Coated GSDs - Page 1

I know coated dogs are a breed fault, but would any of you working breeders still breed a coated dog if the temperment and workability was outstanding? Also, would you ever purchase a coated pup with an awesome temperment and pedigree?

I personally would not. Coats as a general rule do not have an undercoat, which in cold and wet weather is a definate draw back. I believe, orignally, that that is the biggest reason why they were shunned. Although not the only reason. Although I must say that many other breeds have separated their show rings with various coats. I personally would not object to coated GSD's being shown separately. AS many have observed, they tend to have just as good if not better structure and temperament. Debby

I have a young female 6 mos and would like to know what is considered a "coat"? I believe she is borderline but has excellent structure and wonderful disposition. She has coat curly around the butt, long on the withers, but not long in or on the ears and almost, but not quite, a part along the withers. She has won VP1 numerous times and I hope she has a further show career, but I would sure like to know what is definitely considered a "coat."

Hello Redcap, You might look on this page{about 75% of the way down it} and you will see the several variations, maybe this will help you? http://www.4gsd.homestead.com/colours.html Jerry Hicklen

I have to object to a "coated" dog not having an undercoat. There are two different types of "coated" dogs: 1) Longcoat - does not have an undercoat, would be an almost shaggy looking dog, which is extremely rare. 2) Longstockcoat - does have a (somewhat thinner, but existent) undercoat, as defined by the SV breed standard. Some dogs have more or less of an undercoat. If their coat parts on the middle of a back that is usually an indication of an extremely thin undercoat. In the early 90's, my parents-in-law had a beautiful Cimbo Burg Reichenstein-son, who was so borderline that even judges had a tough time. An American SV-judge gave him first place in 1991 (we only showed him since it was a Practice Show for the club to get permission under USA to hold shows and breed surveys), and a respective now retired German judge and breeder told us that we should send him to a tropical country where he is permanently out of coat and he would be just fine. But he was a longstockcoat, while not having too much on his torso, the plums on his legs and a little bit on the inside of his ears gave him away. Both are banned from breeding and their offspring is not eligible for SV registration. There have been ongoing discussions about permitting longstockcoats, but I don't think it will happen. Chris

Blitzenfelk9 Wrote: I know coated dogs are a breed fault, but would any of you working breeders still breed a coated dog if the temperment and workability was outstanding?""" There are many top males that have all the great characteristics you mentioned above without the coat fault. There are so many top dogs available for stud service today in the US that there is no reason to purposely breed to a long coat for "Temperament and Workability".

My 9 mo old female is, I suppose, a longstock coat. She has an undercoat, her hair is longish under her belly and around the sides of her face. Like Redcap's it is also curly around the top down by her tail. She didn't look like a coat when we got her, although, the older she got, the longer her hair got - not everywhere though. She has good lines, and her parents were both stock coats. She is very pretty and has the best temperment. Would have liked to have let her have a litter, though. I'm hoping that she doesn't get any "longer" anyplace else, does anyone know that by 9 mos. if she's done?

Is the SV not considering dropping long coat as a disqualifier? A contact in Germany mentioned it a few mos ago. Does anyone know what, if anything is going on? What I was told was that dogs w/o an undercoat would still be disqualified. Anyone know if this is just rumour?