acceptable faults? - Page 1

being that no dog is perfect and every dog has a fault no matter how small or how big what are some of the acceptable faults that you are ok with ignoring or breeding the dog Anyways.  I am asking this question because of all of the talk about breeding dogs with no hip/elbow score.  I think that many of the problems that we see with some of our working line litters is that hip/elbow scores has become the deciding factor when it comes to breed or not to breed. 

So once again the question is this....... If you are a breeder or if you are a buyer what faults within a dog are you ok with and why?

I think that the SV has covered this pretty well with their Koerung system. I think a dog should be able to get at least a KK2 and if I had a GSD that wouldn't be able to get its Koerung due to genetic problems, I would not breed it. (I say genetic problems because a dog might not be able to get a breed survey if, for example, it got kicked by a horse and lost all its incisors but it might still be a great dog for breeding).

I have some things that is not a debate and that is health no allergies,no problems wit pancres and no joint problems

then its not to debate that the dogs both have to have alot of drive both the fooddrive,prey and hunt should be high more than average. the defense or social aggresion in dogs as you say it here is not as impotant to me as the  3 others .

Hips,elbows and back should be most A or B.

I would never breed a dog that is not exrayed on his hips and elbows.

I do not want to breed a dog that is to angulated,I think many of the kk 1 dogs is way to angulated I would rather see a dog as straight a back and hindlegs ass possible

if a person looks at hip ,color etc as a breeding criteria is wrong in so doing. there is a lot more to breeding then these things. i will look over a dog that has mild hip dysplasia = fast normal  if it has excellent drives and is well in every other way. breed her to a stud that all his lines has good hips and elbows.
 i too like a good straight strong back, big blocky head. wide chest ,muscular hips and big bones all around. this is how the capt. intended it to be.
 working dogs is a true gsd.















 

To op, I don't think any fault should be ignored, In fact a lot of thought and research should go into any mating. But as Sable stated It should not be the only factor. It has to be the evaluation of the whole dog. What would this dog bring to the table as a whole dog, and what the other dog would bring to improve what was lacking. I know of no dogs if you look back at their pedigree far enough you will not find faults. It is about what they have to contribute and is it worth it. You have to look at both dogs, My biggest thing to reject a dog for, when it comes to breeding is not physical it is a dog that has a weak heart.
Hank

sable , a dog with mild rating does  not equal fast normal , anyway , there are enough great dogs around with good hips and elbows , so why even think about breeding dogs with mediocre ratings

if you have to make a choice between foults ,I would say foults that are not shortning the life of the dog ,  or give him a lesser quality of life , are acceptable

hips , elbows , spine , heart , pancreas    etc  etc   are not

to me the only genetic fault that is acceptable is color aslong as it does not affect the health or such of the dog, my female noone agrees that she is a shepherd because of her color other than that she is a good example of a shepherd imo. now i do not like the pure white dogs that is just odd to me. 

duke, i stand to be c orrected. i just pulled my chart. yhanks for the correction. what i said above still stands.
 hank, weak heart is one of the worst faults. i would never have a dog like that in my kennel.

At the very least, it should be mentioned that if you're admitting minor faults into your breeding, try to avoid breeding two dogs with the SAME fault.  For example, one of my males has lighter colored eyes, and I would do better to not breed him to a light-eyed female.  That way, while you may be admitting some fault, you're not selectively breeding for it, so that ALL offspring would inherit the same fault.

Yes Daryl, Thats what I was trying to say in my comment about breeding positives to negetives.
As I've never seen a perfect dog, sometimes the good out weighs the bad but has to be compensated for to repress the bad. We see people always talking about I would never breed this or that, because of something even so rediculous as not being titled, or because hips don't come back 0/0. And while titeling and perfect hips are great, and something to certainly consider. It's not all there is. If all we breed is titled dogs with ofa excellent hips, what will happen to all the other desireable characteristics that have been pushed farther down in the gene pool. 25 years or so we will have dogs that will live a healthy worthless life, incapable of working a field mouse from one hole to the other. We cannot settle for less than a strong , healthy, intelligent, couragous, hard working dog. that has balanced drives, not crazy, but a solid working dog. Just my opinion not trying to start a war.
Hank