Patrick, unfortunately, not everyone agrees that the changes are for the better. I have yet to hear anyone give me concrete proof that they are.

I quote from another thread on this board. I believe this statement came from the BBC program on pedigree dogs:

a recent study from Imperial College, London, which examined the population structure of UK dogs (using the KC's own electronic database) found that every breed of dog they looked at (and it included the GSD) had lost more than 90 per cent of its unique genetic variation since 1970

No one in their right mind could look at that as being an improvement!

Sunsilver, "Unique genetic variation since 1970" What does that really mean!  How many people in the Imperial colledge have actually bred a litter, from a stockmans point of view. A term we us sometimes, "Bull shit Baffles Brains" comes to mind. I know certain breeds have been distorted massivly since the early 1900s, ie, Bull dogs as an example. The shepherd has evolved, it's not as crude and basic as it looked then, untill you have a 1900s specimin in front of you and compared it to the best of todays, You and many more might feel different.  (Max) wasn't around in 1970, I was, and I have bred some really good dogs from  that period, useing the same female line since the late 80s, I have a stunning 9 week old female by Banderas du Domaine du parc, who I have seen doing his excellent manwork in Germany, and the dog has a fantastic character, a superb construction, colour, He is also a Beautiful male, Look at him on the database. If show people put the same amount of work as the working line people from birth, there are many, many dogs that would compete on an even playingfield. Winston Chirchill once said to a Duchess at a party, "Madamn" I know I am drunk! But tomorrow I will be sober! "You will still be ugly"!! Regards Bill Owen.

Patrick, regarding the genetics of the GSD, you obviously haven't read Jantie's previous paper called 'The Bottleneck of the Century", in which she shows that the German showline dogs are all extremely inbred on the Wienerau/Kirschenthal lines. In other words, they have lost their genetic diversity. This causes previously hidden harmful genes to emerge, and reduces the breed's longevity and vigour. This is a fact which has been known for ages, but only in the 20th century were scientists able to figure out the genetic code behind it, and know exactly HOW it worked. 

I suggest you learn a bit more about genetics before you dismiss the above quote as 'bullshit'.

Do you know what the COI is? Have you calculated it for the litters you have bred?

 Christ knows how our dog breeds survived thousands of years without geneticists and the internet, and the EXPERTS on PDB. (especially all the anonymous entities, so essential to our knowledge pool) The GSD is slightly older than 100 year, the developers of our breed STARTED the process, it has many HUNDREDS of years to go, to reach ITS IDEAL. 

Please SAVE me from Alsatianists, Working GSD (no interest in conformation, as long as it is "DUNKEL GRAU" just to be different) Originalists etc etc.

I WILL SIMPLY RELY ON THE SV, AND ITS BREED STANDARD, AND ITS ANNUAL AND POWERFUL "VISUAL INTERPRETATION" OF OUR "GERMAN" BREED, AS PORTRAYED AT THE GERMAN SIEGER SHOW.  The largest SINGLE breed Show in the World - Available on DVD, so no excuse for anyone NOT to see it. It even has SLOW AND FREEZE FRAME for the selectively sighted.

Yeah, an empty shell with a conformation not suited for working is exactly what is most important then, if we should countine this trend of "visual interpretation", the caracheter and structure is already ruined in many showdogs, so what more can I say than each to his own when it comes to what a GSD is supposed to be

SD It is precisely NOT "each to his own when it comes to the GSD" although many on here think it is.

This is a GERMAN BREED, with a huge organisation in GERMANY to look after it in ALL its aspects.

The German SV is the AUTHORITY on the GSD. 

That's right everyone. The SV is the authority but David only has to follow the parts he wants to while he bashes others that choose to do the same. LOL Hypocracy

Sunsilver, The yardstick for most things is how successful it is, You mentioned 2 important kennels, Wienerau/ Kirschenthal, both very successful kennels, Walter Martins view on breeding was looking at the male and female, if they suited one another for type he would mate them, the pedigree was secondry, he used his EYE, and the skill of a good breeder.He is not with us now so we can't ask him, but it worked for him. The Kischenthal kennel is still very active and very successful. Kirschenthal dogs are both show, working, including herding, and consistently at the top. You may say it is pure luck! Its the kind of luck stockmen and breeders value more than anything written in a book. I would sooner listen to people who have been there, done it and had many tea shirts. According to Janties maths and theory, all current show dogs are highly inbred on those lines, Janties views may be used in a classroom. But then you have to go out and do it. I would sooner rely on the eye of successful people, with many years experiance. People have learned from the problems of intensive inbreeding, but it had its place in history. 

I will admit to being unconvinced, if not a non believer in the changes in the GSD over the past 40 years.  Specifically in regards to size.  Will also confess that I always liked a 24-25" bitch... and a 26-27" male...which I realize is above the  standard. 

While doing some research on old pedigrees I got back into the Bernd Vom Kallengarten, Troll Vom Richterbach,Axel Vom Poldihaus... Imports into the US in the 60's or so... Handsome well balanced conformation dogs... and the site I was on had a translator for all the Korr reports on them.  Without exception they were right around 25".  These were SHOW dogs who had conformation that could still work all day... and who, today, top breeders probably would pass over because they were too small, and not sufficiently angulated in the rear. 

  I guess that I started to wonder if those dogs we admired so much were less wonderful than we thought?? Or if over the years our vision  had changed by what was Impressive....  BIG....  EXTREME... While I don't want to go back to the 60's with the breed... we need to remember that we DON'T KNOW what the hip situation was back then because few breeders included OFA.  The steps we've made in physical soundness and testing are great... but maybe the SV has a point when they tell breeders to return to slightly smaller males, rather than continuing the trend towards bigger is better.  The same being said in regards to other movements to one extreme or another in conformation.  The versitility of the breed... the ability to do Protection, herding, Police, Guide dog, SAR, personal Assistance, Pet therapy... all with the same dog, not just with the same breed is SO AMAZING!! 

Right now the Sport Dog breeders want one kind of conformation, the Show line breeders want another, the Guide dog folks another... As responsible guardians of the breed we ALL love, whatever nitch we find ourselves... It might be better to work towards the middle ground... than towards our seperate ideals.  Too many breeds have seperated from one breed into "varieties" and even seperate breeds... and others towards Field and Ring lines.  It would be such a shame if we ended up loosing the versitility that makes our breed.... ALL OF US... so special.   Thanks....   (*Putting away the soapbox*)