Symeon,

I think everyone reasons with your statement which is kind of understandable but I think you may be missing the point that even this ideology you have of a "sanctioning body" can still have little merit to the a dog produces. Not to mention this "sanctioning body" can still be friends, acquaintances, etc there to host the "Tuesday night trial". While a title may be a "safeguard" for knowing the dog has some capability to work, it has little validity to how the dog will produce. The same goes with how many view top competition dogs and the pups sired by them. There's some dogs at "V" mark that do well but don't produce well. There's some "SG" and "G" on the list that may produce your best PPD or "serious as a heart attack" dog. I've fallen prey to those buying habits years ago but know better now. Most recently I was going to turn down a breeding with a super nice SchH2 female and a male that only had a "BH". Good thing I didn't. This male has drives far better than some "more popular breeding" litters I have bought pups from. I was impressed enough to buy the bitch but this same "BH" male was bred to another bitch and again, several pups were placed as dual purpose police dogs. The drives were phenomenal, very high social aggression to. But the great thing is I didn't follow a friends advice of "paying money to a bitch bred to a male with only a BH".

I guess I am like Mike mentioned which is riding "both fences" in a sense but with the world being so advanced in technology these days, you can get a good example of pups these days before investing in them with few things such as a camcorder, computer and email address.

I'm done talking about the subject. It's always going to be highly debated. But know you may be passing up some great working prospects if you get into the "shallow mindset" that some use as a criteria for selecting working prospects these days.

JMHO

Your comments are completly understandable. Yet, all that effort does not quarantee anything.
I will take the Malinois for example. There is no doubt that the malinois, an almost unheard of breed 20 years ago has taken the working world by storm. They have out produced, out paced the GSD in virtually every open arena for working breeds.
But, very very few dogs are from titled females. In fact a big number of the ones that actually have pedigrees have fictitious pedigrees. It is the premeir example of focused breeding and the breeders art that these dogs have come along so far in such a short time worldwide. This breed now outnumbers GSD's 2 to 1 as working police dogs in the Southwestern US and even in Germany the Malinois is now at least as common as the GSD as a police dog. Most with no pedigree, most with only the breeders say so behind them. They also have a incidence of very very low dysplasia in comparison with most purebred dogs.
We are now seeing less fictious pedigrees, more Mals with pedigrees, and more titles on dogs of both sexes going into those pedigrees. But, mark my words on this....we will see greater rates of desease, and more breed specific health and character problems the more the Malinois world becomes like the GSD world. All the claculating, investigating into pedigrees, all the subjective third party evaluations will not produce a single great dog. Onlyt the breeders art can do that. That means your breeder has to be experienced, knowledgeable in the breed, and focused on a narrow ideal. You have to see what happens when the animals produced by a breeder hits the road, and in the US that is not the sport field where very very few animals make it. many more are police dogs, S&R dogs, detector dogs, and personal protection dogs, and companions.
I have had the fortune to help Ed find a couple of stud dogs. If I have the chance to work a dog and know that it is what is necesaary for Ed and the dog becomes available I'm on the phone to him. Because I KNOW that this animal I am looking at will get the chance to produce. I could very well divert that cream of the crop into police work since that is what I do but would rather see them make more police and sport dogs. This is the kind of cooperation that gets things done well in the US. Titles are nothing here. That is said by someone who titles their dogs extensively. That is why I think the new kor that is a discription of character and drive is much more friendly to the breeders art than titles. It will also benefit the consumer more than a title ever will since it can become a real breeders tool.

 Quote:

I'm not saying that good dogs don't exist without titles. Though that's what everyone seems to be focusing on. As VanCamp stated all these "facts" about Leerburg's dogs for example, If I was to buy a dog from such breeder, being that I would have to fly there, to look at the dogs, I would like to see some kind of proof that the dogs passed some kind of sanctioned test at the minimum, besides the breeders claims of quality. before I commited to booking a flight reserving a room e.t.c. Also claims from the breeders associates, friends, and others don't go as far as an independent sanctioned body at the least.

Kevin Sheldahl wrote:

That is why I think the new korung that is a discription of character and drive is much more friendly to the breeders art than titles. It will also benefit the consumer more than a title ever will since it can become a real breeders tool.

Thanks, That's what I've been trying to say all along.
Not to beat this subject to death, but mainly it's sort of an easier way for a novice to check about the dogs in the korung report. Being that all info would be centralized in one area and easy to look up. What responsible breeder wouldn't want his dogs listed in there? All one would have to do is look up a breeder, and see what common traits, his dogs have produced in the last five years for example.

Also if 80% of his dogs go to ppd and psd careers, the only way to still check on their performance, genetic traits would be in such a system.
I also agree that it's the novice that this would benefit greatly more than anyone else. Often a novice would need all the help he/she can get to make an honest evaluation on a prospective purchase. Plus an easier dog to handle, where a experienced handler can get a good dog with "issues" and iron them out because of experience.

VanCamp, if a breeder says he has produced more litters than anyone else, over 300 liters, I would think that there should be more than 7 dogs to go to Sch III in 34 years.
And if most went ppd or psd careers, well, that's why it would be possible to still check their quality/performance, in a more internationaly recognized report, rather than just sports titles like Schutzhund.

Symeon,
"... I would think that there should be more than 7 dogs to go to Sch III in 34 years"

I would say with respect that it's far harder to get a SchH title in the U.S. than in most of Europe. America is a *HUGE* land mass and the difficulty in getting to SchH clubs for many people in this country is beyond belief.

SchH is a *rare* sport in this country with only a few thousand competitors ( at the very most ) if you really look at it.
In my opinion, your statement seems like you're looking at this from a European viewpoint.

 Quote:

I would say with respect that it's far harder to get a SchH title in the U.S. than in most of Europe. America is a *HUGE* land mass and the difficulty in getting to SchH clubs for many people in this country is beyond belief.

SchH is a *rare* sport in this country with only a few thousand competitors ( at the very most ) if you really look at it.

This is something that REALLY needs to be emphasized to all. SchH, or any protection sport for that matter, is very rare if you look at the size vs number of clubs in the country...hell, even if you look at the number of dog owners vs number of clubs!

Those are only the numbers of people that are part of the "SchH III Club". Who knows what the real numbers are for titled dogs? I bet you Ed doesn't even know.

But it is a good sample for comparison, and 7 dogs is good no matter how you cut it.

Just to clarify for those that aren't familiar with the "SchH3 club" that Robert is talking about. That is for handler/dog teams that have trained the dog from Bh through SchH3, Handler/Owner/Trained, no sending the dogs off for titles, no having someone else handle the dog for you in trial. Those numbers are significantly smaller than people that have bought an already titled dog and finished it out to SchH3. It is also only for USCA and does not include dogs trialed/titled by WDA or DVG members.

The USCA SchHIII Club is for USA members titling dogs from nothing to III themselves and for those that actually apply for the listing.
Many people have part of their titles from another organization such a DVG or WDA, or a dog has titled and not finished with a III, or moved into another sport before a III was done. Or like myself just never really cared to apply to be added to the list.
It is unfortunate that in the US there are just so few oportunities to train in the protection sports. Every community has some type of protection training whether that be a professional PPD trainer, or a law enforcement instructor, or Ring clubs, or PPD clubs, or schutzhund clubs. But, it is and always has been a very small and contentious group of folks playing in this arena.
It has just been the last few years that the value of working breeding is becoming known to groups like S&R, detector dogs for whatever discipline, and even people seeking a stable companion at home or work. In the past the dogs were viewed (still ar ein many cases) as viscious loose cannons if they were protection trained or from working lines. So, the numbers of dogs in the SchIII don't have any reflection at all on the quality of the breeding.

It is mentioned that the new kor would give novices a chance to see what the animals were and what they produced. Naw, the level of knowledge among novices would not rise to the level of even understanding the complexity of the art of breeding, let alone the use of the vocabulary in a kor report. The best use of the kor will be by the breeder, especially when introducing outside dogs into their breeding. Others who may have interest in the breeding to determine the course of their own breeding practices will benefit. Novices need mentoring. They need to be directed to someone who can help them select a dog, a breeder, and rear and train a dog for the work. This is where most novices start down the slippery slope to failure. They read a bunch, speculate a bunch, and should have sought out the help of an experienced trainer, competitor, breeder, for help.

 Quote:

Those are only the numbers of people that are part of the "SchH III Club". Who knows what the real numbers are for titled dogs? I bet you Ed doesn't even know.

But it is a good sample for comparison, and 7 dogs is good no matter how you cut it.

the reason why the malinois are the best working dogs is the fact that they are developed in the Belgian Ringsport. no other breed can compete against them in this extreme sport (with exception of a rare few). SCHH is a joke if you compare it to Ringsport.
i train both sports (with Rottweilers !) and only a few Rotts can be used for ring, for schh you find many.
is my humble opinion...