This is a placeholder text
Group text
by johan77 on 19 May 2011 - 17:05
Rexy, I know several competitiondogs from workinglines that didn´t pass selectiontest for the police. This isn´t strange since environmental stability, dealing with unexpected situations or tracking/searching for long time in different conditions isn´t required in SCH, or most sports I guess.
Steve, how many breeders in belgium/germany are only intressted in competitive SCH-dogs then, shouldn´t the GSD be able to work in real situations according to the breedstandard? The german breedsurvey haven´t done much for the GSD as a workingdog, hence for a serious workingdog breeder this minimal requirement doesn´t tell much. As I said, I would welcome harder regulations, but in the end it´s up to the breeder to know what he is doing, having titles or test will not tell you everything. There is also a world outside SCH and belgium/germany, hence you will se dogs which pedigrees isn´t full of SCH-titles in many swedish dogs for an example, and why would someone be bothered by that if SCH isn´t their only goal for a dog.
Judron, test that more are looking on the temperamnet/instinct of the dog is used for long time in sweden, it´s also a must for breeding. All dogs that are used for the police/military or security must also pass similar but tougher tests organized by trained persons in the police. So this talk about SCH and breedsurvey is at least here nothing I bother about, because all dogs at least have done some form of minimal testing and many have also been tested by the selectiontests the police use. So those who are talking about dog´s must be tested, yes I think they should but the minimal requirments in ANY country doesn´t test this enough, and at least I haven´t been talking about using dogs where the breeder use dogs without any health or charactertesting that steve talks about, this is not the point, the point is SCH isn´t the only thing people do and despite any title the dog´s genetics is more important than winning the WUSV with a very skilled handler as an example.
Steve, how many breeders in belgium/germany are only intressted in competitive SCH-dogs then, shouldn´t the GSD be able to work in real situations according to the breedstandard? The german breedsurvey haven´t done much for the GSD as a workingdog, hence for a serious workingdog breeder this minimal requirement doesn´t tell much. As I said, I would welcome harder regulations, but in the end it´s up to the breeder to know what he is doing, having titles or test will not tell you everything. There is also a world outside SCH and belgium/germany, hence you will se dogs which pedigrees isn´t full of SCH-titles in many swedish dogs for an example, and why would someone be bothered by that if SCH isn´t their only goal for a dog.
Judron, test that more are looking on the temperamnet/instinct of the dog is used for long time in sweden, it´s also a must for breeding. All dogs that are used for the police/military or security must also pass similar but tougher tests organized by trained persons in the police. So this talk about SCH and breedsurvey is at least here nothing I bother about, because all dogs at least have done some form of minimal testing and many have also been tested by the selectiontests the police use. So those who are talking about dog´s must be tested, yes I think they should but the minimal requirments in ANY country doesn´t test this enough, and at least I haven´t been talking about using dogs where the breeder use dogs without any health or charactertesting that steve talks about, this is not the point, the point is SCH isn´t the only thing people do and despite any title the dog´s genetics is more important than winning the WUSV with a very skilled handler as an example.
by judron55 on 19 May 2011 - 18:05
JOHAN.....I am oh so familiar with testing requirements....I have done enough helper work for police dogs to understand the selection process. Some of the police k9's were/are also active in schutzhund. I have worked dogs that could never do schutzhund..that are excellent police dogs....the opposite is also true. Should they not be bred? I have also worked dogs that would be an asset to any breeding program, that are sitting home on the couch!
People are going to do as they please when it comes to breeding...that's why the buyer better be knowledgable. Happy Training!
People are going to do as they please when it comes to breeding...that's why the buyer better be knowledgable. Happy Training!
by duke1965 on 19 May 2011 - 18:05
for some people , all they will ever be able to brag about , is the achievements of the parents of their dogs , lets not take that away from them by using unknown dogs for breeding
by mfh27 on 19 May 2011 - 20:05
Duke says, "now I was in france several years ago , and they had a nice setup , the IPO trained dogs were send on a guy in a suit with a bamboo ringsport stick that rattles more than 60 % of the IPO certified dogs didnot even come close to the helper who did nothing more than rattle his bamboo when the dogs were at about 60 feet away".
How many dogs were tested? I don't think this is a fair test at all. For one, IPO dogs most likely have never been trained to bite suit, they bite a sleeve. Having never bitten a suit before, why would the IPO dogs all of a sudden know how to do a send away bite on a suit, stick or no stick?
Do good police dog not need to be conditioned to strange noises and objects hitting them? Can a good police dog go from biting sleeves and suits to biting for real? Or is there an in between step?
How many dogs were tested? I don't think this is a fair test at all. For one, IPO dogs most likely have never been trained to bite suit, they bite a sleeve. Having never bitten a suit before, why would the IPO dogs all of a sudden know how to do a send away bite on a suit, stick or no stick?
Do good police dog not need to be conditioned to strange noises and objects hitting them? Can a good police dog go from biting sleeves and suits to biting for real? Or is there an in between step?
by steve1 on 19 May 2011 - 20:05
johan
I have never said ScH was the only way to test a dog and i have never said i was against Military or Police Dogs being bred from
What i have been saying is this
a lot of people on this forum have German Shepherd Dogs, Who are scathing regards a ScH dog being bred from above there own UNTRIED dogs , All you get is Yes but we sell the Pups to the Military, Police and they go for PPDs, But the same breeders do nothing to test there own dogs to any extent, and they in a lot of cases do nothing with them but breed and sell the Pups to various sources as above,
It is this that i am against Not Dogs who are already working in other spheres other than the ScH Sport, It is mostly from the Sport Dogs progeny or the same lines that these Dogs evolve from
It is simply people who own these Dogs do no form or little to find out the temperament or nothing else and on there websites you read AWESOME breeding, i cannot see this AWESOME breeding in most cases this is what i am against,
Most of these dogs in my opinion should never be bred from they have not been tested for anything and a lot are of mediocre breeding, meaning to far bred away from the real old originals and to many dogs in the pedigrees who have done no work and many not even been joint tested, This is simply not acceptable in my criteria of what constitutes the noble breeding of the German Shepherd dog. Just as well we do not live in ages past with me in charge a lot of heads would roll no doubt about that, My motto throughout my life with the Pigeons and the other physical human Sport was
'NO MERCY' and that would have been the case had i been in charge in the days gone by on the owners of some who own these dogs
Steve1
I have never said ScH was the only way to test a dog and i have never said i was against Military or Police Dogs being bred from
What i have been saying is this
a lot of people on this forum have German Shepherd Dogs, Who are scathing regards a ScH dog being bred from above there own UNTRIED dogs , All you get is Yes but we sell the Pups to the Military, Police and they go for PPDs, But the same breeders do nothing to test there own dogs to any extent, and they in a lot of cases do nothing with them but breed and sell the Pups to various sources as above,
It is this that i am against Not Dogs who are already working in other spheres other than the ScH Sport, It is mostly from the Sport Dogs progeny or the same lines that these Dogs evolve from
It is simply people who own these Dogs do no form or little to find out the temperament or nothing else and on there websites you read AWESOME breeding, i cannot see this AWESOME breeding in most cases this is what i am against,
Most of these dogs in my opinion should never be bred from they have not been tested for anything and a lot are of mediocre breeding, meaning to far bred away from the real old originals and to many dogs in the pedigrees who have done no work and many not even been joint tested, This is simply not acceptable in my criteria of what constitutes the noble breeding of the German Shepherd dog. Just as well we do not live in ages past with me in charge a lot of heads would roll no doubt about that, My motto throughout my life with the Pigeons and the other physical human Sport was
'NO MERCY' and that would have been the case had i been in charge in the days gone by on the owners of some who own these dogs
Steve1
by johan77 on 19 May 2011 - 21:05
Judron, as I understand it selection of policedogs and the expertise on that in US could vary quite much, I think there is more consistency of what is required of a PSD when all dogs in a country go tru the same certificationprogram, and the selectionprocess is more similar and performed by people trained especially for this. I guess it would be nice if a dog is fit both for sport and police, but I rather see a breeder that choose a dog that is a good policedog compared to a sportdog who lacks in courage or environmental stability to do well in service.
It´s much talk about the bad quality of the breed as a whole for the moment in my country, due to a well known workingdog breeder that openly have critized the breedings done today by mostly the showbreeders and the breedclubs intresst in showdogs mostly , but I guess also by some workingdog breeders. But I remain sceptical if the breedclub will change anything according to the suggestion he made to better the breed because the money and intresst is probably in the showdogs by many. What he suggested was not revoulitionary but is neglected by many, some of the points he made was,
1.All breeders should follow the breed standard, all breeders could have bad litters and it´s important we talk open about botgh good and bad, the recommendations and "fine" words the breed club talks about when it comes to health and working should be followed and not only talked about.
2. Higer demands on breeders so lazy and bad breeders see they don´t fit
3.stricter rules when it comes too HD/ED and charactertest, all dogs in a litter should be tested and not only a few, sell the dogs to people that are motivated and tell them what they are buying, then you got more motivated buyers that are more willing to test their dogs, we need an open and honest discussion about health, joints and backs.
4. Start with a healthdeclaration(not sure what is mant here really)
5.Start a new organization which goal is to inform about the things we want to change and the situation for the breed and fight the bad breedingpractice that some are doing. As a sidenote there have already been an organisation for the working GSD for some time now in sweden but I guess he thought it haven´t been effective enough, which may not be so easy when it´s not an organization which lacks the decisionpower that breedclubs and kennelclubs has.
It´s much talk about the bad quality of the breed as a whole for the moment in my country, due to a well known workingdog breeder that openly have critized the breedings done today by mostly the showbreeders and the breedclubs intresst in showdogs mostly , but I guess also by some workingdog breeders. But I remain sceptical if the breedclub will change anything according to the suggestion he made to better the breed because the money and intresst is probably in the showdogs by many. What he suggested was not revoulitionary but is neglected by many, some of the points he made was,
1.All breeders should follow the breed standard, all breeders could have bad litters and it´s important we talk open about botgh good and bad, the recommendations and "fine" words the breed club talks about when it comes to health and working should be followed and not only talked about.
2. Higer demands on breeders so lazy and bad breeders see they don´t fit
3.stricter rules when it comes too HD/ED and charactertest, all dogs in a litter should be tested and not only a few, sell the dogs to people that are motivated and tell them what they are buying, then you got more motivated buyers that are more willing to test their dogs, we need an open and honest discussion about health, joints and backs.
4. Start with a healthdeclaration(not sure what is mant here really)
5.Start a new organization which goal is to inform about the things we want to change and the situation for the breed and fight the bad breedingpractice that some are doing. As a sidenote there have already been an organisation for the working GSD for some time now in sweden but I guess he thought it haven´t been effective enough, which may not be so easy when it´s not an organization which lacks the decisionpower that breedclubs and kennelclubs has.
by Jenni78 on 19 May 2011 - 21:05
mfh27 wrote:
I don't think this is a fair test at all. For one, IPO dogs most likely have never been trained to bite suit, they bite a sleeve. Having never bitten a suit before, why would the IPO dogs all of a sudden know how to do a send away bite on a suit, stick or no stick?
Do good police dog not need to be conditioned to strange noises and objects hitting them? Can a good police dog go from biting sleeves and suits to biting for real? Or is there an in between step?
You have a point. I don't think ALL dogs could do this that easily. I have to say though, that some can. In fact my UNtitled dog, who had never bitten a suit did great, immediately. The dog had bitten only sleeves and the first intro to a suit was at age 7. You CAN teach an old dog new tricks;-) Additionally, the same dog did well and increased aggression as pressure/fight from decoy increased, so it's not unheard of for a dog to not need conditioning to things like that, though I have to say the dog had definitely had pressure applied before, far greater than typical sport pressure, so again, you have a point, in that dogs unconditioned to "real" pressure may not know how to react, and this does not make them "bad" imo.
I don't think this is a fair test at all. For one, IPO dogs most likely have never been trained to bite suit, they bite a sleeve. Having never bitten a suit before, why would the IPO dogs all of a sudden know how to do a send away bite on a suit, stick or no stick?
Do good police dog not need to be conditioned to strange noises and objects hitting them? Can a good police dog go from biting sleeves and suits to biting for real? Or is there an in between step?
You have a point. I don't think ALL dogs could do this that easily. I have to say though, that some can. In fact my UNtitled dog, who had never bitten a suit did great, immediately. The dog had bitten only sleeves and the first intro to a suit was at age 7. You CAN teach an old dog new tricks;-) Additionally, the same dog did well and increased aggression as pressure/fight from decoy increased, so it's not unheard of for a dog to not need conditioning to things like that, though I have to say the dog had definitely had pressure applied before, far greater than typical sport pressure, so again, you have a point, in that dogs unconditioned to "real" pressure may not know how to react, and this does not make them "bad" imo.
by Sch2GSD on 19 May 2011 - 22:05
Lets not forget that different countries, have different rules and regulations, for dog owners and breeders. For the people that live here in the US and choose to have their dogs imported and registered under the SV clubs or foreign clubs with stricter rules, than I feel that those people should follow the regulations and rules for those clubs. However, to the ones that have dogs that are produced here in the good Ole USA, and buy American Made 
, should be allowed to do as, it is or is not, required by the rules and regulations of the US affiliated clubs. Here in the USA, there are no titles required for breeding. I am not talking about health clearances, as the topic of this thread is "TITLES".
My present dog is titled and health certified, and I believe that is a good starting point if I should decide to breed. However, it was my decision that I made to get a titled dog. But just because my dog is titled doesn't make it better than many of the untitled dogs that are used in breeding programs. Having titles is awesome. I also considered an untitled dog but choose the titled one, because of personal preferences. Both dogs worked equal. But if anyone thinks that a title doesn not affect the purchase price of a dog, they really need a reality check. The titled dog was quite a bit more pricey than the untitles dog. However to me, money was not the deciding factor in my decision of what I was going to buy. Having a titled dog allows me to carry my title certification paper, (If I choose to do that, but I don't), and show it to whom ever I choose. But the real proof is in the dog, not the paper. My dog will work the same regardless if the title was ever attained or not.
What I am saying is, a good working dog will work with or without a title certification. I think some people are trying to be controlling and argumentative. After all is said, the results will still be the same. Whatever works for each individual is what will prevail. Bottom line is, "No one can make anyone do anything they don't want to, Or make stop them from doing something they want to do." Now if that can be understood and accepted by everyone, the arguing may stop.
This my fellow GSD owners, IS JUST MY OPINION. Its ok to disagree with me, as I have no problem accepting the fact that we can agree to disagree.
MJ
, should be allowed to do as, it is or is not, required by the rules and regulations of the US affiliated clubs. Here in the USA, there are no titles required for breeding. I am not talking about health clearances, as the topic of this thread is "TITLES".My present dog is titled and health certified, and I believe that is a good starting point if I should decide to breed. However, it was my decision that I made to get a titled dog. But just because my dog is titled doesn't make it better than many of the untitled dogs that are used in breeding programs. Having titles is awesome. I also considered an untitled dog but choose the titled one, because of personal preferences. Both dogs worked equal. But if anyone thinks that a title doesn not affect the purchase price of a dog, they really need a reality check. The titled dog was quite a bit more pricey than the untitles dog. However to me, money was not the deciding factor in my decision of what I was going to buy. Having a titled dog allows me to carry my title certification paper, (If I choose to do that, but I don't), and show it to whom ever I choose. But the real proof is in the dog, not the paper. My dog will work the same regardless if the title was ever attained or not.
What I am saying is, a good working dog will work with or without a title certification. I think some people are trying to be controlling and argumentative. After all is said, the results will still be the same. Whatever works for each individual is what will prevail. Bottom line is, "No one can make anyone do anything they don't want to, Or make stop them from doing something they want to do." Now if that can be understood and accepted by everyone, the arguing may stop.
This my fellow GSD owners, IS JUST MY OPINION. Its ok to disagree with me, as I have no problem accepting the fact that we can agree to disagree.
MJ
by desert dog on 20 May 2011 - 00:05
No disagreement with me mj, you hit the nail on the head
Hank
Hank
by Jeff Oehlsen on 20 May 2011 - 00:05
Quote: How many dogs were tested? I don't think this is a fair test at all. For one, IPO dogs most likely have never been trained to bite suit, they bite a sleeve. Having never bitten a suit before, why would the IPO dogs all of a sudden know how to do a send away bite on a suit, stick or no stick?
Do good police dog not need to be conditioned to strange noises and objects hitting them? Can a good police dog go from biting sleeves and suits to biting for real? Or is there an in between step?
It is a fair test. The good dogs will engage because they are wanting to bite, and were told to. Even though many of them have been conditioned to bite the sleeve, I have seen good dogs engage and bite the arm where the sleeve would be. What you are saying is what I am talking about when I say lowering the bar. Now the decoy may make it very hard for them to bite the forearm, but ok, they engaged the decoy.
A good police dog should love to bite and fight so much that conditioning him to getting hit is retarded.
Do good police dog not need to be conditioned to strange noises and objects hitting them? Can a good police dog go from biting sleeves and suits to biting for real? Or is there an in between step?
It is a fair test. The good dogs will engage because they are wanting to bite, and were told to. Even though many of them have been conditioned to bite the sleeve, I have seen good dogs engage and bite the arm where the sleeve would be. What you are saying is what I am talking about when I say lowering the bar. Now the decoy may make it very hard for them to bite the forearm, but ok, they engaged the decoy.
A good police dog should love to bite and fight so much that conditioning him to getting hit is retarded.
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top
