The German Sieger Show 2019 - Page 2

apple - From the formation of the breed up until the nineteen eighties the breed, both working and showline, came from the same gene pool. The President of the SV was Hermann Martin who gave prevalence to show dogs over working dogs. Generally speaking the working people did not pay enough attention to the anatomy of their dogs and the breed standard, their only interest was in the dogs workability. The shape of the dogs appearance did not matter as long as the dogs could work and in particular bite. Also, Hermann did not like the colours of the working dogs which were predominately grey but some were black or bicolour. and these colours disappeared from the show lines. The colours we see now in the showlines were developed and promoted purely for glamour resulting in the weakening of the traits associated with working ability have faded from what they were. Today we see many working dogs that are correct in their appearance but this is a slow process to bring this detail back from the position that they fell to.

What must be remembered is that our breed is a working breed that can be shown. Unfortunately, the founders warning from the beginning have been largely ignored. The money people have taken over and glamour has become the order of the day. Not many breeders from the show fraternity are interested in training their dogs to properly meet the standards required by the working dog. It is much easier and quicker to keep breeding and selling to keep the income coming.

The German Shepherd is still is and always will be one breed. That should be everyone's purpose in their interest of our dogs.

Mackenzie

I am very aware of the damage the Martin brothers did to the breed. I have argued that even v. Stephanitz was a hypocrite and wasn't a successful breeder. He promoted Roland von Starkenburg because of his type and he had a very faulty temperament and is a dog all GSDs go back to. I see no value in showing dogs and especially no value in show line dogs. I don't see value in registering dogs. Look at all the "purebred" AKC dogs of many breeds where their registration is meaningless. The SV's requirement that the GSD have a working title to get pink papers is a farce. The helpers are told to go easy on the dogs in IGP and the Sieger show because they know the dogs will run. IGP is no longer a breed suitability test. The herding dogs are gone and are basically show dogs with diluted herding titles. You can breed for health and working ability or you can breed for a certain coat color and structure, but you can't do both. Many working line dogs have great structure that is not close the SV's ideal for its show dogs. Their ideal actually hampers the dogs' ability to work. Raiser had a reason for saying the dogs had frog legs. It is just like the Westminster Dog Show. The announcer says what the dog was bred for and non of those dogs have the working ability of their ancestors.

Apple, AMEN....

apple - First, I would point out that there were then and, even today, very good Breeders around who never produced a Top Dog. They did however produce consistently some very good animals which proved valuable in a breeding programme.

Turning to Roland v Starkenburg he was a black dog who was born 1st November 1903! He came from the time when the gene pool was very limited but his type from his bloodline produced consistently the same anatomically. It may be that v Stephanitz thought that this was of some merit at this point in the breed history. The breed has developed and Roland’s type is not seen very often today, one hundred and sixteen years on. Looking at Roland’s peers produced at that time they were not much different anatomically in their type. When being judged at the period in Roland’s time the priority was working dog first and show dog second. It may be that his character may not have been the best of the bunch, who really knows? I do not think that holding up Roland at this time in the history of the breed is the right dog to use as an example.

When you say “I see no value in showing dogs and especially no value in show line dogs. I don't see value in registering dogs” then for me you are indicating very little knowledge of the benefits of this system. If it were not for this process you would not find the information that is available on this or any similar database. All of which is beneficial to serious followers of the breed.

The purpose of the working qualification is to establish that the animal has the ability to learn and perform to a level that it can work as befits a working breed. The unfortunate thing is that the system is circumvented when the titles have been bought.

The breed standard is the guide to what is desired in our animals, however, in referring to structure Breeders have ignored the standard either through ignorance, lack of understanding or poor breeding stock this applies to both working and show Breeders.

Mackenzie

Just look at the unregistered KNPV Mal X's and Dutch Shepherds. They produce some of the best police dogs out there. There are no conformations shows for these dogs. They have been outcrossed to other breeds to bring in other traits and hybrid vigor. Many are very nice looking dogs and there are a lot fewer health issues than with the GSD. How can you say many of the SV show line dogs have essentially bogus titles and then the system has benefits? What are the benefits other than profit? Regarding Roland, sacrificing temperament for structure is foolhardy. It is well documented that he had a weak temperament. When you say there are still some breeders who consistently produce good GSDs, good for what? I don't disagree and have such a dog, but there are no show line dogs in his pedigree.

apple - I do not have to look at the KNVP Mal X or Dutch Shepherds because they are nothing to do with the German Shepherd and this thread. I think you are getting mixed up in this matter. I did not say many of the SV showline dogs have essentially bogus titles. What I did say is "the unfortunate thing is that the system is circumvented when the titles have been bought". The benefits of recording information about dogs via the registration system is that it provides the basis of any search for or about a particular animal i.e. sire and dam, dysplasia results etc.  A German Shepherd is a utility dog which means it is capable of working in a variety of different disiplines whether it be just a companian dog, search and rescue dog, guide dog for the blind, Police dog, Military dog, Competition dog,herding dog,sniffer dog, patrol dog.  The breed is not just about law enforcement or bitework.

Turning back to Roland it is mentioned in the book "The German Shepherd" by Goldman and Hart that   " He proved to be the only stud of his time that could produce the type that Stephanitz was breeding toward from available bitches".  This underlines the fact that in those days a breeder could only deal with a few males because the choice was extremely limited.

 

Mackenzie

 

My point about the KNPV dogs is that it is a totally different approach to selection for breeding and is far more successful than the SV's approach, which, IMO, has done more harm than good. Valuable genetics from the working lines were lost due to the Martin brothers for the reasons you stated such as coat color or lack of a black muzzle. Consequently, the number of quality working dogs has decreased. The direction they have taken IGP in, partially to help the weaker show line dogs to get their titles, and their approach to judging has led to a demand for a different type of dog that often lacks the traits needed for work as a tradeoff for traits needed in sport. Regarding HD, as Gustav pointed out, it doesn't seem to have had any effect. Some have argued that some of the earlier stronger dogs had a higher rate of less than good hips. We know that a pedigree full of very good hips can produce HD and breeding partners with not so good hips can produce dogs that are free of HD. Plus, I believe the SV has taken the position that HD is 75% environmental, so HD results available via a registration system seems to be of little value. The SV has led to the demise of true herding stock.
Regarding Roland, you point out that v. Stephanitz choose type over temperament, which to me, is totally inconsistent with someone trying to develop a working breed. Goldbecker and Hart sing high praises of Roland in their book, but never mention his weak temperament. They describe him as a genetic mutant that launched the breed forward. To me, that would only be true if your goal was more about type than working ability.

HD has been mentioned in this post ....

But the truth and the reality : HD is the least of concerns within the GS at this point , for there are other afflictions that present more often and far out number the incidence of HD .. Believe me , HD .... that is the least of all ills to worry about ...

apple - have you considered that maybe the females that were put to Roland had very strong characters and able to produce strength in this area. If this were so then it is possible that the risk was worthwhile with so few males to choose from.

Mackenzie

There might be some value for compensatory breeding to improve structure, but I see no value of it when it comes to temperament.