Would you breed a blue mal? - Page 6

Pedigree Database


by BlackMalinois on 23 October 2019 - 12:10


@ Valk this one with the same bloodlines around 53 kg  maybe you have better men stoppers

in your kennel like to see them. The best opinion  is to to decoy work  with dogs like this ,




by Hundmutter on 23 October 2019 - 12:10

Since one kilogram equals 2.2 pounds, I have always worked on the rough equation that 88lbs would be about 44k; so where the google calculator makes it only 39 kilos I just don't get !


Either way, if one is talking about relating a purebred dog of either breed (Belgian or German Shepherd), the 88lb weight is way bigger / heavier than normally regarded as breed typical.

by apple on 23 October 2019 - 13:10

That is why some Dutch breeders outcrossed to larger breed dogs. They were trying to produce police dogs and wanted to add some size to the gene pool. But I don't think the Dutch are famous for producing true family bloodlines, but more so, random combinations that are hit and miss and less predictable. That is why you see male Mals X's from similar lines varying from 55-100 pounds. I don't think 88 pounds for a male working line GSD is atypical.

by Koots on 23 October 2019 - 19:10

I realize that breeders in KNPV and for purposes like LE or PP do not care about purity of the dog's breed genetics if it can do the job. I also realize that colour has nothing to do with a dog's temperament or working ability, that's a given. My point was that there may be genetic links between a certain colour(s) in certain breeds, and a defect that could affect health, longevity, etc., that a blue or non-standard colour dog should not be used for breeding. If the OP is not producing papered dogs, and the blue Mal is extensively tested for health, including genetic testing in which nothing adverse is linked to the blue colour, then that dog being used for producing more like him is something to consider.     But, I am of the opinion that the blue colour was considered faulty for a reason, and until that is proven by genetic testing to be false, I would not breed a blue Mal.


by Koots on 24 October 2019 - 08:10

Forgot to say that, IMO, breeding should be to not only pass on the GOOD traits but also try to eliminate or lessen [the chance of expression of] the BAD. So, if a certain colour is linked to a genetic flaw that affects health then we should not pass on that genetic flaw if at all possible.

by apple on 24 October 2019 - 08:10

In the GSD breed, a blue dog, Hoobins Gray Boy, made a title in the US in 1964 and resulted in altering the standard to ban the color in 1968, most likely because it is a dilution in pigment, not due to health problems. In Dobermanns and Great Danes blue dilution is acceptable. This is all based on breed standards and has nothing to do with health. So it is another example of how it is possible to loose potentially good working genetics at the expense of a beauty standard.

by Centurian on 24 October 2019 - 09:10

Koots ... the point you made is most important . And that is a point that I have seen through decades ignored. I remember people 25 years ago vehemently arguing with me over my discussions pertaining to Line Breeding. They know that naybody that should understand genetics that I would be one of them . My case eas and still is that in the line breeding we also maintainn the desireable , so called good traits , but we also keep those vdery deleteriuos/bad traits. . We cannot through repeated line breeding just intensify and keep the good without the bad. IMOp this has bee n[ a major ] part of the demise of the GS. Not only in regards to color but we need to be conscientious to many traits such as coat type , etc etc . So when I read about discussions saying that a person does not care or pay heed to the color , as long as the dog works then I am just stunned and lost for words. Because logically the next thought would have to be : why have ANY breeds , why do we even cafew to have predictable bredding practices that maintain a breed for after all all that we need is an animal that works. Who cares about the details , right ? So , that in essence questions : why in the world were all those people sselectively breeding to establish and maitain breeds , when all you foolish people had to do was just breed anything the can just work . All those people In suppose that bred conscientously, selctively , with a specific goal and minset had it all wrong. BLUE ....wow , I must have all my understanding of genetics and what a breeding means all mixed up .. I am gald the people opened my eyes that all that matters is that the dog works and that color , coat type , and even breeds don't really matter [ or is a priority ]. Because this seems to be the way the conversation has been going ... What do I know and who am I to say how dogs should be bred ...

by apple on 24 October 2019 - 10:10

I think the issue is more complex than what you are saying. Certainly, dogs were originally bred and traits were selected for some type of task. The GSD was developed to be a herding dog and the true working lines were not concerned with physical appearance, but with the ability to be very good at herding. Later there became this emphasis on gait and movement, but IMO, that was really more emphasized by the show people. The various breeds bred for work were often developed as a financial necessity. Then there was the evolution of the dog fancy, which was promoted by the wealthy, who didn't depend on dogs to survive or make a living. Their goal was all about social status. The dog fancy became a multimillion dollar industry. There are "esteemed" judges, professional handlers, breeders, kennel clubs, breeders clubs, etc. Think about the Westminster Dog Show. The dogs are near perfect specimens according to the breed standards. The announcer gives a little description of why the breed was developed and what traits they possess. But how many of the Westminster dogs can still actually work. Plus, there is no evaluation of the work they were bred for. You either breed for working ability or try to perfect the phenotype of the breed standard. Due to the SV, the true herding lines are lost due them encouraging the low income shepherds to breed to the show lines because they could get more money for pups. Valuable genetics have been lost in the working lines due to over emphasis on physical traits. In the early years of the breed, when working ability started to decline, the breeders would incorporate the true working lines. You have a point about the in/line breeding because the true herding dogs were not inbred. The non FCI Mal X's don't care if a dog is blue, red or purple. They care that the dog is an extreme worker and hopefully is a good producer. The result is that the cream of the crop of the Dutch Mal X's are far superior to the cream of the crop of the working line GSDs. They are not bred to be pets either, even though some can be good companion dogs in the right hands.

by Centurian on 24 October 2019 - 11:10

Apple ... every single word that you just wrote I am 100% in agreement with you . True , but what you wrote happened over time . I had, as far as the GS is concerned , for decades brought this to the most prominent SV Judges , who were very very very good friends to me . Thier comment in discussions were " Centurion [ in lieu of my real name ] we know , we know , that when you train a dog , we are not as meticulous and steadfast as you are and we know, we know , that when you look at / evaluate a dog you look at the intrinsic as well as the extrinsic qualities of the dog. You look at the structure and external features as well as you do the dog's perormance , capabiity and the work " !! And my comment back was : " absulolutely because both goes hand in hand. What matters about the GS I asked them , "  "EVERYTHNG MATTTERS " I added. BTW this is why I worked some of their dogs and they had placed dogs with me !

Years ago Apple , 30 - 25 years ago I had show line GSs that could and would do any police routine and they were police duty capable. What you say is absolutely correct because not all the factors were considered in the breeding at a certain point. IMOp the notion of having the perfect structure and look is as bad is saying that one cares only if the dog can work . If one cares only about the look and the movement , then through generations the breed will be ruined , and that is what happened but also the like is true. If we only breed for dogs that only work ,especially with crosses ,  then also we lose the breed and we cause a deteriment to both breeds. Many ,many times on the PDB , and this is not just about a blue canine , I wrote that breeding is more than putting two dogs together . I had a Mals and 8 of my friends have imported tough Mals from France and Belgium . I had GSs from the best breeders in the world but if we have the notion of crossing this to that , I concede you may get a great working dog , but eventually you lose the breeds [ of both crossses] that you started off with . So I do not see the justification to breed dogs only because they work and you throw out the rest of the package because of it or you don't pay attention to all the important aspects of the  mating pairs.  Had the SV Judges really really listend to my message , and others that echoed the same mesage 30 years ago and placed more breeding requirements on the Show Line Breeders , then the SL would not have gone downhill so easily and so fast IMOp.

Although admitingly I say that this is none of my business, but Rhetorically , I would put this question to the OP : If you were conscientious about breeding and you really truly want to breed seriously , then why in the world did you ever consider getting a blue Mal when there are so many great Mals out there that fill the requirements to work and that are good specimens that you could have bought and bred ? To me that is the crux of the matter .


    And to answer the thread question specifically my personal answer is : I personally would have sought high and low to get THAT Mal that was MORE THAN breed worthy just the same way when I bred GS they were the best at that time in the highest WL /SL programs. The people that know me know that I had 17 years ago a SL X WL GS V rated structure at 1 year old did a police demo in my hometwon with three of the areas police Depts and thier dogs .   They don't even take GSs in my area to the Academy until the dog is 1.5 years old and he was 1 year SLXWL old dog with no collar and leash doing most of all the police tasks [ except incendiary devices and narcotic detection]. Not that I am exception or the dog , but because Korbelbach and Karthago Kennels had vision  and a breeding goal , as did the person that made the SL/WL cross. Again to repeat: to hear or read , that someone doesn't care about the breeding as long as the dog can work ,without everything else being considered , welll,  I lack understanding their mindset. Quite often on the PDB I have read about people that want to breed a dog because they have a dog ...


by BlackMalinois on 24 October 2019 - 11:10



 @ blue Border Collies
there is a relatively rare genetic condition found in both blues and lilacs (in other breeds not just BC's) known as dilution alopecia which can cause bald patches over the body and particularly on the ears. It is commonly thought that the breeding of dilute to dilute will increase the incidence of dilution alopecia but there has been no evidence to support this and a blue puppy from two black parents is just as likely to suffer from this disease as one from two blue parents (in fact I've never seen this from two blue parents).



You must be logged in to reply to posts

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

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!