showing long coat female - Page 7

Louise, you said Yes, sad to say, my trimmed longcoat (whom I loved very much) was awarded AKC points by defeating dogs with normal coats. Did you yourself give ole AKC a call and let them know what you did so that they could take your points away etc etc etc and disqualify your dog from any further showings????? Just thought I'd ask. You see I have nothing to hide. The UKC told me exactly what we could do. We do all of that but NO cutting!!!!!! Like I said, they even saw Chaos in person so that I could get the go ahead to show him with his coat!

I still think that it is a bit hypocritical to DQ a dog for a few tufts of hair out of place then turn around and give the wins to overangulated dogs who would never be able to chase down and turn a runaway sheep! IMO it is THIS policy that is ruining our breed because breeders are going to try to produce what wins. And, while we are on the subject, I got a copy of v. Stepanitz book for x-mas. Can anyone please point me to the chapter where HE says that longer coated dogs are not acceptable?

Yes I would like to see this too!

Poppa, both of your examples fly in the face of the SV and the AKC breed standards and neither "should be" rewarded in the show ring. I think it would not be too difficult to disect the GSD breed standard point by point and to make good arguments why each is not correct or fair. However, the standard is what it is and the only way it will ever change in Germany will be if the SV decides to do so or, here in the US, if the GSDCA votes to do so. So, until if and when those changes are made to allow a coat to be exhibited and bred, it is not acceptable. Fair? Not fair? Doesn't really matter in the big picture. Historically, changes in breed standards rarely serve the breed and are made so they conform to the current show dogs. It's like saddling the wrong end of the horse - instead of breeding dogs that fit the standard, change the standand to fit the dogs...duh, LOL. It's my understanding that the long coats WITHOUT THE UNDERCOAT were too sensitive to bad weather conditions and were not allowed to be used for breeding by 1930. I believe Herr Captain was alive then, wasn't he, so he was probably still actively involved in perfecting the breed and I'd have to think he was involved in that decision. The longcoats WITH UNDERCOAT were allowed for breeding until the early 90's. Some seem to think the decision to no longer allow them for breeding was purely political. Since the Captain was no longer alive then, he could not have been involved in the decision to not approve a longcoat with an undercoat. Many of the foundation dogs and current dogs carry the longcoat gene recessively and, to the best of my knowledge, there has never really been a big move to eliminate it from the gene pool in Germany or elsewhere. Even if longcoats were used for breeding at the beginning, that didn't necessarily mean the Captain did that because he thought they were correct, he may have been selecting for something else that particular dog had that he felt he needed. Now it's hard to make a case for using longcoats in a breeding program since there are a lot more dogs to choose from and those that are Koered do not have longcoats (unless they were skillfully trimmed). I myself find longcoats very attractive, especially those with a thick, deep undercoat and harsh guardhairs that stand off from the body. I haven't seen one of those for many years. A guy in one of my OB classes owned one and he was about the most beautiful dog I've ever seen. I called him a "shollie" LOL. I can't imagine how hard it would be to bathe a dog like that, wetting him to the skin would be almost impossible. That would be the sort of longhaired GSD that could survive a German winter. The ones with the long, soft guardhairs and little of no undercoat would never survive and that's what it's all about.

SW, I'd like to see the section of the UKC rules that addresses the trimming of dogs prior to showing them. Why don't you quote that here for us since I'm sure you must have purchased a copy of that rule book that's sold on their website. If you don't have it, then I'll ask a friend who shows UKC style. AKC says -"A dog which is blind, deaf, castrated, spayed, or which has been changed in appearance by artifical means except as specified in the standard for the breed.........may not compete at any show and will be disqualified." " A dog is considered changed in appearance by artifical means if it has been subjected to any type of procedure that has the effect of obscuring, disgusing or elmininating any congenital or hereditary abnormality or any undesirable characteristic, ot that does anything to improve a dog's natural appearance, temperament, bite or gait"

The reputable breeders sell their coats at a much reduced price. This gives someone who perhaps couldn't afford the more expensive littermates the chance to own a really well bred dog to have as a companion/partner/sport dog. That's a good thing. Of course, I am not pointing a finger at any one specific person, but I've always been curious as to why someone who takes advantage of the lower price and after the breeder explains why the pup is discounted then goes on to complain about it not being acceptable to breed or show their dogs? If you think the SV & other organizations were wrong to change the coat type, or acceptable colors, etc., from a serious fault to a disqualification, then perhaps the solution would be work to effect change in the organizations? Otherwise it's a little like pissing in the wind.

Exactly correct, Sueincc. Not sure how open the SV would be to considering a change back to allowing long stock hairs, but wouldn't it be interesting to find out? I'd vote for it as that coat is weather proof and could protect a tending dog year round. The danger would be in the interpretation of what is enough undercoat and how harsh the guardhairs need to be. Maybe that's why the SV stopped approving long stock hairs, too much room for personal interpretation allowing incorrect coats to obtain their Koers? Easier to just say - no more longcoats.

Blitzen: "Easier to just say - no more longcoats." Indeed! Otherwise, there may be too much subjectivity and politics. The latter tends to raise its ugly head when SV judges come to this country to judge and make "exceptions" that they would never make in Germany before an audience of their SV peers. Otherwise, how long is "long" (will we have a measuring stick for this?), how soft is "soft", how harsh is "harsh", how much undercoat is "sufficient"?

I just thought I would mention one thing about long coats and weatherability. Why is it that the German Shepherd is the only one of the working Shepherds (Belgian, Dutch, and German) that doesnt allow for long coats? I've heard the argument that they arent as weather proof, and that they arent as economical for workers - but at the same time - Belgians and Dutchies seem to be far more interested in working ability over showing wheras showing in the GSD world is huge. If the long stock coat really wasnt weather proof, wouldnt it have been disqualified in both of those breeds as well instead of accepted? I dont think it is a pretty thing - especially with the dutchies since I cant say that I have ever seen one in the show ring and have only seen one pet Dutchie (who is starting SchH in January with my club). Just kind of a curious question. ~Cate

I think it's all a matter of personal integrity. If you adhere to the SV standard, you don't show long coats. Period, whether you agree with the ruling or not. To present a lc in a show ring is clearly cheating. There is no grey area in this matter. It's black and white and nothing in between. I've seen it happen at a sieger show and the judge was offended that a lc was entered and promptly disqualified the dog. We could start another discussion on personal integrity and that would probably elicit thousands of replies. It seems that integrity is sorely lacking in many venues these days and justifying the showing of a lc is merely the tip of the iceberg.