History Lesson/Background re posts Nazism, WDA - Page 2

Kim well stated.  That was so much more productive than most of the other posts on the subject... Thank you

Dave

I understand it is supposed to be a "breed worthiness test".  I vehemently disagree, however.  I don't think it has much bearing on "breed worthiness" imo.  I also understand there has been a subculture of blind acceptance of it as such.  It is, in my view, a sport - nothing more. 

Thank you KIm   Most helpful for those who have not been introduced properly to the world of German shepherd  Dog..It is a most beneficial  thread

We cannot lose sight of the value of breeding, worthiness, and keeping within guidelines.. It is much more than a sport , and it  has to remain the true recognition of a Regal breed of dogs. , remembering  "Joy in work, devotion to duty and to master...docility and obedience, teachableness and quickness to understand"  --------Max von Stephanitz

In German, the word SCHUTZHUND means literally    protection dog., for that is what a Schutzhund is meant to be.

The sport evolved in Germany around the turn of the twentieth century as a means of testing and reserving the character and the utility of working dogs.

These dogs are the result of its genetic endowment...the quality of its  parents, its grandparents and their parents, too.

In 1899, Max founded the  German shepherd dog Club of Germany (called the SV) and from there we go to where we are today  as Kim has supplied  us with the explanation of the divisions . 

In Germany , the two largest Schutzhund organizations are the SV(the German Shepherd Dog Club) and the DVG(the German Alliance for Utility Dog Sports) The trial rules and regulations of both organizations are essentially identical. However, the emphasis is slightly different in each. While the SV is a breed club dedicated to the promotion of the German shepherd dog, the DVG is a Training club that accepts a number of other breeds besides the Germans Shepherd in competition...If you read the mentioned book below it continues the whole story behind todays clubs up to what Kim has provided.
 
An excellent book to read if you do not have it, is   "Schutzhund,  Theory and Training Methods"  by   Susan Barwig  and   Stewart Hilliard.  On pages 3, 4, 5 , 6 , and 7, you will find another same explanation as Kim provided of the clubs originality and the clubs here in the usa and even a pic of Leo Muller and Argo who represented the United States at the World Championships in Italy. I met Mr, Muller at the trial at Siegelville this last July.


YR

Hope this helps LMD to see a little more into the reasonings .....and why we support these clubs....each in venues that do differ but all dedicated to WORKING dogs.









 

Great postings Kim.  Yes, I was aware of those points (im old), but the younger board people probably don't know and it is good to tell them.

Terri

I am not all that old, but I have been aware of the background becauseI like to be aware. I do NOT know for a certainty that the facts Kim has laid out are part of the impetus behind the controvrersial "Johannes Amendment," but they should certainly be considered by USA members in relation to that proposal.

Nothing here was laid out to support, not support any organizations, proposed amendments etc. Personally, freedom of choice is always my choice.

BUT The one point I was making on the "Johnanes Amendment" is that it may very well be an attempt at strengthening the organiztion and that it only affects people who compete at top level in WDA NASS or GSDCA/GSDCA-WDA WUSV Qualfier - those organizations require no membership to compete at other levels in sport or show.  Only USA requires you to be a member for most activities.  The amendment says nothing about participation.  A person is free to participate whereever they want to where membership in another competing/affiliate organiztion is not required.

Not making a judgement on this, just providing info.  And of course it would affect what magazines you would get! You would only get USA's 

Yes, I understand that you are not editorializing, just informing, and thank you again.

"BUT The one point I was making on the "Johnanes Amendment" is that it may very well be an attempt at strengthening the organiztion and that it only affects people who compete at top level"

An amendment that is negatively restrictive of the best in one's sport in no way will strengthen an organization.

"A person is free to participate whereever they want to where membership in another competing/affiliate organiztion is not required."

Then a person is not free at all!

Kim, thank you very much for this explanation. It clears up some issues for me that I did not see before. 

During my time as a GSDCA member and Am. S/L enthusiast/exhibitor, I was aware of the WDA/Sch. but it meant nothing to me.

I would like to point my very view "from the other side" as I see it. Please feel free to correct me on any points you feel are in error.

1. WDA is proposed to the GSDCA as an antidote to the rising popularity of Sch. sports and the UScA in the U.S. Those proposing are the very few GSDCA members interested in Sch. at the time.

2. GSDCA sees the possibility of the UScA, with it's emphasis on a true working dog, growing to the point of possibly challenging the AKC/GSDCA for FCI recognition of the GSD so they approve WDA. Of course, they assume it will always be completely under GSDCA control.

3. WDA grows and with a membership who want working dogs with working titles. Most of whom have never attended a GSDCA specialty show and are shocked at what they see when they do.

4. The "new" membership of the WDA votes out the entrenched GSDCA original founders and installs a leadership more in line with what they consider a GSD to be.

5. The ousted leadership gets behind the WDS trying to pump new life into it. They run to their  allies in the GSDCA willing to assist them in their return to power.

6. These people are so obsessed with control that they will willing give up the WDA and the gains it has made for the silly a**  AKC WDS that no organization in the world will ever recognize.

Rik

Thanks, Kim.  Your history lesson is timely and much needed.

From my perspective, the greatest impact of the "Johannes Amendment", should it pass, will be on Breed events at UScA. 
Most Sieger Show participants are dual members. 

Forced to choose, many would likely opt for WDA.

Many dual members support local and regional UScA Breed Shows and Surveys.  That, too, will stop. 

Many UScA local Breed shows already suffer from pitiful attendance.

The impact of this proposed UScA ammendment increases dramatically should the WDA adopt a uniform membership requirement for all events.

Gayle