EVIL MEAN WICKED AND NASTY - Page 9

I see,
personally I lean towards the all round GSD.
I've had the hard aggressive type but I found that the dog was lacking in the other traits I desired.
And that type of dog brought much more concern and responsibility.
I think it all depends on the individual, your right we can do what we like and like what we choose.
But I try to stick to the original standards and not focus on just a few traits.

   

Too many back and elbow problems out of Mink Haus Wittfeld.

It is a separate topic all together but one of the major problems breeding any type of animal be it dogs or horses, show or work, is breeders who deviate from the standards that a particular breed was founded on.
What else is new. 

I understand that to each his own. My opinion is lots of dogs are being bred to sporty or too pet type and I have no desire to have just that. I like a ballanced dog just high drive and true aggression. I have no desire for people to pet my dog and do not mind the extra risk and it is a risk to own such a dog. I never scored real high in Sch and we weren't real flashy but we had fun.

That being said I like to watch good stock dogs, bird dogs well any kind of working dog just do want to own them.

I agree moon type to type can change the whole breed. A lot a variables to breeding. That is part of the reasion I do breed very often. 2 litters of GSD in the last 16 years. Does that make me a puppy mill? LOL

Wow this forum isn't a problem, it's other one that spend more time attacking everyone, keep up thr great work :)
At least here people know what they are talking about, that makes the world of difference.

I am probably about to get jumped on from a great height but I will say what I feel. I don't consider  'aggression' to be a desired trait of the GSD. Courage - yes, willingness to defend and protect - yes, aggression - no. IMO no GSD should ever be 'a risk' to own and never a 'risk' to others, unless it's temperament has been ruined by someone or it is badly bred and doesn't have the correct temperament to begin with.  A GSD with a correct temperament should not be a risk to own.

How does a dog protect without aggression?

Controlled defence/protection (or aggression for want of a better term) should not create a dog that is a risk to own is what I am getting at, not aggression as an overly dominant trait.  If this trait is not excessive but is simply part of character of the overall balanced dog, they should not be a 'risk' to own. If they are then they are not 'balanced' IMO, it's a bit of a contradiction in terms. A dog that is a risk due to over developed aggression cannot fulfil the range of roles required and expected that a GSD should be able to fulfil naturally.

I guess I am disagreeing with the term 'balanced' in the context of what you said above.   Perhaps I don't understand what you mean by true aggression? I know how I understood it, but it may not be how you meant it.