|
|
|
|
|
Classified: top quality puppies
|
The SV-Stud Business 2003-2007 (17 replies)
|
|
The amount of registered pups in the SV-breeding book has dropped in merely 15 years from 34.685 pups in the year 1993, to approximately 16.816 pups in 2007. A scary development indeed. The battle for stud fees increases. Now as before, the studding business is being controlled by only a few males and their owners, those that always occupy the first positions and have made a name for themselves in the Siegershow. Apparently people seem to want to breed solely to the very best, it needs to be "Vorzüglich Auslese" (VA), at least not much less.
So the cake is being shared by only a few “Ausleser”. Does the breed benefit from this? Should we not spread the genes? Should not the vast bloodbasis be used to the fullest? According to SV-informations, in 2007 we had 1.259 different studs at our disposal. Sadly enough most of them will only be used once. Their stud fees might only bring their owners a mere 400 Euro. For this amount, one will not get the services of the top-males listed in my latest study. You will need a thousand Euros for their services, unless you belong to the club. But that is another story altogether.
But do go ahead and see for yourselves. After reading my notes, you may enlighten me or slaughter me:
http://www.bloggen.be/hd/archief.php?ID=128
Links to the accompanying spreadsheets in Excel-format:
http://jantie.demeyere.googlepages.com/WichtigsteDeckrueden2003-2007.xls
http://jantie.demeyere.googlepages.com/WeitereRden2006-2007Gesamtbersicht.xls
I wish you all a healthy GSD!
Jantie
|
|
|
|
|
Jantie,
I find all this very interesting...could you possible PM me so we can discuss this further?
Thak you,
Christine |
|
|
|
|
Jantie,
When are you going to get a clue and post something that's close to reality and not some twisted logic? |
|
|
|
|
How much can anyone possibly believe someone who cannot even get the basic facts correct?
In 1993 there were 27.648 GSD pups registered in Germany. The VDH (German Kennel Club) has not even published numbers for 2007 yet.
The 'studding' is only 'controlled' by the choices the bitches owners make, nothing else.
More hot air, as usual. No one needs to slaughter you, you already lead a very pityful life dominated by a very unhealthy obsession. And because of that, any grain of good that you may actually uncover somewhere will never get noticed. Good luck influencing the masses in their popular choices.
BTW, in case anyone is interested, breedings to foreign owned bitches (meaning litters will be whelped outside of Germany) are as high as ever. For some of the top males it is sometimes nearly impossible to find a single litter in Germany at a given time. So the majority of these 'concentrated' VA breedings are spread throughout the world. |
|
|
|
|
Third try! Sorry, these things don’t seem to be too compatible.
And it’s very frustrating, in the preview, everything seems ok.
DENIAL! DENIAL! Now we won’t even bother to get into that! Breeders and dealers will of course always doubt facts.
OK! Let me continue to offer facts.
1986: 24.546
1987: 25.754
1988: 25.503
1989: 25.189
1990: 29.605
1991: 29.756
1992: 32.131
1993: 34.681
1994: 33.340
1995: 34.278
1996: 32.808
1997: 29.563
|
|
|
|
Here are the actual numbers from 2006 to 1997
and for the years 2002 to 1992.gif)
If anyone would like to view the actual source, which is the official website of the German National Kennel Club (VDH), and which lists official data for the last 10 years, click here:
http://www.vdh.de/alles_fuer_medien/welpenstatistik_list.php?suche=Deutscher+Sch%E4ferhund&sort=&go=Go%21
See Jantie, you keep getting your numbers and supposed facts mixed up because you do not know where and how to even begin to look. That is very basis for any study, experiment, claim, trend, statistics, you name it.
Go ahead, keep making a fool of yourself. You picked the perfect day for it too. Merely shouting louder whenever your so called facts are proven to be bogus yet again is not going make anyone hear you any better. But thanks for the joke. |
|
|
|
|
Get off my back D.H. Your name spells DENIAL!
You will try and tell everyone Hip Dysplasia is NOT an issue within the GSD-breed, and it’s clear why.
You are a broker and need to sell the crap that breeders can’t and won’t keep.
Was there not an issue here on Pedigreedatabase?
The end of my reply got swept away. Here it is.
1993: 34.681, 1994: 33.340, 1995: 34.278, 1996: 32.808, 1997: 29.563, 1998: 28.147, 1999: 24.445, 2000: 22.228, 2001: 21.781, 2002: 22.466.
All figures are based on SV-Genetics!! Not on figures from the VDH!!
I’m talking SV always! Not the later altered figures.
I have sent my figures to the notorious University Professors, if something is wrong in my statistics, they for sure, will recognize my faults.
P.S.: My life is a pretty happy one, thank you! I’m just writing the letters I need to write, before my end comes, soon enough. No need for you, D.H., to send me any greeting cards lecturing me.
As I said, get off my back, and let people make up their own minds.
This is a place where everyone can speak his mind.
Instead, read the story of Venja vom Haus Musica (I know you read German). Just another story of how one had to deal with a very sick GSD-puppy, already at the age of 10 weeks. Carmen’s story is linked to my website: www.bloggen.be/hd
People |
|
|
|
|
If anything my name spells D.enial H.alted! You just proved my point here once again. Thank you. By using your beloved genetics CD your forget the simple fact that dogs from all over the world get a-stamped and thus find their way into that particular database. American line GSD for example have long had a very different breeding history and most certainly not the same breeding criteria as the SV GSD. Dogs from so many other countries also get a-stamped and also become part of the SV genetics database, regardless of what the breeding rules of that country are, and many have virtually none.
When you look at your genetics database numbers of 2007 five years from now, those numbers will have drastically changed. Because dogs from all over the world will add up and change the currently 16thousand something dogs to an easy 20thousand or 25thousand and more, because more people outside of Germany a-stamp now than ever before. Shows that you simply do not get the scope of the data that you are looking at and using as a source.
The VDH supercedes the SV. Without the VDH, the SV would not, could not exist. The VDH numbers are the only official numbers that count. They represent the SV studbook, which you made a mention of in your last mass eMailing. Another misinformation. The SV stud book of registered breedings and their resulting puppy registrations is not by far the same as an internal SV Genetics Database for a-stamps. The VDH published puppy stats are though. Shows that you lack the very basic understanding of how the clubs operate and what data is relevant and when.
Because you lack the very basic understanding of the sources you are using, your theories will always remain flawed.
Give us something breeders can actually use! So what is your solution for all these bitches owners again that want to use the males of their own and very personal choice? Ahhhh, I forget. You never actually HAVE a solution that comes with all your garbled... stuff. But you are in good company here. This pedigreedatabase is the mecca of misinformation. |
|
|
|
|
| Ouch! DH – but true enough.
Jantie, it’s hardly surprising that VA champs get much of the studwork!
But insofar similar to most present-day show-line dogs they’re predominantly of the Wienerau type and of the same genetic blend (as going back 5 to 8 generations readily shows), if not generally resemble each other as well, does it really matter that much? Genetic diversity is crucial, but currently we seem to be merely, or largely, re-combining the same genetic stew in hope of producing a dog marginally more felicitous than what already exists.
I’d appreciate you views thereon, DH.
|
|
|
|
|
(Jantie singing: “It’s all about the money, dudumdudumm…”) One must wonder what’s in it for you DH? You are very good at fooling people. You’re entitled to your opinion, so I won’t even bother to get into that, it does not interest me how you make your calculations. Mine are based solely on SV-material, so one cannot get any closer.
Now it made me think of the cyclists in the Tour de France. For multiple years, they just doped away. Journalists challenging this Holy Tour Institution and asking tough questions, were haunted. They were accused of lying, didn’t have proof, didn’t know what they were talking about, were chased from the press conference, threatened with law suits.
You might have followed the debacle last year, after the revelations made in former Telekom soigneur Jef d'Hont's book?
A tearful Erik Zabel appeared at the T-Mobile press conference along with former teammate Rolf Aldag to confess to using the banned blood booster EPO while riding for the Team Telekom in the 1990s.
Aldag confessed to a longer history of doping. He started with EPO before the 1995 Tour de France, and he said that continued with it.
Following the confession by colleague Andreas Schmid, Doctor Lothar Heinrich has admitted his involvement in doping riders of the former Telekom squad. The German had been working as a sports doctor in the team's current incarnation, T-Mobile, up until May 3, when he was suspende from service by T-Mobile Team Manager Bob Stapleton
Later, a Tour de France winner Bjarne Riis admitted that he took EPO, human growth hormone, and cortisone when he won the Tour de France title in 1996. In those days, however, he said it was part of the game, and that he didn't have a choice.
Following a confession last month by 1997 Tour winner Bjarne Riis that he used the banned blood booster EPO (erythropoietin) during his career, Germany's former Paris-Nice winner Jorg Jaksche alleged last week that he was encouraged to dope by the managers of his former teams. |
|
|
|
Etc, etc.
All of a sudden, everything came to the surface, or shall we say, everything collapsed. What had been lies for many years, apparently was the truth indeed, and the evil had spread wide out. It was raining confessions. Let history take its course.
You once wrote me in private, you’d be interested in some particular figures for your upcoming book. (Now THAT will surprise the world!) You told me exactly what figures would be of interest. Now I trust you won’t need them anymore, but, I’m still waiting for a copy of that book. Please do advise.
Jan |
|
|
|
|
That's probably why the S.V. could be thinking of REINSTATING LSCs...??? Puppy production is LOW and most of the good genes are comming from the ones that are being banned from being S.V. registered.... You may not know it but the LSC registry for GSD could probably hold the link to unify Show and Workinglines since the LSC gene is common on both sides of the GSD spectrum...
Its so good to be back... :) Now I have time researching on my beloved breed... Marci |
|
|
|
|
Speaknow, genetic diversity is a term that people pick up and also not understand well. Genetic diversity is important for the species Dog. Not for different breeds of dog. Species Dog has been around for millenia and most certainly has incredible diversity, with all its breeds, cross breeds, mongrels, pariahs. Existence and overall health of species Dog is certainly not in question. Nature does not care if Dog lives only 1 or 3 or 8 years in order to propagate. As long as it does. And it does so very well. Dog also does not need Human to secure its existence. Dog needs no kennels, no gardens, no sofas, no specifically formulated diet in order to survive. Give it a dump and it will thrive. And if that should not be around Dog will find a way like it has done so effectively in its past.
The GSD as we know it has been around for only a little over a hundred years. Species Dog is not dependent on the survival of the GSD. If the GSD disappears in another hundred years no one in the big scheme of things will shed a tear, only some fanciers, and how important are they really in the big scheme of things for the species Dog...
Genetic diversity is already not given with the GSD, from the start. The genetic diversity for any breed is, by its very design, limited to the few foundation dogs that made this breed. There is an interesting site called www.gsddata.com. If you sign up as professional user (no affiliation here, but it is an interesting site with very many interesting functions), you can look up what they call a bloodline tree. Nearly all dogs go back to good old Horand. How can you increase or simply maintain genetic diversity when you only have a very limited diversity to begin with? So from the get go it has always been that re-combining that you are talking about and you will remain limited to exactly that.
Right now the professional user costs 16 Euros for the whole year. If you want to learn a little more about your dogs, it is a worth while investment IMO. To see what you would be looking at, I hope that site owner will forgive me for posting a picture of the blood line tree of my Santos.
But the question is: will that lack of diversity cause problems for any breed? Well, if you look at very isolated populations, ie the Galapagos Islands, or Madagaskar, or many other geographically isolated places, it shows that despite the lack of diversity due to such isolation there are still thriving populations. Many dog breeds formed naturally because of natural isolation. The common bicycle as we know it did not come into existence til 1890. Before that personal transportation was rather limited and people did not have the luxury to go far for breedings or send their dogs anywhere. Take the UK for example - many of their terrier breeds are named after the locality where they originated, and England is not even a big place to begin with. The locally isolated places there gave rise to certain types of dogs to emerge over time. Some food for thought... |
|
|
|
|
Jantie, when people have lost their argument they usually try to pull a bunch of funny bunnies out of their hats in order to divert attention from their defeat. Yes, I asked you many, many, MANY times to actually do something worthwhile with your obsessive talents and produce something that is not tainted by your personal vendetta with the GSD, but is something that will actually be useful to breeders. Before you had a GSD you didn't give a rats a** about the dogs and any money associated with it. But you were most careful to pick the best possible prospect, even hired a purchase consultant who went with you to the breeder where you bought your pup. If your dog Indiana, who indicdentally never actually lived with you, but lived in the back yard of your father's home (albeit a very nice back yard with a beautiful lawn and large wooden kennel), had continued to become a great dog in Belgium, he had already gone SG5 at the Belgian Sieger Show after all, if he had gone VA or top V and people would have come knocking on your door for stud service, your personal GSD history would have taken a very turn. Considering that you kept tabs on every little expense that dog incurred for you, starting with having to drive to his location three times a day, you would have been more than welcoming to all the stud inquiries and the €€€€€ that would have followed. Never mind the kudos and it is rather obvious that fame is most important to you. Too bad your carefully calculated purchase did not pan out. Jantie, you are a bl**dy Hypocrite!
BTW, your so often cited university professors are indeed 'notorious', LOL. Scientists are absolutely notorious for wanting to see their names published!!! But you name NO names of ANY scientiests. Who are they? Name and contact info please! Just because you found their mailing address on google and keep spamming them with your brainfarts does not mean they support you or your theories. If there are actually any. If anything you ever produced had any validity whatsoever, you would indeed have scientists knocking down your doors in order for them to piggyback in hopes to have their names immortalized. Plus, every 'study' needs to be open to a peer review. Without naming/attaching even a single scientist, there can be no such peer review. But no scientist is willing to make such a blatant fool out of themselves and have that immortalized, like you keep doing with your far fetched 'theories'. |
|
|
|
|
D.H., I believe you put that into excellent perspective. Jantie, I look forward to seeing more of your efforts, with a little more objectivity involved.
Genetic diversity is directly relevant to the level of inbreeding that occurs after the formation of the breed, once the "stud books" have closed, and what unseen variance is lost from assortive mating. It all depends on what is selected for, and what may be unknowingly genetically-linked to traits you've selected against. There are many breeds that have survived well for a century or more founded by as few as a dozen breeding stock. Even "experts" cannot seem to agree the requirements for adequate genetic diversity.
"Everybody agrees that 300 (wolves) and 30 (breeding pairs) is the absolute minimum and that 1,000 wolves is a much more viable population," ~Ed Bangs, wolf recovery coordinator for the Fish and Wildlife Service.
"The current population is genetically diverse. All the careful planning - picking wolves from different packs in Canada - paid off." ~ Dr. Robert Wayne, Yellowstone researcher
"We believe that the original recovery goals of 300 wolves in the three states are arbitrary, inadequate and unscientific," ~Sylvia Fallon, ,conservation genetics, Natural Resources Defense Council
If you substitute the word "breed" for "unrelated breed founder" in the chart below, you can see that it's possible for a high level of genetic diversity to be maintained for many centuries based on few founders.
|
|
|
|
|
| DH, regretfully, I fail to see relevance of your remarks relating to genetic viability of dog species as a whole. And of course genetic diversity is vital to each distinct breed as well, if not for those who wish to sustain it for its unique qualities, then for the welfare of each individual animal in it. And for those who don’t appreciate genetic diversity’s value here’s a snippet from Wiki:
“Genetic diversity plays a huge role in the survival and adaptability of a species. When a species’ environment changes, slight gene variations are necessary for it to adapt and survive. A species that has a large degree of genetic diversity among its individuals will have more variations from which to choose the most fitting allele. Species that have very little genetic variation are at a great risk. With very little gene variation within the species, healthy reproduction becomes increasingly difficult, and offspring often deal with similar problems to those of inbreeding.”
Then, our breed was hardly solely built from Horand, whereas the modern Wienerau animal was more directly founded on just a few select, already inbred, later animals, and so line-bred ever since. More recent temperament flaws are said to stem directly from such continued inbreeding. Here’s another snippet:
"Inbreeding on such early animals such as Horan and Luchs produced some wonderful animals but it also brought about some undesirable effects. At this point Von Stephanitz bred out to animals of herding origin such as Audifax von Grafrath and Adalo von Grafrath. The result was this 1904 Sieger Aribert von Grafrath."
Each of these dogs in turn sired many progeny and became pillars in the development of the German Shepherd. Von Stephanitz was a cavalry captain and was ideally suited to impose his strong will over the SV of which he was president. In this capacity and with uncompromising dedication he directed the breeding programs. The dogs of Thuringia, Frankonia, and Wurttemburg were all used, each area providing dogs which had special merits of tail and ear carriage, size, color, and temperament. Using long-haired, short-haired, and wire-haired local shepherd dogs from Wurtemberg, Thurginia, and Bavaria, von Stephanitz and other dedicated breeders produced a responsive, obedient, and handsome German Shepherd.”
You may be missing the point where lack of genetic diversity in isolated populations is concerned, DH. These species largely only survive for as long as their habitats remain intact and undisturbed – over time they’ve become specialists tailored or attuned to one specific set of conditions. And the more specialized they’ve become the more susceptible they are to being wiped out by external influences/intrusions.
Your views sadly fail to correspond with proper scientific findings, Daryl.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I fail to see what you are disagreeing with, or in what way my views fail to correspond "with proper scientific findings". You say Inbred, I say adapted. Genetically diverse may mean more adaptable, but inbreeding means more adapted, or 'specialized'.
Genetic and non-genetic factors driving extinction is greatly debated. Genetic diversity indices, such as alleic richness, are significantly higher in the wild than in captive or domesticated populations in general. Genetic variability will decline from its ancestral levels by undergoing an amount of local adaptation, due to selection pressures like assortive mating or inbreeding. In critically endangered populations, the viability of wild stocks can be compromised by attempts to increase their genetic diversity that show no evidence of inbreeding depression. Such attempts promote the spread of deleterious alleles adapted to a different environment, and break down locally adapted genomes (purged of deleterious alleles) by introducing alleles adapted to a different environment, or risk local extinction due to unpredictable environmental changes to which this genetically impoverished population cannot adapt.
We are basically in agreement, you are not clear at all at what you disagree with. If you really want a debate, I say -- genetic diversity (buzzword) is not as vital to the survival of a species as is portrayed, and there are no "proper scientific findings" that can prove it. |
|
|
|
|
"SV-Stud-business" now available in PDF-format on my site: www.bloggen.be/hd
and on: www.petwatch.at
Sorry I could not yet find the time to translate, but the figures are quite universal.
Godspeed!
Jantie
|
|
|
You need to be a registered user to post messages
Login
-
Register
Classified: Daughter of Intl. CH for sale
|
|
|
|
|
Start Page
Search Website
Login
Classifieds
GSD Database
Kennels
Latest
Articles
Collections
About the Breed
Messagelist
Post Reply