The saddest breeding program I have ever seen! - Page 4

"Your statement that GSDs are obsolete for military and law enforcement work is preposterous, and is not based in fact."

I did not make such a statement.

Still, one has to think about the issue of dog utility.

Most of the time, with some exceptions such as SAR, seeing eye dogs, and drug detection, a dog is used  in law enforcement and the military because it is viewed by human beings as being more expendable.

Some people really are animal lovers. I find many into show line GSDs tend to be true animal lovers and dog lovers,often  older ladies and gentlemen; to them, dogs are not more expendable than human beings.

I have nothing against working dog  or working line, especially for SAR and drug detection, but most dogs work because they are viewed as more expendable than human beings.

Different stroke for different folks.

For me I like different strokes. I like more than one line of GSD.  

I find very opininated people, toward religosity proportion at times.

HighDesertGSD, the next time a police service dog in your area is killed in the line of duty, you might want to attend the funeral service and look at the face of the handler. You might, then, want to revise your thesis that "many into show line GSDs tend to be true dog lovers, often older ladies and gentlemen; to them, dogs are not more expendable than human beings." So much for the intense bond that develops between a police K-9/military handler and their dog. I'll have to tell the officers I train with to go out and find those older ladies and gentlemen into the show line dogs to school them up in how to truly love their animals.

Sue, as always, fantastic posts--part of the reason I so rarely post here is that you write almost word for word what I am thinking, along with 4pack and Slamdunc and some others.

Leoetta--also great posts--but don't feel like you wasted an hour and a half of your life reading that site. If you're in the right mood, in can almost be hilarious--I count that as being entertained. Just like reading some of these posters on here.

--Scott

"So much for the intense bond that develops between a police K-9/military handler and their dog. I'll have to tell the officers I train with to go out and find those older ladies and gentlemen into the show line dogs to school them up in how to truly love their animals."

I have no doubt that there is a bond between canine and officer, but an officer still has to be intellectually honest.

People make do with reality and make mental adjustment.

When an officier sends a canine into a house in high danger, a suspect possibly armed, the canine is there not because it is more able than an officer but because it is able enough and it is more expendable.
 
This is just the simple truth. Officers who handle canines, like many people in many conflicting situations, often shun the truth.

If you love a canine, really love it, your do not place it in such danger.

The basic thrust of canines in law enforement, except for drug detection, for the most part, is that dogs are more expendable than human beings. An officer handling a canine can block this simple thrust out of his mind as much as possible, but it is the truth nonetheless. May be it can be called conditional love: that a dog is more expendable is the main thrust, after that friendship is possible.

I like working dogs as well; there is something in a dog with high caiber that elicits interest.
 
Some canine work is simply important because the working dog is able enough and also expendable.

Oh boy.

HighDesertGSD--I want to first thank you for keeping your response on a level of civility that makes me want to continue to engage in this discussion with you.  Part of the reason I have not contributed more to this board over the years, is seeing--in the past, at least--how quickly interesting topics degenerated into name calling, bashing, cursing, flame wars that just were a complete turn off.  So, however much I disagree with you, it's actually refreshing to engage in a civilzed discussion with someone.

But I do have do disagree with your premise that  most patrol dogs work because they are viewed as more expendable than human beings. Yes in some cases this is true, but the key word here is "most." Most of the time, most patrol dogs are utilized for other reasons: their mere presence at a scene can make a criminal suddenly comply when they would have had no problem fighting an officer, or a mob is forming and a dog(s) shows up, and the mob decides to disperse. Dogs frequently find robbers, rapists, and muggers long after they commit their crimes when officers alone wouldn't have. They will think twice before doing these things when they know the department has a dog.  All of this doesn't hinge on the dog "being expendable"--it hinges on the dog being able to do things that an officer cound otherwise not do alone.  So in these intances, which are the GREATER MAJORITY of the instances that a patrol dog is utilized, the dog IS definitely "more able than an officer" but NOT doing this simpy because it is more expendable.  So this is not the "main thrust" of using one of these dogs--it is actually the exception.

Granted, you are correct that in certain tactical situations, such as the one that you described of sending the dog into a house with a possible armed suspect, etc., then your premise applies.  But I really don't think there is ANYBODY out there who thinks that this is preferable to risking a human life.  And I bet this also applies to those wise, elder show people that you speak, who love their dogs so much..

I also think that most of the K-9 handlers FULLY understand the risks involved, and I don't think that they "shun the truth" and I don't think that if they "really loved their canine they would not place it in such danger."  Sometimes if you really love something or somebody, you will let them do what they were meant to do, and not try to shelter them because you are afraid of your feelings being hurt.  This is why I think the officers are just as much heroes as the dogs who die, they knowingly send their dogs (sometimes) in harms way, but do it anyway even though it certainly kills them inside. 

Again, this is the exception, but please don't bring up this whole if-they-really-loved-their-dogs argument.  It just doesn't apply.  And it doesn't apply that these dogs are used most of the time because they are more expendable than humans.  Just not the case the majority of the time.

Thanks,

Scott

Scott,

ROFLMAO!! Thanks, you are totally right it is another form of entertainment LOL!

Thanks for the clarification...Shepalute is a Shepherd/Malamute mix.

I had one, long ago.  I didn't call him anything funny...He was just a Shepherd/Malamute.  He was extremely high-energy, very, very driven dog.  He dug, whined, barked, was wildly energetic, and would chew on ANYTHING he could get in his mouth.  In my experience, the majority of Malamutes are high energy dogs.

So I wonder how you could have a whole bunch of mixed breeds that are total couch potatoes and never do anything wrong.  I'm sorry, but I don't see it.  I couldn't read very far on her website because of the glaring grammar errors and spelling nightmares.  Seriously, who spells "whine" as "wynn"?  I thought Wynn was a name.

If people are willng to pay someone that much money for a dog, then more power to them.  If it is a really major mutt, like what she's breeding there, then even more power to them.  If I want a mutt, I'll go to my local shelter and adopt one that fits what I want to have for a dog, looks and temperament, and I'll only have to pay about a hundred dollars for it.  I won't be getting any guarantees, but then, guarantees aren't guarantees with a breeder, either.  Genetics can be a crapshoot.  And no matter how great the lines, there is no way to be a hundred percent sure that your puppies are completely free of genetic abnormality.

To those who talk about the creation of new breeds and each person's right to create whatever they want...They do have that right, as long as there are intact dogs to mix all up.  But there are hundreds of "pure" breeds, and with the overbreeding that's done, there are many genetic issues cropping up in all breeds, and there are some breeds that, without major human intervention, couldn't even exist at all.

So why create yet another mutt?  It's pointed out, over and over again, that Max von Stephanitz combined multiple breeds of dogs to create what we know as the GSD, but I might remind those who point that out that he also was objective about his breeding, and was a strong enough individual to cull those that did not measure up.  He wasn't breeding dogs solely to make more dogs; he sought to create a truly magnificent working dog, which he did.  He did not cross dogs willy-nilly just to see what popped out.

As to whether he is rolling in his grave...I imagine, if he were able to know what's become of his breed today, that he'd be pretty angry with some, and pretty happy with others.  It is true that there is not the need for working dogs that there used to be, but that does not change the fact that a well-bred GSD is still a pleasure to have as a pet, a companion, and a friend.  A poorly bred one may make an awesome pet, but it makes just as much sense, in my view, to strive for the total dog, knowing that some will not measure up (and thus, make awesome pets) than to breed for mediocrity.  Just my opinion, mind you.

As for the subject of this thread...She's a puppy mill, in my opinion.

Crys

As I said, some police work does not place the dog in danger, but some, a large part, does.

I say SchH is great sport and perhaps a pup from both SchH parents should be worth more than most pups. I never believe SchH leads to a dog that is aggressive against people in the wrong situation.

A good breeder (not necessarily the one in question mentioned by the OP) can also place high emphasis on a GSD that is softer, has less drive, has less athletic ability, as a companion first with only adjunct role in protection and other "workability". The is nothing wrong with this. In fact, I tend to think the market among informed owners of GSDs for this type of GSDs is larger than one for SchH work. In a  urban and suburban areas, a softer dog that just barks and make comotions, which GSDs of any line wiill do, is best for most people, especially with the availability of firearms. 

I once had a very athletic dog that could scale a 7.5 feet fence. Containing it was a ordeal. There was the fear that it will escape and got ran over by a car. My current GSDs can't scale a six foot fence. This is a great relief to me.

I am not sure, but I tend to think that GSD's of high drive for SchH work tend to be dog-aggressive. My two girls get along very well. The mom cries when the daugther is missing for a few hours. I really appreciate this bond between my pets.  I think one of the greatest assets or quaility of a dog is to get along with other pets. There is a certain satisfaction. 

My showline GSDs run besides me, with me riding a bike for about 4 miles every other or third day. Very healthy, and they have very pleasant and excellet gait, a fact I like very much. And they are beautiful and have very sound body structure. They are very fit and they keep me fit--workability in itself.

I am not sure, but I tend to think that GSD's of high drive for SchH work tend to be dog-aggressive

I have to disagree with this statement.  I have two high drive working line SchH dogs and spayed female and an intact male.   Neither of them have a dog aggressive bone in their body and they've been confronted with everything from aggressive small dogs to loose running aggressive intact male dogs.

They are what the breed standard calls for.  Neutral to the situation and attentive to their handler.

Personally I've experienced more dog-aggressive show line dogs.    Now granted the one time I did see a dog aggressive WL male it was spectacularly dog aggressive but thats 1 WL vs 6 SL I've wittnessed over the 4 years I've been doing the sport.

"I have two high drive working line SchH dogs and spayed female and an intact male"

Have you had two intact females, which I have?

Some people say two intact females are more problematic than two intact males.