What is a King Shepherd

This is a placeholder text
Group text

by Speaknow on 26 February 2008 - 07:02

Can’t believe it! A knowledgeable person talking dogs instead of people or whatnot! Only sorry topline topic fizzled out, Preston - wouldn’t mind at all a more general one on structure. Not sure it’s worth getting too tangled up in this purebred thing though. We not only seem to be speaking at cross-purposes but are also plagued by word definitions. I’ve got no truck with the Standard whatsoever, never said different – think it’s a fine thing in fact. Only hoped to highlight inherent contradiction in how there are presently two fairly distinct groups of GSD’s – with ‘working’ ones even specifically advertised as such (heed some folk and you’d think any dog without that badge or particular bloodlines – ‘show’ in other words – isn’t even worth owning!), yet both operating under the one regime or subject to identical requirements – and always were! Farmers always ‘bettered’ animal quality by selective breeding – just because this is done in a rational, informed or ‘scientific’ fashion doesn’t necessarily mean that ‘purebred’ itself carries any special scientific weight. From a scientific viewpoint or geneticist’s (who’d probably reject the label ‘purebred’ altogether) it merely means that through successively selecting individuals closer related than the average they’ve become, to variable degree, more homozygous (at the cost of genetic diversity) for particular traits or characteristics than group’s remainder – no more and no less; in this context a dog club’s ‘pedigree’ means zilch. Some known dog breeds go back two thousand years or more. There’s a lady who walks her German Shepherd past my place most mornings. Good looking animal, impressive structure, rugged and plenty of bone, but there’s something odd about it that I simply cannot put my finger on. The first and only time we spoke I learned the dog was paper-less and that she knew nothing about pedigrees etc. Now, if I said to a vet (a man of science?) that I didn’t believe the dog was really a 100 per cent purebred GSD, or that it didn’t happen to have a bit of paper saying so, he’d probably tell me I was a right proper idiot!

by marci on 26 February 2008 - 08:02

And make sure these other breed-types are sectioned under the heading "Herding group..." not part of the Working dog-breeds...

Heck... My history was wrong... I thought the Shiloh Sheps resulted from further molding the American-type GSD... I've read of Am. Ch. Scorpio of Shiloh gardens... And I was wrong... Its really the American way of getting and knowing what they want...

Thats probably why... American GSD's with Straight-backs look very different with Modern German GSD with round-backs...

by sueincc on 26 February 2008 - 14:02

Just because we don't think as highly Shilohs & Kings doesn't mean we are not knowledgeable in the breed. The fact is these are mixed breed dogs under the rare breeds banner. Tina openly admits on her website she added other breeds including Malamutes into the mix.

The Shiloh size (both height & bulk), conformation, coat and temperament make them unsuitable for not only schutzhund and herding but most any work. She purposely bred the drives out of the dogs, dogs need strong drives to be capable working/herding dogs, not just for schutzhund. Yes, every once in a while you may find a Shiloh able to certify as SAR dogs despite their breeding, but these are the exception not the rule.

As far as tracking goes, all dogs can track, they don't show any particular "aptitude" for it; however, in order to be really good at it dogs usually need to be high energy dogs with a lot of drive, which is why Shilohs as a rule are not suited for this kind of work either.

Also, schutzhund dogs aren't sharp tempered, so if Tinas' foundation stock was sharp tempered that was a fault in her line and had nothing to do with the dogs being trained in schutzhund.

Yes they probably do make great therapy dogs, but so does any dog that will just lie there and allow people to pet it and pick up it's feet. It's not a difficult job to qualify for by any stretch of the imagination.

by Sunsilver on 26 February 2008 - 15:02

"Yes, every once in a while you may find a Shiloh able to certify as SAR dogs despite their breeding, but these are the exception not the rule."

http://www.andersonindependentmail.com/news/2007/mar/21/gandalf-thanked-father/

I know of several others, too. One of the Shiloh foundation dogs was the best SAR dog Tina has ever worked with, so it stands to reason that the ability is still present in the breed.

Marci, you ARE correct. The 4 foundation bitches were all AKC American shepherds (see link for more info: http://www.shilohshepherds.info/The%20Fabulous%20Four.pdf ) BUT...and this is a BIG but...the were not the sort of dogs that were winning the ribbons in the show ring. Tina chose to breed for large size and bone, temperment, good hips, and BRAINS. Some of these dogs were black and silver, as TIna wanted to breed to the lines that produced the super-smart "Littlest Hobo" dogs. I met Chuck and his dogs in person during the '70's and was VERY impressed by what he was doing. (And before you start yelling about the standard, the black and silver colour was chosen because it showed up better on black and white TV screens.)

The Shiloh Gardens dogs are from a totally different kennel, and have nothing to do with Tina Barber's dogs.

Tina worked extensively with protection and schutzhund dogs, titling her first schutzhund GSD under NASA at the age of 16. She knows all about what makes a good schutzhund or protection dog. At one time, the main focus of her kennel was producing this type of dog, for police and security guard work. Many of these dogs have drives that make them unsuitable as family pets. (Yes, I know there ARE many exceptions! We have a thread about that on the board right now.) It was her decision to go for a more laid-back, gentle dog that could be trusted with other pets and small children. Different strokes for different folks. These are NOT (not anymore) German Shepherds, so why should this bother you?

If you read the link about the Fabulous Four foundation bitches, you will see Tina has a very well-thought-out breeding program. She knows exactly what each of her lines is capable of producing, and the outcrosses made outside the German Shepherd breed were done with much thought and care. There have been a total of only FOUR outcrosses, which were necessary to prevent too much inbreeding in these heavily line-bred dogs. They are:

Super Sweet Sabrina Selah, a predominantly GSD bitch with probable Sarplaninac in her background.

Sampson, a cross between old-line GSD's and Alaskan malamute. He, too had some of the London (Littlest Hobo) ancestors in his pedigree.

Orbit, a white GSD from the Hoofprint kennel

Artus, a black Alt Deutscher Schaeferhund.

(This information is from Tina's book, "Against the Wind: A Breed is Born".)

Tina's breed is still not officially recognized. She pulled out of the Rare Breed Association last year due to disagreement over what was/was not a Shiloh Shepherd. It is still a breed in development. She has devoted her whole life to these dogs, and I wish her well.

But her dogs are NOT GSD's, although her foundation dogs were. I posted the above in an effort to clear up misconceptions and misinformation. So, out of respect for this board, can we let this subject drop? If anyone wants to continue it or ask questions, I'd be willing to do so by PM or E-mail.

by Sunsilver on 26 February 2008 - 15:02

Oh, yeah, and if you think just ANY dog can track, you should have seen the German Shorthair pointer's performance at the tracking seminar! He was the only dog there which showed absolutely NO aptitude for it..he just stood and pointed!

by harddawg on 26 February 2008 - 16:02

Preston, you are truly a hillarious man! I think I enjoy reading your posts.

by sueincc on 26 February 2008 - 17:02

AHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

What more is left to say? I guess they do have a purpose - they are great for decorating the kids bedrooms, living stuffed animals, well sort of living, they aren't much more active than the fake ones. Truly useless.

by Mystere on 26 February 2008 - 17:02

I fail to see why ANYONE would waste their breath and time trying to convince gsd-folks that somehow these Shilohs and Kings are anything desirable ...to us! As I said, Coke, Pepsi or RC, everyone to their own taste. I have SEEn Shilohs and Kings that people have tried schutzhund with and the dogs were slugs--they would have had more success, frankly, with the average Scottish terrier, who, at least, has the drives.

But, the Shiloh and King folks are welcome to their preference and I am glad that they enjoy teir breed. I am glad the Neopolitan Mastiff folks like their dogs, too. Wouldn't want one myself, but to each his/her own. Now, why can't the non-gsd folks just leave it at that?

by sueincc on 26 February 2008 - 17:02

Yes all dogs can track, they are born utilizing their noses more than any other sense, we don't teach them how to track. If ever you would be interested in learning what tracking and/or schutzhund is really about, I'm sure most people on this board would be happy to help you out.

by Speaknow on 26 February 2008 - 23:02

"For anyone to try and compare anything about these degenerates to any work of Capt Von Stephanitz is preposterous. These two freakish "breeds" having nothing to do with real GSDs except for being outlandish complete perversions of any small portion of the GSD genetics they may have hijacked. " My, my, we’re certainly at times a close-minded, generalizing intolerant lot! The GSD was founded by mixing different types of herding dogs. The early specimens, then no doubt also labeled mongrels and mutts by some, bear little resemblance to what we see today, Horand included; whereas the Koerung, if memory serves, didn’t come into existence till the twenties. I know little about the Shiloh or King but it seems they “hijacked” rather a bit more than a small portion of GSD genetics; so perhaps there’s some relevance after all. I can’t recall comparison being made to Max’s work but, and whatever the motivation, the Shiloh’s development doesn’t sound too extraordinarily distant from his methods or that variously applied by Breeders throughout history, whereas some of the club pedigreed German Shepherds (American style maybe?) I struck over the years weren’t exactly something I’d rant about! Each to their own? Strictly from an academic viewpoint I’m rather curious whether the Shiloh is now sufficiently affirmed genetically as to breed true.

Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top

What is a King Shepherd - Page 7

Pedigree Database