USCA Sieger Show - Page 8

Pedigree Database

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

by Klossbruhe on 08 May 2017 - 23:05

Hello again Susie
You are quite right, I do not know you. And that is why in my posts I did not write about how you train dogs. And that is why I did not write whether you keep your dogs in a kennel or in your house. Because I do not know and it is none of my business. But I am surprised you thought that I wrote about you.

I did, however, write about what I observed of my fellow OG members when I lived in the Tirol and then later in Hessen. Almost all of them kept their dogs in kennels. Some were nearby or even in the backyard. Some 10 minutes away. There were a few, a very few who allowed their GSD in the house. But that was not common. I also wrote about what German schutzhund IPO judges tell us when they come over here to judge. But I did not write about you.

I do not know why you think that the IPO and the Korung are the sine qua non of whether a dog has working ability. In the first place, today's IPO does not resemble the SchH Prufung of 10 years ago and it certainly does not resemble the SchH Prufung of Stephanitz's day. Back then, the wall was straight up, it was perpendicular. And back then, the judge shot the gun off 1 or 2 meters from the dogs head. Would Stephanitz think today's IPO was much a test...So, whose IPO is the proof the dog can work. Todays, yesteryears, tomorrows. It is all arbitrary. The SV recognizes the HGH, and such dogs can be surveyed. But at the Sieger Show, they have to have their own class Why, because, as Scheld told me, there is wide spread prejudice against the HGH and so few Germans do it.

The IPO did not come down from on high like the 10 commandments as the final statement on what is the measure of whether a dog can work. It is man made and arbitrary. You like it as a measure, that is fine. I like it too. Where we differ is that I recognize that it is not the only measure and it is not necessarily better than other tests. You write and I quote "but most of them are not able to perform in all 3 phases, including phase3 / bitework - and that´s the difference ( at least for me )," Again, that is fine that you like it. But bitework was made part of the original SchH Prufung because Stephanitz wanted to have the DSH used by the police since he recognized that herding was disappearing. He would have been happy to have had the DSH stay a herding dog had there been a real need. That is how he started out when he found out that the fancy dog people in England had bred the herding ability out of his favorite dog, the long haired Collie. Had he realized that a GSD could be a blind person's dog maybe he would have made a test that involved dogs taking blind people around cities. I am sure he would have approved the Rettenhund Prufungs. Bitework is fine, but it is not the only test and it is not inherently better than something else unless you are a policeman or a soldier.

You speak of breed surveys. That is an arbitrary measure as well. To be clear, my club over the years has hosted dozens of breed surveys, I have seen hundreds of dogs surveyed. I have worked as a helper at surveys. And, all of my own dogs have received the KKL1 recommended for breeding rating. Lately only KKL. But it did not and does not mean much. Any showlines dog that is not missing a tooth or had some other terrible flaw could get a KKL1. Yes, it had to do the Uberfall am Hundefuhrer and Mutprobe. But those were not much of a test at a survey. And any working lines dog could get a KKL2 breeding still allowed rating unless it was really, really bad. .Now there is no more KKL1 or KKL2, only KKL. Is this an improvement, is that better or worse. Does it make a difference. And why has there been a change, because it is arbitrary and a man made thing. And it may change again tomorrow, for good or for worse.

You do not talk much about shows being important to breed suitability. But Stephanitz and his contemporaries thought they were very important. Why, because they understood that not every SchH, KKL1 dog was really suitable or to recommended for breeding. At shows, before they got so politicized, breeders could see the differences, and Stephanitz and later caretakers of the breed could guide its future. Conformation was important and shows were, originally, more important than surveys. Sadly now, they are only a venue for dog sellers and the gullible.

Like you, I like doing IPO, but that is just me. There was nothing else when I got into shepherds. And though I am not a breeder, I got every dog I have owned surveyed, even more meaningless in the US, especially to a non breeder owner. But, like you, I felt it was important and I wanted a detailed analysis of my dog's conformation. However, unlike you, I do not think IPO the only valid test of working ability and I think dogs which have shown their ability to do other work, even if there is no bitework, should still be surveyed because they have value to the breed.
 


by Gustav on 09 May 2017 - 09:05

Wow, Btw, GSD911 your last post says it all succinctly....there are no lines mentioned in standard. Those that buy into SL vs WL are just as detrimental as those who proclaim  a lack of certain elements being harmful to breed. It is nice to see balance on both sides of equation.


by vk4gsd on 09 May 2017 - 10:05

Kloss, what working tests do you think could prove breed worthiness better than IPO?

Do you think the point of bitework is just suitability for soldier or police. Do you think it reveals anything else about the dog?

by Klossbruhe on 09 May 2017 - 17:05

Hello VK
I do not think I wrote that there were other tests that were better than the IPO. I wrote there were other tests that could be equally valid. I mentioned a couple of these in my post.

I do not know if you have been a helper or not. But as a helper, you soon realize it is not just about biting. Most dogs that come off the sleeve do so before they are hit, usually when the stick is in the air. Their eyes narrow in anticipation of being hit. Some stay on and their bite weakens, some fall off. Protection is about the heart of the dog, its ability to deal with fear.

Some dogs are born fearless but that does not necessarily make them good protection dogs. To some extent, overcoming and mastering fear and responding reasonably in the face of fear is the making of a good protection dog. One of my helper teachers once said to me, "I can chase any dog off the field, but my job is to make the dog think he can handle me." Being a good helper is about acting not being macho.

I think I wrote that Stephanitz, when putting together the original Schutzhund Prufung chose things that would appeal to the police, tracking, obedience and protection. I think his test would have been different if there was still a lot of need for herding in Germany at the time or some other need such as search and rescue or helping the blind. Most of the things in the test, like gun neutrality, became part of the test out of need. Dogs, up until recently (with a few exceptions like the Cavalier King Charles Spaniel bred as a lap dog for the rich) were purpose bred for hunting, ratting, protecting the door to door tax collector etc. And Stephanitz back in the 1890s was looking around for a purpose for his GSD when the need for herding dogs started to disappear. As a military man, he hit on the idea of the police and military.

So to answer your question, no I do not think the point of part 3 of the IPO test is merely to see if a dog is suitable for the police or military, although it can serve as a basis. I think the point is to examine the personality of the dog and to educate it.

susie

by susie on 09 May 2017 - 18:05

Klossbrühe, sorry, I really thought you are talking to me, based on "Hello Susie..", "You know...", " I do not agree with you...", "you remind me...", guess I was wrong...

Once again, you don´know me, you said " And remember, Stephanitz did care about conformation and the show scene."
Whom do you think you are talking to? To a "working dog hardliner, no matter the conformation" ?

I made more miles in the show ring than anybody else on this board...,I guess all of them together didn´t train as many dogs for shows as I did...Why? I think it´s important for the breed (... and because I can :) ).

I believe in working ability, but I believe in conformation, too, I neither believe in working lines, nor do I believe in show lines, I simply believe in good dogs ( able to work, fitting the standard ).

I got most of my personal dogs out of "showlines"; strong, hard dogs, and I was able to find those dogs because breeders/owners trained their dogs - I was able to see the parents during training for IPO - and this training is still able to expose every strength and every weakness in a dog. As an active trainer you must know.

To think about the "future" of the GSD is difficult -

in case we want quality we have to weed out dogs not fitting the standard
in case we want quantity we have to adapt to society ( no work, fast success )

I don´t see any need for this breed to be a 10.000 times sold couch potatoe year after year - there are enough breeds out there well known for their laziness, friendliness, or plain stupidity.

Personally I don´t think a GSD able to participate in ( your words ) "agility, Barn Hunt, Fly Ball other things" is able to proof the suitable temperament of this breed.

I am old fashioned, for me it´s about "hardness, courage, fighting drive", and training a dog in IPO will give me a way better insight than training in agility or something else.

I really regret SV doesn´t recognize KNPV or Ringsport titles. These dogs ( COMBINED with health tests, AD, and show rating ) should be allowed to breed survey.

I may be totally wrong, but for me the GSD is one of the very few very special breeds able to perform as a working dog in case of protection dog ( only the Malinois and the Dutch Herders are as good as the GSD, maybe some of them even better ). The biggest advantage of the GSD - most of them are still able to live a satisfied life as active companion dogs with owners who know how to educate and satisfy this kind of dog - versatility...

Once again, the OWNER of a GSD doesn´t need to participate in anything, but the BREEDER of GSDs should do, at least for me, and as long as there is no better test than IPO ( or RH2 / HGH / active police dog, combined with health tests, show rating, and breed survey ) that´s the way to go for me.

susie

by susie on 09 May 2017 - 18:05

Just read your last post -

"So to answer your question, no I do not think the point of part 3 of the IPO test is merely to see if a dog is suitable for the police or military, although it can serve as a basis. I think the point is to examine the personality of the dog and to educate it."

"...it can serve as a basis..."

Yes, it can, and yes, it still does ( for people who are actively involved in training dogs ).

What basis do you want to establish instead? Agility? Barn hunt? Dock diving? That´s ridiculous.

Right now outside of Western / Central Europe any "breeder" defines his own "basis", good, bad, useful, or absolutely senseless - the pet dog buyers don´t mind, they are more than glad in case they don´t need to "entertain" their couch potatoes.

The USA are not member of FCI, that said you are free to establish any test you want, but up to date there is no test at all, not better, not even worse, just nothing.

BRADY BEE

by BRADY BEE on 09 May 2017 - 18:05

👍 @ Susie. As usual 😊

by Klossbruhe on 09 May 2017 - 19:05

Hello Susie
I think your misunderstanding of what I wrote has to do with prepositions.

I wrote "I am surprised you thought I wrote ABOUT you."
I did not write "I am surprised you thought I was writing TO you."

ich rede mit Euch
Ich rede über Sie

Of course, I knew that I was writing to you. But I was not writing about you. I did not say you were a hardliner or anything else. I wrote in a dispassionate way about the IPO and made points in support of my thoughts. I wrote these to you, but not about you.

I am very sorry you think I insulted you. But my discussion was not about you at all and I feel bad you took it that way. We can, of course, differ without it being personal. Misunderstandings can happen when two people speak the same mother tongue, let alone when they have two different mother tongues.

susie

by susie on 09 May 2017 - 19:05

I don´t mind at all, my life doesn´t depend on dogs, never did, although the GSD is part of my life.
You didn´t insult me - you are only able to insult me in case you become personal about my family, but you are not able to insult me in case of "theories about a breed", not important enough, but very interesting.

The two of us are not that far apart, we both want the best for the breed, the main question is:

Do we want the breed to adapt to society
or do we want to find a niche ?

Xeph

by Xeph on 10 May 2017 - 02:05

This breed's niche is its ability to adapt.





 


Contact information  Disclaimer  Privacy Statement  Copyright Information  Terms of Service  Cookie policy  ↑ Back to top