Who objects to this dog being bred? - Page 3

I have no "objections" either.  Like 4Pack, I was answering why I personally would not breed to the dog. 

Actually a GSD breeder cannot have it both ways. Either he or she breeds to the SV standard and follows their rules or not period. No grey areas here. There are a lot of double standards applied on this board. When it comes to AKC, many here go ballistic insisting it's AKC's  fault the breed is in bad shape. AKC should require performance titles, hip and elbow xrays, yada,yada, yada not allowing anyone to register a litter of GSD's if the parents do meet all the parameters. Well, that's what the SV is doing and has done for how many years now, but there are still those who know better than the SV, do not follow their rules unless it is convenient and then justify it in some way. Again, either one breeds to the SV standards or they don't. What good are all the rules in the world if they are ignored? Personally I could care less who titles their dogs before they breed them, but if you're going ot get on a GSD board and tout your loyalty to the SV and all they stand for, how can  you breed untitled dogs without breed surveys? That's what I mean by applying a doublt standard.  And that's all I have to say about that.

Great post, Blitzen!

That is exactly how I feel. The funny thing is that it is often the same people bashing other breedings, lines etc. But for them, the rules and regualtions do not imply. They justify their breedin practices with knowledge of their lines. They can vouch for the parents having super working abilities and full bites etc. etc. Well, if they do, why the heck don't you put a title on that dog and prove it to the rest of us?

Chris

P.S. Sorry to be off topic. I know this is about a LSC being bred or not. But it applies to the coat types and colors just as well as the titles and temperament.

D.H. 

EXCELLENT !! 

One minute people are complaining that we need to add new blood to the GSD.     Then the next minute you are elliminating a dog that could add Positive traits to the breed and still get quality standard coated pups.  

So,  what is better ?!      Do you want a working dog ?    If so ,  I think this dog has a lot to offer considering his accomplishments and the fact that regardless of the hip ratings he has,   obviously as D H pointed out that  he is still capable of producing quality .  

Or Geez !   lets add another breed in and try to fix it later.     

If  way back when,  someone didn't decide to elimanate quality dogs, based on just color or coat.   Then we would still have a much more diverse gene pool to choose from. 

The only reason there are certain color that are faults , is because  a human decided so.    Not based on health issues !! 

Rather to customize the breed. 

Sad Really !

Out of curiosity: Which litters did he have in Germany? I could not find any records of him being breed surveyed (due to his coat, of course). The only one breed surveyed was his sister Kelly (KKL1) if I checked correctly. But I only have old Breed Survey books, not the Genetics CD. If he did not get breed surveyed, it could still be possible for him to sire litters under SV regulations if his breeder  Balonier never registered him as a coat and he received a show rating under a judge. this litter would have received white papers. But to the best of my knowledge, hardly anybody in Germany breeds with these kind of papers, not even workingline breeders. Maybe he had these litters registered in one of the renegade clubs (ASVD or LSVD)?

Jamille, it is one thing to add new blood, but he does not bring that. His bloodlines are rather common. There is lots of progeny out of Ali. As a matter of fact, some call him one of the best modern producers in workinglines. So, for those breeding under SV regulations, there is no need to use him at all and make an exception.

Chris

He sired the:

"X" litter v Welzbachtal born 2 march 2004

"X" litter v Haus Pilzwege born 3 April 2005

"F" litter vd Donnerbrücke born 4 Sept.2006

"B" litter vd Riedbachsaue born 2 April 2007

They are all registered with SV

LMH: the coat, in and of itself, does not dissuade me.  I asked the question neutrally to encourage a more open discussion.

Personally. I would take a top BSP competitor over a poor working showdog anyday -- but I feel that generally working ability (which includes conformational structure as well as temperament in action) should take priority over color, angles, expression, etc.  So if I had to personally choose a nice but coated dog who consistently scores at the world class level over a VA dog who is not close, I would take the coated dog.  This does not mean that if I could get all of this dog without the coat I would not choose that one.  Some people here are convincing when they argue you can get this dog without the coat, so why not? My hypothetical however was meant to ask if you believe in ABSOLUTE rules (such as coat and color rules) such that you would be willing to cut the #6 BSP dog out of the gene pool to adhere to that rule. Many of you seem to think you would.

That said, I understand both as a gsd lover and as a person who happens to research and teach decision making & judgment, that there is no right answer here.  While everyone can admit that no set of rules (SV, or legal, or in sports) is perfect --everyone can identify with the judge who knows justice is not well served by the rule of law in a particular case, or a referee in sport knowing the fair thing is not actually the strictest application of a rule really intended for another circumstance, or a teacher who knows that there are always shades of grey in plagiarism, or, more to the point, that now & then a GREAT DOG may appear who has a "disqualifying fault" yet offer both a bit of genetic diversity AND some highly desirable trait or traits --  yet we may nonetheless feel that agreement to abide by those rules is a good thing.  The reason we think this (if we are rational and not just emotive) is because we don't want individuals exercising such discretion, not trusting that it will always be unbiased and wise. in the exercise of that discretion.  Say yes to breeding an astonishing long hair and you may be implicitly condoning the breeding of one hundred mediocre long hairs, in other words.

Yet what would you really do if another dog like Lord came along.  But not exactly Lord -- better.  Wins the BSP three, four times in a row.  Top structure.  Perfect coat.  Everything you ever wanted in a dog -- and when you get home with your trophy he goes to work in the kitchen and whips up an incredible Boeuf Bourguignonne, too boot.  One problem: he's a disqualifying color.  This Hercules-Einstein-Adonis-Julia Childs of a gsd is, say, blue. 

Do you really not breed to him?  If not, why -  for fear of more blues?  What if, to continue with this hypothetical, you can test for the blue gene and be absolutely sure that only non carrying females are allowed to breed to him - then what? 

If you still refuse to breed to him, you can say that you believe in an ironclad rule of law, without exceptions.  That you don't break the rules, period, whatever.  

For my part, if this dog shows up (and the odds are very, very much against it) I am not going to hesitate to welcome him into increasing his influence on the gene pool.  And I'm a vegetarian. 

Interesting.......  Someone said he has SV registered pups? Can anyone confirm that? If his pups are SV registered then he must be KKL rated right? Am I missing something? If he is the sire of SV registered pups and is KKL rated, then what are we even debateing. Now, here's my point again (if saomeone's statement is correct), he littermate is KKL1? So she who carries the LSC gene is recommended for breeding but he is axed? I wish humans were "bred" this way our schools wouldn't be so full and my taxes would be much lower! 

Ok, who can confirm these things? anyone?

If some of us had to be judged on our bad builds, hairy backs, lack of courage and bad nerves we would be far from breed worthy.

With that said, DH does seem to be playing double standards here.  At least with the limited info we have on the dog