Estahaus, against the grain? - Page 2

Most people completely misuse the term "roach back" and do not even really know what it means.

Hodie, Quite correct on several points. I am not against a judicious outcross, but it MUST be done for very good reasons (not for its own sake). By his own account much of Karl Fullers success has been achieved this way. He stated that since herding has been his livelihood and showing his hobby, herding ability always took priority, but he bred to sport lines for hardness and select show males who had something to bring to a breeding without losing too much in working ability. With this in mind each dog must be carefully evaluated for what it brings and at what cost. Another question is whether an animal breeds true to their own type and qualities. If I were to venture such an outcross it would likely include a carefully selected Czech or DDR line dog w/ firm straight back, correct proportions, and moderate angulation. The main purpose would of course be to gain drive, hardness, and a splash of hybrid vigor. While I might one day be pleasantly surprised, the Am lines seem beset by so many limitations that it might be very difficult to find one with anything to offer. Best Wishes To All, Jonah

I received a very long email from one of the regular posters on this web site, that I embarrasingly forgot to ask for his/her opinion. It is a poster whose knowledge and analysis I have always valued and almost always agreed with. Anyway, it is too long to post here (and I have not asked permission to do so), so I won't. I will say that some extremely good points were made in regard to the GSD of today not being "threatened" by the small gene pool. One quote from his/her email is "The magazine of the Canadian Kennel Club had an article many years ago that stated a comment that the GSD, which has the largest dog population in the world only has a genetic base of 600 dogs", but the emailer feels that it is a much smaller number than that. Another quote from the email is "Some of the ancient breeds, such as the sighthound breeds (Afghan, Saluki, Sloughi, Azawahk) have been around for about 5 thousand years and have been subject to isolation and closed breeding for all this time. They are some of the healthiest populations around. Racing greyhounds are bred for speed and running clean at that speed. They are extremely heavily inbred but overall are a very healthy breed. Mind you they are subject to very heavy culling. The ancient sighthound breeds have been subject to heavy culling and natural selection. But overall they have always been genetically very close". There was also a reference to Darwin's playground (Gallapagos Islands) that made the point of how diversified and healthy the life there is, yet they were subject to heavy inbreeding, just because of their "closed" location. Too many points to make from that email but it pretty much summed up to this. Inbreeding is not an evil thing and if done judiciously, is the best and fastest way to obtain specific traits one may be after and will not lead to the "end" of GSD's as we know them. It can be done by those lacking knowledge of what they are doing and be detrimental, but more often than not, with judicious inbreeding, the good traits will win out over the bad traits that inbreeding may bring. So, IMO, where we are today in the GSD world is I guess exactly where we would expect to be, considering the distances between us and the different desire, views and wants of GSD breeders/buyers from all over the world. If I like the rounded back look (which I find very similar to the back of a Greyhound, the fastest dog around), then a breeder somewhere will breed for that to satisfy my desires. If it was not desired and only working ability or only looks were what the masses wanted, then judges and breeders would go in which ever of those directions (again, which is where we are today). Conclussion on my part is that, it is not as bad off as it seems in the GSD world, just different desires and different opinions of what the GSD should be. I know what Max v. Stephanitz stated they should be (I have his book), but my goodness folks, I also have the Bible and know what God stated we should be, and we have deviated as has the GSD of today. As for me, I like the German Show Lines that can work decently. I think they are "good enough" for anyone, except the hardcore "my gun is bigger than your gun" types. Any gun will hurt you bad. Some will just blow you away and some will just put holes in you. A German Show Line dog can put holes in you. Just like a gun, shots can be missed but you still would not one sent your way, would you :) Thanks all. I hope "you know who" posts his/her email to me, on this site. It will cause quite the conversation. "Do Right and Fear No One" is the family motto of Capt. Max v. Stephanitz. It is actually easy to do if you can figure out, what is right. That is the hard part.

Jonah, You and I agree completely on this issue. I am fortunate to own a fine dog who is part American. I have always laughed and said to myself how glad I was that he seems to have inherited mostly German traits and characteristics, but none the less, he is 1/2 American. Take care.

Do Right, Good point. Actually inbreeding has more effect of bringing recessives (both simple and polygenic) to the surface so that they can be culled or accentuated as needed. That being said, linebreeding depression is very real, and affects most pure breeds. This can be easily seen when an outcross occurs and the pups are unusually strong, healthy, and resilient. This is regularly used in plant production by standardizing the pure strain then using a first generation outcross (f1 hybrid) for production. I believe that the U.S. breeders may have their day as international type has become quite well known and appreciated here. GSDCA is inching toward the German ways. Considering the problems that have developed in the German breed any breeder who is studious and devoted to producing the correct dog has a chance to positively shape the future of the breed. Best Wishes, Jonah

Hodie, Good comments. Best Wishes, Jonah

Hi DoRight--Just caught this thread-- I grew up with Am Showlines and have had many of my own--not just observing at dog shows. I was blessed to actually share my life with them. Eventually, I graduated (perhaps the wrong word) to AmShowline/German-working line crosses when some fairly decent breeders started experimenting with incorporating new blood into their lines. Liking what I saw, I obliged their efforts and happily purchased a couple of these dogs. (In my estimation, they were the best in character and drives.) I now have WG Showlines. Any opinions offered by me are based solely on personal experience. When I switched to 100% German dogs, I wanted something different in appearance. They seemed heavier, and more robust---and the red-black coloring was just foreign enough not to be a constant reminder of a dog I had dearly loved. I, also, assumed from 'German-dog' enthusiasts that additional benefits of health, heartiness, and longevity would be another plus. Well, truthfully, they are just as plagued with health ailment issues. They do prevail, though, in the noise department---bark, bark, barkkkkkk and the activity level far surpasses the Am Showlines. I love both types and try not to react when people slam the Am's. Extremes are not an Am exclusive--they are everywhere. When I had AmSh's, I always chose dogs not walking on hocks or down on pasterns. With outcrossing, DoRight, you'd be going against a stringent tradition. I would ask of those who say no to it---Why? What are the negatives concerning the pups? Just the other day, someone mentioned 'Vegas' and his pedigree having no line-breeding in 5 generations? Is this fact interesting because predicting what he will produce won't yield as dependable a guess? (I'd love to hear from WiscTiger why she might have to keep the whole litter if her plans don't work out.) cont.....

As to your breeding plans, DoRight. You have a really good head on your shoulders, and can judge a good dog for yourself. Even though I don't feel outcrossing is a bad way to go, this being your first litter, I, probably, wouldn't stray too far from the status quo. Remember, though, we are seeing the same dogs being used over and over---there are many health issues constantly being discussed. Also, soft ears keep popping up,(just look at the pictures of 1/2 these dogs on the DataBase--what's the term--friendly ears?); and, would you look at all the cow-hocks? I know GSDfan's Am shep had obvious cow-hocks, but I never encountered the problem in my AmShowlines. I do see it all the time now in many WG showlines. If it was my decision, I'd breed her only once and hope it took, because I'd want a smaller litter. I wouldn't want pups conceived on one breeding and an additional bunch conceived on another tie a week later--the result being too many in the womb. That's just too much crowding with some pups being crushed and causing malformed joints, etc. I also don't like more than 6 or 7 sharing colostrum from THEIR dam in the first few days. A smaller litter, IMO, has a better chance of developing a strong immune system. I presume you're mulling over what stud to use. The easiest choice is to probably stay with the WGshowlines for now. Of course, look for positives that will diminish her negatives. Check the longevities in the pedigrees (as many as you can find info on, including siblings). I would look for a stable temperament and no overtly extreme drives, whatsoever. I believe, Winnie, called them 'balanced'. My term is NICE dog. Many here say they look for a dog that can relax when not working--I say look for a stud that you can 'relax' around. If I'm going to be totally honest, DoRight, I do believe that outcrossing is the way to go--Sounds rather silly when you think of it--outcrossing in the same breed. If you go this route, I wish you great success---for your success will become the breed's.

"Only" 600 foundation dogs is a very, very high number; most breeds I am familiar with boast of far less, some less than 25. Malamutes, for example, have 15 foundation dogs. 600 is unbelievable. Those 600 would be Herr Captain's and which others? Assuming those numbers are correct and there actually were 600 foundation dogs, then I'd also assume those 600 are distributed throughout the worklines, the highlines, the American lines and probably all these lines have the same foundation dogs? Don't know, just asking. A shrinking gene pool is not necessarily the result of a small number of foundation dogs. It can also be attributed to the overuse of specific stud dogs - AKA the popular stud dog syndrome - the flavor of the month. I am confused as to whether or not this gene pool is truly shrinking. Some say yes, some no. Looking only at pedigrees on this site gives me the idea that there is plenty of diversity available to GSD that would allow any breeder to stay within the divisions that have already been established - working, show, American - should that be the goal. I have never seen a pedigree on this board that could be correctly termed "inbred", very few are even "closely linebred". Most are loosley linebred on 1 or 2 of the popluar studs or top producing bitches of the time, most are outcrosses. For all intents and purposes, a dog with no common ancestors in 5 generations is considered an outcross. The SV has kept the breed from becoming too tightly bred. Looking at pedigrees of planned and current litters give me the impression that few breeding highlines take advantage of any available diversity anyway since it appears that they prefer to breed only to Va rated dogs that win and whose names sell puppies. It looks like some wait to see who is the new Sieger prior to making a breeding decision. The workingline breeders tend to be more preformance oriented when selecting stud dogs, but still that too could lead to over use of the same stud dogs I think.

Do Right, I don't know of the kennel you speak of... But absolutely agree with what your saying!! In a way goes back to the "Complete GSD" We have discussed in the past. Good post there's alot to absorb here.