The Bottleneck of the Century - Only one bloodline left! - Page 10

Debby, I think that a lot of what you wrote in a prior post is very accurate and I respect that information. But you seem to want to equate working and show camps and come to a compromise. The good Capt. didn't see them as equal and felt that showing of dogs was a sure way to lose working qualities. If show and working are equal than your premises are valid, but if you want to "make sure my dog remains a working dog" you have to prioritze working first. Lastly, those seiger show dogs of the sixties ans seventies could work.....so what is different today so that everytime I look people are talking about lack of working temperament in showlines....what is different from 60's and 70's. The way I see things is ; if any line can't consistently(not 100% but at least 75 to 80 %) produce certain traits then you can't use the 25% to substantiate the line's ability to produce that trait. A dog with fair conformation and good temperament can serve man as was intended, a dog with perfect conformation and fair temperament is only good for showring. The breed was made to serve man!!!

Gustav,

I just spent a tremendous amount of time and effort in a reply only to have the internet crash. I don't have the heart to re do all of it. But take a look at my boy who I am grooming for National Schutzhund competition... http://castlebrookshepherds.net/ApolloBiteWork.html    more later.

Debby

debby, those are nice pics and I commend you for your dog!!! My only question to you is: " Does your dog represent the work of 75% of this line or 25%. If 75 % of showline dogs work like this then we should not be discussing protection work at the seiger show, as they should be like your dog, .afterall, they are the elite and Sch 3. If your dog represents 25% of what showlines perform....then you make my case for me. 1 out of 4 is failing in any scheme. I know how I compare your dog to the average showline I see, I'm interested in how YOU see YOUR dog in terms of average showline??  Keep up the good work...I have no problem with any dog that will work....doesn't mean they can consistently produce it....but it starts with working ability.

Thank you for the compliments. He is a very good consistant dog. He represents the full culmenation of my research into show lines that produce work. His sire produces the 75% working qualities that you look for. ( Karat's Ulk) He is way far above the average show line! But he is not alone by any means. Ask Louise, or even Molly. The working show lines ARE out there.  One just has to care enough to search them out.  And yes they are pretty consistant in performance production. Some of the problems with your comparison and as well as your criteria for proving performance is that there are very few show people that WANT to compete in working venues. There are a few reasons for this. #1 is that many working people hate show lines so much that one has to worry about their dog being purposely hurt in work competitions.  Imagine a VA dog being jammed and injured so badly that his career is over.  This happens even with working line dogs because of poor helper work. They just do not want to take the risk of loosing so much. #2 is that MOST show lines dogs are not given the intense training that a working line is. MOST are rushed through training just so that they can pass and start their show ring career. They ignore perfecting the work.  #3 most serious and practical working venues have dumbed show lines of recent years because they don't do the proper research to find the right lines to work with and consiquently have come across MANY show lines that don't have anything close to what it takes on the street, sport or otherwise.

I agree that show lines from the 70's could work for the most part. It is current and recent past show breeders that have ruined that, by breeding only for what wins in the show ring. 

I disagree that Max hated show dogs! lol You will have to show me specificly in his book, which I have, where he says that. He judged shows and choose for MANY years what dogs would be used for breeding based on those shows and the work tests in them. He molded the breed and he himself laid the course for directions of change and improvement. INCLUDING CONFORMATION CHANGES and what won in the show ring.

More later,

Debby

"German Shepherd breeding is Working Dog breeding, or it is not German Shepherd breeding"                    

                                                                                                  ~Max von Stephanitz~ 

So Ida, you tell me how that comes across as hating show dogs????

Max himself MADE the show ring. His desire was to make sure the dogs IN THE SHOW RING could also work! THAT  is what is missing in today's show ring!!!!!!!! It in no way says that Max hated show dogs.   Work AND conformation/breed standard was his goal and should be today also!!!!!!!!!!!

Debby

So Ida, you tell me how that comes across as hating show dogs????

Hmmm, a little perplexed, as to how you translated a quote into hating show dogs.....

Jasmine

To get back on subject...

Prioritzing work is GREAT and that is how it SHOULD be. Hence my drive for research. But it is a total picture of HEALTH, WORK, TEMPERAMENT, BREED STANDARD, and producing those traits consistantly that should be focused on as a whole. THAT is what Max wanted and also what is so badly needed by both camps today.

Gustav,

what I see as the biggest problem in your analisis is that you keep going back and forth between generalizing on showlines and speaking of specific showlines.  Yes, there are specific showlines that are producing work, but showlines as a whole needs help badly. So, the percentags you speak of for my dog are: yes he is proabably in the 25% of good work producing showlines in general, but his specific lines are more in the 75% range. MUCH different.

Debby

Jasmine please READ the conversations above.

These are some "Important early dogs" (from Willis' work), but still not a complete picture of the founders.

These are some of the breeds supposedly involved in the creation of the german shepherd...

Genetically, the German Shepherd dog is more strongly related to the Mastiff category of breeds...

The first three registered dogs were Horand v Grafrath (formerly Hektor Linksrhein) SZ1, Marie v Grafrath (formerly Marie vd Krone) SZ2 and Schwabenmadle v Grafrath SZ3.  Von Stephanitz had the affix v Grafrath and it is rather unusual that the first dog registered should prove to be so influential, even allowing for Von Stephanitz's political power in the SV.  By Kastor SZ 153 out of Lene Sparwasser SZ156, Horand v Grafrath had passed through several hands before Stephanitz obtained him.  A small (60-61 cm) dog with good bone, Horand had a satisfactory head and good character.  Widely used he became a kind of blueprint for the breed.  Later he was inbred to and this inbreeding became a kind of blueprint for the breed.  So much that soon after the turn of the century the registration of dogs of unknown pedigree was banned....

It is a long way back to the early dogs.  All who knew them are dead and the dogs which were the fountain heads of the breed have long ago slipped off the ends of pedigrees.  Discussing them may seem unnecessary to a present day breeder.  In a sense this is true, but it must be realized that the genes which circulate in the breed today have come down, in most cases largely unchanged, from those fountain heads.  Although man has selected and culled in the intervening 90 years or so, he has merely rearranged the genes and increased or decreased the frequencies, he has not changed them.  The defects we see today can be traced back to those early dogs...

Horand v Grafrath had 53 litters to 35 different bitches and 140 progeny were registered...

~The German Shepherd Dog: A Genetic History (Willis, 1991)