing. It can be done, it just takes a commitment to the OVERALL well being of the breed.

 Quote:

Originally posted by az trooper:
Look at Zwinger V. Emsbogen, Heinz Gerdes is an SV judge and has VERY handsome BSP participants.

our first working line dog is a granddaughter of Boomer v Emsbogen. As is our 2nd. Very good looking dogs, both sable. One (our first) has some show lines on her sire's side, but still the grandsire is Ico v Ardhaus (2x National champ) and the granddam is a ScH3 bitch. She's only 6mos old, but shows promise for SchH (that's what we do for now, we're just starting out). The other (our second) has Boomer as a maternal grandsire with Afra v Baumberg as a maternal granddam, and she's a bit extreme in prey, good defense, but lacks confidence in tracking (she's linebred on Harro, Dax, and Sagus). Both are good looking dogs and appear to fit the standard well, but we're more into the working ability so we don't plan to do anything other than showing them to get a rating for breeding. Kinda goes along with the working lines not doing too much showing (besides, I really have no interest in competing for "who has the prettiest dog on this day under this judge" award).
I also think another reason you might not see too many working lines at shows is d/t the fact I've hardly seen many get better than a SG or G. Kinda hard to get motivated when your dog doesn't get looked on favorably because it's too "rugged" and not "refined enough." But keep in mind, all my comments come from someone that is truly still an amateur (hopefully considered a well informed one though).

But Richard, it is much easier to do that by just switching breeds as you have to the BRT, which is a fairly new breed in itself, much less in the US. What most members have been referring to on this thread is the demise of the GSD conformation standards (or the adherence to, which you repeatedly pointed out and I agree with). This is a problem that has been ongoing for generations, even to a certain degree in Europe, a problem in which the working types are scoffed at in the conformation ring, and vice versa at the working trials. I amusingly recall a situation a couple of years ago when my grandparents from the midwest came here to Arizona for a visit for the first time. All my GSD's come from European bloodlines, but only one of them has all Leerburg grandparents. She has a much darker coat and a stocky build. When my grandmother, who is in her late 70's and grew up with working shepherds on the farm was meeting the dogs, she immediately recognized the Leerburg descendant as a shepherd, but asked what breed the other dogs were! And in today's society, I get the complete opposite response from people who automatically recognize my other dogs as shepherds and question what type of dog the "oddball" is.
:rolleyes:

Beth,

It has gone on forever. 20 years ago when I had my GSD even the Vet would ask what he was crossed with. I thnk that if the GSD, and other working breeds are going to be totally saved it will require that people begin to look realisticly at how conformation (and working dogs) evaluations should be handled. AKC is NEVER going to work towards saving any of the breeds. This is for several very specific reasons.

First the AKC is designed to regester dogs. It is the primary source of their income. They will do nothing that will jeopardize that. They feel no responsibility towards the breeds. They leave that up to the breed clubs. And they select which clubs represesnt the breeds. The AKC has long held a bias against the working of dogs. The AKC sees there function is to attempt to encourage the most possible breedings of regestered dogs so they can regester the puppies. They hold shows so that they can give people something they like to do. They sponsor some working type trials, but they have always seen the primary function of the dog is to be a house companion. This is in direct contradiction to many of their accepted Standards.

So if you are looking to the AKC to save the breed, be prepared watch it continue to decline. If any breed is to be saved it will be up to people that love the breed to do it. It may mean that if you want the AKC will be left behind. The only reason the AKC holds the sway it does is because size and money mean power.

If anybody was really serious about creating a real regestry for the salvation of the working breeds it would have to look something like this. First Championships would have to be fairly easy to obtain. It shouldn't require a dogs full functional life to obtain a Championship. The other thing that would be required is the dogs must demonstrate working ability. The working ability would not necessarily mean full protection titles, but some thing along the lines of Temperament Testing.

If there was a 2 level Championship. The level for Champion would require meeting the Standard for the breeds conformation only. Not that the dog "beat" the other dogs in the ring, just meet the conformation standard. It could work similar to how cats are judged now. Each show has multple rings with seperate judges. In one to two shows a dog could recieve a conformation championship. In order to compete for a Grand Champion the dog must first pass a working test. Either be titled in a working discipline or pass a temperament test. Then the dog is allowed to compete against other Champions and Grand Champions for Conformation Best in shows for the breed and overall best in show.

Under this type of system the people that are primarily interested in the Conformation showing could continue down that path. But in order to do that they would have to demonstrate working ability. Working people could validate that their dogs meet Conformation Standards with out having to invest a long career in the show ring.

It could work, but it won't happen. The show people don't want to maintain working ability as it limits the potential customers for puppies. The Working people aren't willing to invest anything in conformation showing. There will always be people that are willing to discard the standard to suit their narrow purpose, both working and conformation.

Originally posted by Richard Cannon:


So if you are looking to the AKC to save the breed...

I think we all know that's not going to happen... Nice post.

Richard,
Van Camp beat me to the punch! Ummm, a few things I would like to point out. The first being that you have implied to change the way the judges judge. The present standard that you have quoted ( and I have read it many times before) is very liberal on the working aspect. There really is no direct mention in the standard to the real working abilty of the GSD with the WUSV or the AKC. WHile I aggree with you that it does not include or call for extreme angulations that we see, it also does not call for working abilty. If it did, we would not be debating this.LOL
I feel that if the Seiger requirments were to change and the conformation shows even at the club level changed, then, to include real working abilty tests, then it would force judges to have to pick better working dogs, over the pretty spooky guys. I think that this has to come from the top and cause a domino effect.
Your remark refering to my comment in not being that intrested in conformation anyway; even if I was, and more people like me were, this would not make a lasting overall change in the breed. It would be a few isolated groups doing this. I feel that a systme like the ZTP, in America and Europe for that matter, that one could go and get in a weekend would be best suited. During this time the animal would then be judged overall. Again as I stated before, even with a change as I feel there should be in the standard, to bring the two together, with the amount of time it takes to get a dog ready for breeding, we would never move foward at the pace we need to. Do you really need titles? No Ed has proven this, but if you are talking about making a lasting change through-out the breed, then you need some way of recording thses animals.
The Seiger should be the best all around animal, do you think the present standard really calls for that?

Michael,

It comes down to the application of the Standard. The present Standard lists the non-working temperament as a Fault. Again, it doesn't matter what the Standard says, Judges freely ignore it. It comes down to the Judges support the majority of the fancy. That won't change. The AKC will NEVER put working chacteristics as a requirement for a Conformation title. Even for the breeds they accept and sponser working trials, there is no requirement for the working ability to be shown for conformation. Some years ago the Doberman & Rott people tried to include a temperament test in the Club Conformation shows. They discoverd 2 things. One, the AKC threatened to remove those Organizations from the governing body of the AKC. Two, the dogs couldn't pass the test. They promptly dropped the requirement.

As much as we lament the lack of decent type in conformation shows, we created it by not showing the dogs. And now we complain that the conformation has gone down hill for the working dogs, and the Conformation dogs can't work. Plain and simple, you get what you breed for.