Jennifer, I know plenty about genetics and breeding. I am not saying that there is no predictability in purebreds, I am saying that the predictability of many purebreds has gone out the window with such drastically different or uncaring opinions of what should be bred. You completely miss what I am saying. But that's fine, I don't really care. People love what they have, nobody likes to think that there might be something negative about their dog or the blood line they came from.

 Quote:

Jennier wrote: if some?most? SL breeders primarily focus on looks and let the rest fall by the wayside, shame on them! but couldnt the opposite be said about WL breeders? that some strive for working ability ONLY and as a result *some* end up looking like mix breeds? sorry---dont mean to offend, but some look like Mal or Elkhound crosses IMO. they might be able to work circles around some SL dogs but that isn't the only measuring stick, folks. i would want one that is balanced in drives and energy levels and intensity.

No the opposite is not true. Surely you are not suggesting that show breeding protects type, just the opposite is true. Have you seen the exaggerated examples today prancing around the show rings that look nothing or little like the breed they are supposed to be. The only thing that protects type is function as form follows it. The cookie cutter effort in breeding has caused all of the problems we see today in our pure breeds. Landrace breeds or types have remained virtually unchanged for thousands of years without a show judge or standard, thank you very much. "The GSD breed was a combined show/working breed for 70 years, before it split into separate show and working lines. During those 70 years, the desire for a uniform "breed type" for the show ring reduced genetic diversity, and especially in the earliest years of the breed, caused excessive use of popular sires". The only thing that can save a working breed is changing how and why breed stock is selected by breeders. It may be of interest that no pure breed in history as remained viable by selecting breed stock by how close to a standard they are, not one. Take a look at the working Border Collie some have prick ears some not, some are large of bone some light depending on what stock they work and where. Some are black and white some not but anyone can recognize them as Border Collies. But one thing they all have in common is they all can herd which is a lot more than there show sub-set can do. Regards Norman

Mike, to an extent i get what your saying--there are bad breeders with agendas for producing NOTHING like what the breed is supposed to be about--agreed. hopefully that divergence is not the norm of what breeders are producing. but to say that the actions of of bad breeders negate predictibility in purebreds in general is going overbaord and throwing out the baby w/the bath water.

there are bad breeders of both lines, right? that doesnt mean SL dogs are w/o any value or merit or abilities and it doesnt mean that a person should not purchase a SL puppy if its a good, reputable breeder who trains, titles and screens. it doesnt insure a perfect puppy---but nobody CAN.

i guess until a negative thing comes up with a person's dog they have every reason to think/hope there isnt anything bad looming on the horizon. i have had dogs that came up with HD or cataracts (not GD's), i even had a very titld male aussie whose mother got HD and i promptly neutered him (he had not been bred), i had a titled female whose full sister got cataracts---i spayed her (she had not been bred). these are personal eithics choices that breeders are repsonsioble for, b/c the future of their breed is at stake.

i am not in blissful ignorance about health issues, or the disregard some breeders have for screening for them, the same for temperment issues and abilities to perform the duties they were bred for. as a buyer all one can do is make sure the parents & all those in the pedigree were screened for genetic issues, titled in the discipline the buyer plans to pursue, meet the parents, get references, hopefully see older siblings, write the check, cross your fingers and keep the dog's environment as healthy/appropriate with nutrition, etc as possible. there are no guarantees whether a person gets a SL or a WL puppy or a mutt.
and youa re rtight, we are all happy w/the dogs we have, if we become *not* happy for some reason, then we would go in a diff direction next time.

there are not any breeds OR lines that i know of that are free of genetic issues. same goes for dogs with less than desirable temperments. if you are aware of some perfect lines, then by all means i will contact you next time i shop for a puppy.

 Quote:

there are bad breeders of both lines, right?

The problem is, there are not really many good show line breeders out there. I would say there are none, but I have not seen every show line breeders dogs. The problem is that there is a 2-part problem in show lines. Structure AND Temperament. So the breeders that are out there breeding show lines are ignoring half the equation, or doing a halfass job at trying to fix both simultaneously. Those breeding for show structure are breeding flawed dogs (structurally) and not taking temperament into consideration in the way they should be. Those breeding for temperament are ignoring the fact that the dogs are not structurally sound. Maybe they are breeding dogs with better than average hips, but the rest of the structure is still flawed.

It will take a lifetime or more to breed out the roached back and incorrect structure of the show lines, and then the temperament hasn't even been adressed.

Look at any show line GSD pedigree and you will instantly see the dogs are show lines from their appearance. It's not like "only a few show lines have poor structure." The entire lineage is founded upon the poor structure. So, I am sure that I am not far off when I say that there are less than a handful breeders out there, if there are even any, that are breeding structurally correct dogs that also have strong nerves and correct drives. Let alone a breeder that is breeding show line dogs with correct structure and working abilities to match working line dogs. The gene pool is just too small for that.

So why save a lineage that is doomed from the start, when you can find a "reject" working line dog that has enough drive to do Schutzhund on the weekends, and is blessed with correct structure, good hips and everything else that people seem to think they have to turn to show lines for?

You could theoretically introduce working line dogs into the show line gene pool to try and iron out the structure and temperament, but what would be the point? You will produce more bad dogs than you would good dogs, and if you forget for a minute that there is a divide between the 2 lines, and remember for a second that both these dogs are supposed to be German Shepherd Dogs, then why not just breed the dogs that are structurally correct with good temperament in the first place? i.e. just breed the working line dogs. This goes back to my earlier post pointing out that there are plenty of working line dogs that "didn't make the cut" that do everything people seem to turn to show lines for, sans the skinny legs, weak nerves, roached back and bad hips.

That's not saying that all working line dogs have perfect structure and great hips. But the percentage of good dogs falls into a realistic favor for the buyer, vs. the show line's where you are almost hunting for a mythical dog. A dog that, if someone has one, gets sold for ridiculous amounts of money because they know how rare such a dog is.

There are, as you say, niche breeders trying to bring back working abilities to the show line dogs. However admirable that may seem, at the end of the day, unless they spent $25,000 to buy a unique dog from the guy lucky enough to end up with the perfect show line, that happens to also produce well, the breeders are starting with mediocre foundation dogs in order to try and produce working dogs that don't work as well as working dogs should, and are still plagued with structural issues.

I'm not sure why I even bother trying to explain it. But, this is my last post on the subject.

Norman,
when i say SL i am talking about GERMAN SL's, not American. i see a huge diff between the 2. AMerican breeding has done exactly what you've said. is it your opinion that the German SL dogs are part and parcel of that same crappy job at preserving the breed? and when i said breed type i meant CORRECT breed type, able to work efficiently.

yes form follows function. over-angulation and roach backs and fearful/nervous/un-confident dogs are wrong.

border collies are very split between the working lines and show lines. the show lines look totally diff. it all boils down to the almighty dollar. breeders breed what wins, what wins sells. conformation judges are in large part to blame for the direction that ANY breed takes. when they put up crappy movement, incorrect angulation or topline or temperment (as much as can be evaluated in the ring) then they are encouraging bad breeding. but i do say that any breeder who focuses only on one or 2 things is ignoring other important aspects. if a dog isnt sound he cant work no matter how much drive he has; if a dog is sound but has no drive he cant work. if a dog is sound and can work but looks like a malinois when he is supposed ot be a GSD, then that IS losing breed type (correct breed type). one cannot be at the expense of the other--NONE of them should be sacrificed for the sake of the other. i will admit that appearance is the least important of breed traits--soundness, temperment and working ability should be higher priority.

 Quote:

Jennifer wrote in part: Norman,
when i say SL i am talking about GERMAN SL's, not American.

I am also.

 Quote:

if a dog is sound and can work but looks like a malinois when he is supposed ot be a GSD, then that IS losing breed type (correct breed type).

It may be of interest that the Malinois and the GSD looked very much alike at one time. From Laura Sanborn "The Belgian Shepherd breed was formed out of a landrace of sheep herding dogs in Belgium starting with the establishment of the Club du Chien de Berger Belge in (I believe) 1891 and the first written breed standard in 1892. The landrace they derived from likely already existed for hundreds of years. The GSD breed was formed out of a landrace of sheep herding dogs in Germany starting with the formation of the Verein für Deutsche Schäferhunde (SV) and the first written breed standard in 1899. The landrace they derived from also likely already existed for hundreds of years. The Belgian Shepherd and GSD came from sheep herding dogs who performed similar functions, and had very similar appearances. These breeds no longer look similar because the GSD show ring altered the GSD breed".


Regards Norman

Mike, I am sorry to hear that was your last post on the subject. I have enjoyed your view point. I completely appreciate your passion for what you think. I do not completely agree with you, but on many of your points I do agree.

I am one of those folks who is stuck in the middle between the two "classes". I have WL and SL dogs. I appreciate what each has to offer in regard to what I need. My WL is my SAR K9, and her unending drive and determination for the work is outstanding. I also found myself in posession of several SL dogs who are NOT the normal typical SL dogs. They also have produced better than themselves. I bred my youngest (SL)female over a year ago, who produced 8 pups who are all in working homes. 3 in sch(in working dog clubs), 2 in herding on working farms, 2 in SAR, and one is a few months away from graduating from narcotics detection and apprehension in a country sheriff's dept. Even I know that it is an unlikely scenario in even the best of wl breedings, never mind a SL. Will I be able to produce that kind of litter again? I wish, but most likely not. I will however strive to maximize the potential for that type of litter. I am breeding that same bitch to a SL dog, who when most see work, have NO idea he is 100% german show lines.

Don't get me wrong, I love working line dogs, and if I could talk the spouse into another dog in the house, I would have another working line dog. I also, can appreciate and enjoy ANY dog that can work, no matter what the work is. Hell, I have been known to drool and get goosebumps when I have watched Chris Carr's dog Frankie just doing ob, never mind watching that dog haul arse down the field for a long bite! I enjoy watching the over the top drive dogs doing anything, and am always thankful I do not have to handle those dogs.

I hate the show ring and think it is the biggest downfall to any breed. Breeders who line the ring pointing out the gorgeous gait of one dog over another and care less for the working ability of that dog continue to ruin the breed. Why anyone would go to a dog show to choose breeding stock is beyond me. If more breeders lined the fields of working dog trials to choose the breeding stock, one of two things would happen, 1) we would see an increase in the working ability of the dogs presented at these shows or 2) many would get their wish and the SL dog would cease to exist.

I still think the best way to increase working ability is to put the breeders who are producing good dogs in the forefront. Educating the public is one of the best and easiest things we can do. Instead of pointing out which ones can't work, it is a lot easier to point out which ones can work, and which ones produce working ability.

Additionally, encouraging owners of SL dogs to correctly, PROVE their dogs' working ability in real trials,(and other working endeavors) and not at the clubs that are KNOWN for their midnight trials, and backyard ADs would go a long way to helping.

If you are looking for Charlie Starr's kennel it is Drache Feld. They are located in Kentucky, not far from the NASS site.
Charlie is trying very hard to produce showline GSD's that work exceptionally well. His background is in working lines and he is an excellent trainer and helper. He is in show lines because someone hired him to run their kennel. Part of why his dogs work so well is because he is actually taking the time to train them the correct way.
At his regional show this past June he brought in Margit van Dorssen as a judge. She is the woman that owns the von Arlett kennel in Germany. She has long been a proponent of breeding working dogs in to her showline program to add pigment and working ability. She spoke at the dinner they had about why and how she does this. She also was featuring on the front page of her web site a dog she produced out of the mixed working/show lines. I am not sure if it is still there, but, her web site is http://www.arlett.de/
It is translated in to English also.

Edited by SteveZorn (10/22/2008 01:39 PM)
Edit reason: spelling

 Quote:

Steve wrote in part: "She has long been a proponent of breeding working dogs in to her showline program to add pigment and working ability".

Steve I'm glad she is trying to make something of show line GSD's but this begs the question why doesn't she just breed working line GSD's with good pigment? Regards Norman

Dee, i agree with everything in your post. well said. that has been my point, that both types have value.

Norman, question: do you think the change of the GSD's original look is a bad thing? ---and i am not talking about soundness-based traits (like roached backs, overly long backs and too much rear angulation, narrowness), i mean just the general LOOK of one that is structurally/functionally put together correctly. *should* they have stayed looking the old way? are WL breeders trying to return to that look?

in Aussies, some breeders tried to cross the WL w/the SL lines and they often times ended up with pups that really were neither. minimal herding instinct and not pretty or sound either. if GSD breeders are having success with crossing them, then good. what could be better than a mentally sound, sane, confident, capable, structurally correct & also *lovely* dog working?

Dee, congrats on that outstanding litter. goodluck doing more of the same.