How difficult is it to breed for both looks/structure and working ability? - Page 2

Pedigree Database

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Baerenfangs Erbe

by Baerenfangs Erbe on 30 August 2021 - 17:08

Everything stands and falls with the breeding female.

Structure is important but you can't sacrifice temperament, nerves or working ability for structure.

The second you put structure and pigment above everything else, thats the moment your program goes downhill.

And it's so hard to breed a dog where EVERYTHING is right!


by Rik on 30 August 2021 - 19:08

if there were a sure formula or system that worked, then everyone could just follow it and everyone would breed good dogs. no problem.

by duke1965 on 31 August 2021 - 01:08

Valk, you are funny, you are telling us its easy to breed for both, and then you say, you are not breeder, but some old breeders told you so,

im breeding a lot and tell you its not, I have bred for looks, produced top winning and top producing dogs, specialtywinners, 200 plus FCI championshiptitles, and multiple FCI worldchampions, breeding for looks only is easy, working traits is a bit more complicated, and then to do both constantly is damn near impossible, 

by ValK on 31 August 2021 - 09:08

Ric there are formulas for breeding certain dogs of different features and it's was implemented many times. that why today exist german hochzucht, british alsatian, american show dogs, russian GSD, shiloh GSD, brainless but hyperactive sport dogs... whatever else. all of that within one GSD breed.
you may say, all i mentioned were developed for looks.
sure, but on opposite side we did have GSDs of former DDR and those dogs didn't come from nowhere by accident but was developed by using certain formula and they also had distinct recognizable looks.

duke, would you feel better if i lied i'm a breeder?
and why i shouldn't trust to words of those "some old breeders" if i not only seen bred by them dogs but did raise and prepped many of them and owned several dogs from that breeding.
can you elaborate term "working traits"? there are many different works and accordingly requirements for traits to fit certain one is different as well.

by xPyrotechnic on 31 August 2021 - 10:08

What this thread is teaching me is that there should be a set of traits that are my foundation, and that i should be willing for other traits to be undesirable in my program as long as i can produce healthy working dogs for example if the chest width is not as big as i would like as long as they are working dogs it shouldnt be too much of a problem.


by Rik on 31 August 2021 - 11:08

valk, the formula you are talking about was a state sponsored breeding program that produced (I have no idea how many pups/litters per year). I would guess in the hundreds of pups. and then of course if good dogs are bred, there is some good offspring to choose from.

some show kennels today still use this "formula". breed 20, 30, 40 litters of winning dogs, maybe get a couple of winning pups. this is hardly a formula, it is just mass production of dogs with certain traits with the odds stacked that there will be some offspring with those traits.

I understand what you are saying and agree with much of it, but I still say if it was easy, everyone would do it. would be foolish not to.

Baerenfangs Erbe

by Baerenfangs Erbe on 31 August 2021 - 11:08

I mean, there kind of is a formula but it's still subjective. Whats a good dog to me, is not necessarily a good dog to you.

So fo rme, it's stability. The dogs have to be absolutely stable environmentally with solid nerves. If they don't have that, I don't care how much drive is in the dog, how awesome their grips are on the field. I will not breed the dog. Environmental stability and strong nerves as well as temperament is the most important thing to me.

The other part is that I want to know the males, personally. I do not like breeding a dog sight unseen. Either I need to be able to trust the owner of the male or know the dog intimately myself. If you know their weaknesses and strength you can tell whether or not the dog is going to compliment your female.

The rest is waiting and hoping that mother nature doesn't throw you a curveball.

by ValK on 31 August 2021 - 16:08

xPyrotechnic, it's a main point of breeding for special purpose - keep in program the type of dogs who's fit for that purpose and has potency to pass it to descendants and be firm in washing out unsuitable specimens. never try to improve the dog with genetically based weaknesses.
one more think - do not look at depth of dog's chest only as aesthetical point. the chest itself is just container, which contains vital for dog's health and endurance organs. deeper the chest means bigger lungs to supply more fuel (oxygen) and bigger heart to pump it through bloodstream.

Ric, can you point me to where i told about easy breeding?
i didn't meant specialized, government financed breeding facilities. in fact in former DDR such didn't exist. i did refer to mass breeding GSDs in former DDR by civilian hobbyist breeders. they weren't sponsored but all dogs, even ones being used for government services, was obtained from these people. and there was dogs not exclusively for military/LE purpose but for all kind of work which can be performed by dogs.
unlike commercial breeding, in DDR breeders didn't breed the dogs to live off it. a good dog was monetary equal to few kg. of beef. a super stud dog could be purchased for about cost of Levi's jeans. people did it not for money but because love to breed and desire to reach perfection.


by Rik on 31 August 2021 - 17:08

valk, your exact words were "not really as difficult as many think. the general rule is quite simple". apologize for misquoting.

I am not disagreeing with you as you may think. at one time the people in West Germany were also working together to produce the #1 working dog the world has ever known. the GSD was not only the almost exclusive choice for LE/Mil but also the dog of choice for seeing eye. this was also a lot of people working together with a common goal.

so, we can argue semantics forever, and I will change my statement to "if it was simple and not difficult to breed good dogs, everyone would breed good dogs.

when there are lots of "good" dogs to choose from, and lots of people working towards the same goal, yes, I think that makes it less difficult. but that is not what is happening now. and I doubt ever will again.

by ValK on 01 September 2021 - 11:09

"but that is not what is happening now. and I doubt ever will again."

sounds like you're right - people, using dogs for profiteering not capable for consensus/to come together to implement and hold to some standard of ethic in breeding.


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