
This is a placeholder text
Group text
by vk4gsd on 13 April 2014 - 11:04
what actual objective criteria do you base yr claim on?
Not even trying to be a smart ass.

by kitkat3478 on 13 April 2014 - 11:04
What actual objective standard...really?
My actual objective is...to produce 'robust' German Shepherds....ain't that everyones objective?
Having healthy hearty dogs is basicly the goal. Having dogs that are, uhm, up to the standard, capable and willing to p.erform what ever task is put before them.
You know, the stuff the dogs were originally bred for.
by gsdstudent on 13 April 2014 - 11:04
There isa book out now called "Anti-Fragile''. it has to do with economics and large systems. The author says that being fragile like an egg shell has its obvious problems but being robust is not the opposite of fragile as robust only resists stresses. Being anti-fragile would be the opposite of being fragile. His point is that being anti-fragile means you benifit from stress. A muscle being stressed by exercise gets stronger, but only to the point of not getting the wrong exercise and becoming fatique to the point of not being able to recover. The living body is fragile. It will wear out no matter how well it is cared for. Nature helps to make a species anti-fragile by allowing the gene pool to change by mutations. We are the force behind dog genetics and if our breed is more fragile now, it should be handled by selective breeding. Enforce the breed standard. Proof the offspring. Work together to be a real force.
by gsdstudent on 13 April 2014 - 11:04
read the standard kit, and then reread it without thinking about your own dogs. Read it with your minds eye on the history of the breed and its future. The breed is robust striving for anti-fragile. History had a sheep dog morph into a military/police dog morph into a detector dog. The individual fragile dogs must be removed from the gene pool and into the loving family enviroment.
by vk4gsd on 13 April 2014 - 11:04
by Nans gsd on 13 April 2014 - 15:04
VK4GSD: sorry I did not mean too short maybe not a great choice of words but shorter coupling as opposed to a longer length of back; but balanced would probably be better terminology; I always compared her to my other bitches which had slightly longer coupling or a little longer in back and seem to breakdown younger and in 40 years I have never had a dog reach 15 years old. dogs or bithches...This bitch had just incredible proportions to where she really utilized her body that worked for her and could go for literally hours or seemed like days. Have a good one, Nan
At Kitkat: that is one cute little boy puppy.
by SitasMom on 13 April 2014 - 16:04
Nans, I agree, I also prefer a more compact dog to an elongated one.

by KYLE on 16 April 2014 - 01:04
The breed morphed into what was needed and what was popular. The standard has not changed. The interpretation of the standard is what has changed. Not adhering to KKL and measurements has changed the GSD. The complete and total disregard for the definition of TSB has weakend the breeding pool. Not having dogs go thru the AD (completely) and HIT (herding instinct test). Now how is limiting a working / herding dogs movement promoting anything but the end of the breed. This will make the dog anothe AKC victim and GSD in name only. But this problem will not be fixed as long as there is money to be made and the only goal is single purpose. Do you think Mali owners have their fingers crossed when looking at OFA results? I once heard someone say that the GSD is not the best tracker, not the best at obedience, not the best at protection. But the GSD is the best at doing all 3. Perhaps it was once the best at all 3.
I think the OP set ths up to spark debate. Debate is a good thing. But if anyone thinks what this topic suggests is best for the breed. Please do not get into breeding the GSD.
Kyle
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top