This is a placeholder text
Group text
by sueincc on 28 June 2010 - 23:06
deleted
by sueincc on 28 June 2010 - 23:06
Alphalpha go back and read Charlies last post, first paragraph, last sentence. I think that pretty much says it as far as I'm concerned, when judging scores and titles.
Again, NO ONE SAID a schutzhund title or ANY TITLE FROM ANY GRIP SPORT is the be all and end all as to determining breed worthiness, it is one of the pieces for many of us, but not all of us.
Again, NO ONE SAID a schutzhund title or ANY TITLE FROM ANY GRIP SPORT is the be all and end all as to determining breed worthiness, it is one of the pieces for many of us, but not all of us.
by GSDfan on 28 June 2010 - 23:06
Charlie319: Like I said in my first sentence I was commenting on the use of titles with regards to breed worthiness (inspired by some of the replies on the matter)….I was not necessarily trying answering the original question.
Everyone has their own set of priorities and goals; but IMO It’s important to avoid tunnel vision, where one attribute of the breed becomes the main goal when the importance of the others become compromised, especially in a breed where versatility is a breed trademark.
There is no crystal ball, if you have two good dogs, and put them together that is where you start….even with matching/studying pedigrees, seeing what they produce is trial and error with the first litter of the pair. IMO It’s not about trying to avoid producing duds or soft dogs…it’s about putting together two good strong dogs and hoping they together produce themselves or something in-between.
Everyone has their own set of priorities and goals; but IMO It’s important to avoid tunnel vision, where one attribute of the breed becomes the main goal when the importance of the others become compromised, especially in a breed where versatility is a breed trademark.
There is no crystal ball, if you have two good dogs, and put them together that is where you start….even with matching/studying pedigrees, seeing what they produce is trial and error with the first litter of the pair. IMO It’s not about trying to avoid producing duds or soft dogs…it’s about putting together two good strong dogs and hoping they together produce themselves or something in-between.
by GSDfan on 28 June 2010 - 23:06
Alphapup…you are reading too much into it. I was more referring to extremes…getting into detail about everything in between is not what I care to evaluate, like I said to each their own.
What I was referring to by saying “high standards” is one who’s training is complete…as in towards a title (SchH, PSA, Ring). As opposed to (like the example I gave in my first post about the PPD)… a person who claims to work their dogs or claims to have personal protection dogs, when in reality all their dogs do is bite a sleeve or suit…that is not IMO a high standard.
In response to your question about those people who title or buy a dog that meets minimum trial standards…it is up to the breeder to determine if that dogs work is strong enough for their breeding program (some breeders have lower standards than others)…and it is up to the puppy buyer to see the parents work to determine if it meets their standards. It is impossible to police this...one can only police themselves…IMO everyone else…to each their own.
When I said “I have no repsect for people who use that statement as an excuse not to put in the effort to title or train their dogs to a high standard.”
I was referring to people who use that excuse not to train their dog…you left the most important part out of your quote. If someone wants to breed untitled dogs with good pedigrees… fine (to each their own) It’s below my standards but I’m not the GSD police. BUT if they do they should be honest…say they don’t have time, don’t have training available within reasonable distance, say titles are not important to them BUT they DARE NOT criticize the sport and say titles don’t mean shit, especially when they’ve never put in the effort to train them for ANY sport. THAT is what I have no respect for. It’s one thing to go teach a dog to bite a sleeve and a whole other thing to put the effort and dedication into training a dog to meet requirements for a title (in any venue).
With regards to SchH vs PSA, Ring or Police….SchH is not without flaws, weak dogs can pass…but it is up to the breeder and the puppy buyer after the SchH title is on paper. The sport has been watered down, to allow a larger number of people and dogs to participate.
Is it wrong or right? I’m sort of in between, on the one hand…I think it is good for newbies…starting with their pet dog (not interested in breeding), learning about the breed…seeing other stronger dogs work at the club, seeing and learning the good and bad attributes of their own dog…learning about the sport, learning how to handle….achieving success, even if it is small…they become educated for the *NEXT* dog. Where are they going to purchase their next dog…from a club member who’s dog is strong and works real nice or will they buy again out of the Sunday paper?...they now know what to look for, their second dog purchase is probably going to be better and more informed than the first one, they now have a network of knowledgable GSD people. This keeps people in the sport, encourages growth, educates them about the breed…and may even change their goals and interests. I know lots of people who went from showline to workinglines just because of what they saw with their own eyes at training.
I do PSA because I like that you need a stronger dog than you need for SchH, IMO there are plenty of SchH only trained working line dogs that can do PSA, it is just not what their handlers choose do.
You say "THE FACT OF THE MATTER VERY VERY FEW GSD DO YOU SEE WITH THOSE TITLES".
IMO not because they arent capapble! It's because PSA
What I was referring to by saying “high standards” is one who’s training is complete…as in towards a title (SchH, PSA, Ring). As opposed to (like the example I gave in my first post about the PPD)… a person who claims to work their dogs or claims to have personal protection dogs, when in reality all their dogs do is bite a sleeve or suit…that is not IMO a high standard.
In response to your question about those people who title or buy a dog that meets minimum trial standards…it is up to the breeder to determine if that dogs work is strong enough for their breeding program (some breeders have lower standards than others)…and it is up to the puppy buyer to see the parents work to determine if it meets their standards. It is impossible to police this...one can only police themselves…IMO everyone else…to each their own.
When I said “I have no repsect for people who use that statement as an excuse not to put in the effort to title or train their dogs to a high standard.”
I was referring to people who use that excuse not to train their dog…you left the most important part out of your quote. If someone wants to breed untitled dogs with good pedigrees… fine (to each their own) It’s below my standards but I’m not the GSD police. BUT if they do they should be honest…say they don’t have time, don’t have training available within reasonable distance, say titles are not important to them BUT they DARE NOT criticize the sport and say titles don’t mean shit, especially when they’ve never put in the effort to train them for ANY sport. THAT is what I have no respect for. It’s one thing to go teach a dog to bite a sleeve and a whole other thing to put the effort and dedication into training a dog to meet requirements for a title (in any venue).
With regards to SchH vs PSA, Ring or Police….SchH is not without flaws, weak dogs can pass…but it is up to the breeder and the puppy buyer after the SchH title is on paper. The sport has been watered down, to allow a larger number of people and dogs to participate.
Is it wrong or right? I’m sort of in between, on the one hand…I think it is good for newbies…starting with their pet dog (not interested in breeding), learning about the breed…seeing other stronger dogs work at the club, seeing and learning the good and bad attributes of their own dog…learning about the sport, learning how to handle….achieving success, even if it is small…they become educated for the *NEXT* dog. Where are they going to purchase their next dog…from a club member who’s dog is strong and works real nice or will they buy again out of the Sunday paper?...they now know what to look for, their second dog purchase is probably going to be better and more informed than the first one, they now have a network of knowledgable GSD people. This keeps people in the sport, encourages growth, educates them about the breed…and may even change their goals and interests. I know lots of people who went from showline to workinglines just because of what they saw with their own eyes at training.
I do PSA because I like that you need a stronger dog than you need for SchH, IMO there are plenty of SchH only trained working line dogs that can do PSA, it is just not what their handlers choose do.
You say "THE FACT OF THE MATTER VERY VERY FEW GSD DO YOU SEE WITH THOSE TITLES".
IMO not because they arent capapble! It's because PSA
by GSDfan on 28 June 2010 - 23:06
got cut off.....
IMO not because they arent capapble! It's because PSA and Ring trainers/clubs are not as readily available as SchH trainers/clubs (I have a dozen SchH clubs within an hr of me, I drive 2 hrs north each way to train in PSA). Those sports are very small in the US in comparison to SchH.
It is very difficult if not impossible to mask a dogs weakness in PSA/ring sports. Do I think dogs who can’t do PSA/Ring are not breed worthy?….for me personally are you asking? For me personally, probably not, but that is not absolute … Overall…. I certainly do not think it would be sound to alienate such a large number from the gene pool. Ema is one of the few female GSD’s in the sport…If memory serves, she was the only female GSD competing at the PSA regionals last year when she got her PDC. Even if PSA and ring was available to train in like SchH is, I would not go on a limb and say PSA or ring should be THE GSD breed suitability test, it would eliminate too much of the gene pool...most notably with regards to the female population.
SchH is a breed suitability tool…the rest is up to the breeder/handler and puppy buyer.
IMO not because they arent capapble! It's because PSA and Ring trainers/clubs are not as readily available as SchH trainers/clubs (I have a dozen SchH clubs within an hr of me, I drive 2 hrs north each way to train in PSA). Those sports are very small in the US in comparison to SchH.
It is very difficult if not impossible to mask a dogs weakness in PSA/ring sports. Do I think dogs who can’t do PSA/Ring are not breed worthy?….for me personally are you asking? For me personally, probably not, but that is not absolute … Overall…. I certainly do not think it would be sound to alienate such a large number from the gene pool. Ema is one of the few female GSD’s in the sport…If memory serves, she was the only female GSD competing at the PSA regionals last year when she got her PDC. Even if PSA and ring was available to train in like SchH is, I would not go on a limb and say PSA or ring should be THE GSD breed suitability test, it would eliminate too much of the gene pool...most notably with regards to the female population.
SchH is a breed suitability tool…the rest is up to the breeder/handler and puppy buyer.
by GSDfan on 28 June 2010 - 23:06
BTW Alphapup...thank you for your compliments on Andy:-)
by ALPHAPUP on 29 June 2010 - 00:06
SUE .. YES !! GOOD POINT !!! ... IT IS NOT THE END ALL [ MANY FACTORS TO CONSIDER] !!....... gsdfan/ melanie ... a nice response from you [ as usual !]. AND..IN ESSENCE - I PERSONALLY DON'T FEEL MUCH DIFFERENT THAN YOU DO ... INDEED SO CRITICAL YOUR COMMENT: THE GENE POOL ... BOTH WORKING AND SHOW LINES .. ARE SO MUCH IN TROUBLE ALREADY REGARDING THE GENE POOL !~! A NICE FORUM DISCUSSION - THANK - YOU FOR ALL THE POINTS OF VIEWS /COMMENTARIES
by VomMarischal on 29 June 2010 - 02:06
Is it just my imagination, or are even working lines breeders beginning to produce cookie-cutter LOOKING dogs? Not to say they all act the same, but they all look pretty much like, for example, Branko vom Salztalblick. I'm not saying there is a single thing wrong with this dog--I sure wouldn't kick him out in the cold. But it seems that even in the working lines we are getting away from individual looking dogs...I don't even know whether I think this is good thing or a bad thing, except that I hope we aren't breeding too much for looks.
by Chris Hruby on 29 June 2010 - 03:06
Great question!!!
Titles are a great start, however, the parent's, thus, genetics are what will show up in the breeding. I agree 100% that just because a dog has a title does not mean that is is breed worthy. I think you learn a LOT if you can see the dog's training and how it is brought up along the way. You can work a dog and hide a lot of things on the field with the right training, helper, etc....I also think that even though a dog has titles and is a really nice dog does not mean that it is a good producer.
It is widely known that if you send a dog to Germany you can buy a title. I have heard of quite a few dismayed owners, that after spending thousands of dollars shipping the dog off to Germany, have brought their SchH titled dog out to training only to be embarrassed at what they don't know. You can also obtain titles on your non-breed worthy dog here in the states if you want to engage in unscrupulous activities.....use your imagination here...;-)
On the last point....again....observing the dog in several venues to me would be important. High scoring SchH dogs these days are mostly all prey as unfortunately, that is what the sport dictates. If you want to breed to the standard, you really have to try and balance both prey and aggression.
Again, the best way to learn is to go out on the field and sit and watch some good training over several months, if not years....
Are the dogs that are difficult to trial and therefore do not score as high actually the better dogs?'
Hmmm...what are we looking for in a strong dog......fight, courage, dominance....those things do not lead to an easy dog to train....jmho.....
by Steve Schuler on 29 June 2010 - 03:06
This has been a good and informative thread that I have found to be very thought provoking. Thanks to all who have contributed to it!
I was just looking at the Von Forell website. They are a kennel located in Australia, whom I imagine many of you are familiar with.
Interestingly, they have their breeding program divided into four categories. On their webpage that I have extracted this information from they have a heading for each category followed by a short 'blurb' and a link to another page which expands on that particular category. Their various categories and 'blurbs' are as follows:
FAMILY COMPANION & PROTECTOR: Looking for a Stable and Fantastic Family Dog?
COMPETITION HIGHLY DRIVEN SPORT DOGS: Dogs for highly competitive enthusiast that demand strong driven dogs.
LAW ENFORCEMENT AND POLICE K9's: Dogs for Highly Experienced and Qualified Handlers that demand strong dogs with a
serious edge.
.
DETECTION DOGS: Enormous prey driven dogs, specifcally bred to work with Specialist Teams.
Without going into the consideration of these categories being specified as a marketing device, I think that they do illustrate that there can be somewhat distinct breeding goals that might differentiate one breeder or program from another. These goals need not be thought of as hierarchial, proceeding from the lowest order of mere companion dogs to the highest order of Police K9's, but as goals designed to best fit the demand for types of dogs that are intended to fullfill different capacities. While many dogs may be "breed worthy" in a broad sense, they may not be "breed suitable" for the intentions of the breeders aspirations or best suited for the actual environments in which their pups will live.
As a person who does not want or need a "highly driven sport dog", a 'strong dog with a serious edge", I fall into the category of people interested in a "family companion and protector". Of course, as we all know EVERYBODY is breeding those dogs. If you don't believe me, just surf some breeder websites. They are ALL sellling great candidates to fit that bill.
Kind of a funny aside, but one breeders website I visited advertised that some of their high drive sport dogs would be sold to pet homes for certain impairments like monorchism. "Great!" says I. The perfect companion German Shepherd! A single testicled GSD ALWAYS make the best candidate for a companion dog. Or is it 'culling by placement? I know, kind of off topic, but I think it's pretty humorous. But then again, I guess that IS an example of a dog who is not Breedworthy!
SteveO
I was just looking at the Von Forell website. They are a kennel located in Australia, whom I imagine many of you are familiar with.
Interestingly, they have their breeding program divided into four categories. On their webpage that I have extracted this information from they have a heading for each category followed by a short 'blurb' and a link to another page which expands on that particular category. Their various categories and 'blurbs' are as follows:
FAMILY COMPANION & PROTECTOR: Looking for a Stable and Fantastic Family Dog?
COMPETITION HIGHLY DRIVEN SPORT DOGS: Dogs for highly competitive enthusiast that demand strong driven dogs.
LAW ENFORCEMENT AND POLICE K9's: Dogs for Highly Experienced and Qualified Handlers that demand strong dogs with a
serious edge.
.
DETECTION DOGS: Enormous prey driven dogs, specifcally bred to work with Specialist Teams.
Without going into the consideration of these categories being specified as a marketing device, I think that they do illustrate that there can be somewhat distinct breeding goals that might differentiate one breeder or program from another. These goals need not be thought of as hierarchial, proceeding from the lowest order of mere companion dogs to the highest order of Police K9's, but as goals designed to best fit the demand for types of dogs that are intended to fullfill different capacities. While many dogs may be "breed worthy" in a broad sense, they may not be "breed suitable" for the intentions of the breeders aspirations or best suited for the actual environments in which their pups will live.
As a person who does not want or need a "highly driven sport dog", a 'strong dog with a serious edge", I fall into the category of people interested in a "family companion and protector". Of course, as we all know EVERYBODY is breeding those dogs. If you don't believe me, just surf some breeder websites. They are ALL sellling great candidates to fit that bill.
Kind of a funny aside, but one breeders website I visited advertised that some of their high drive sport dogs would be sold to pet homes for certain impairments like monorchism. "Great!" says I. The perfect companion German Shepherd! A single testicled GSD ALWAYS make the best candidate for a companion dog. Or is it 'culling by placement? I know, kind of off topic, but I think it's pretty humorous. But then again, I guess that IS an example of a dog who is not Breedworthy!
SteveO
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top
