USCA to develop a plan to improve the breed - Page 5

I agree w/VKGSDs. I think the divide is worse on the internet than it is in person, though I will admit to a few "you did WHAT?!" comments when I mentioned I bred a homebred bitch to a black and red. I got a few phone calls and emails concerned that I was "switching sides." <rolleyes>. I replied that I bred the litter just like every other litter; I looked at the dog I had in front of me and then looked for the right dog to complement. The one I found happened to be black and red. Get over it. But for the most part, people don't seem to say the same things in person they do online. A nice SL is welcome at most clubs. A SL who doesn't work isn't any more welcome at a working dog club than most WL dogs are in a conformation show <shrug>. So what? Show up anyway. Do your thing. At the end of the day, when you prove your dog, unless they're just complete @$$holes, people will respect you for it. 

       nevermind 
 

BVATM???

elitism huh?  I never understood why one would want a dog, but then not want all the "stuff" that makes up that breed of dog?  ...

I do think the whole idea of elitism was taken out of my contextual meaning. That is because I can agree with everything else that came after in zdog's reply.

The problem is I don't think he understood Dog1's call to think out of the box. Now, Bob McK, has said what he has been saying for years. I have nothing against Bob, or his dogs, or what he wants for an ideal GSD. I merely wanted to point out that nothing has changed since I stumbled on this site and was informed my AKC Complete Dog book was only good for toilet paper. 

It is simple logic to stop repeating what one is doing if the results remain the same. Now, since this was  a call by Dog1 for "outside the box" thinking,  I imagine it is hard for some to actually think about what is being said, and not just make the comfortable knee jerk reactions that go with it.

I do believe my sense of "elitism" relates to what I have perceived as the secretive elements that it drives in some people, for instance in the sport of IPO, making it difficult as a sport for the USA to embrace. Even within its own organizations, elitism continues to drive apart its factions. These ideals are not growing the sport or any type of acceptance, for any real attempt at inclusion, as a simple possibility. Basically, it does not believe in a mainstream public that can decide if a proper German Shepherd Dog with all its important temperament characteristics, described beautifully by zdog, is the dog for them. If there was no longer a long list of distinctions or problems relating to the conforming to the standard, we wouldn't have the WL/SL divide. We would have GSD bred in the USA that are working dogs, but not always the dog for everybody. Really, I am sure the GSD is not the dog for every German citizen, too. There must be some who prefer a schnauzer or a dachshund?

Hope that is a bit clearer, how I see "elitism" as a problem, (but probably not.) 

My problem with reading Dog1's proposal has to do with who are the breed wardens? I can see some issue with that, perhaps.
 

I think Dog 1 has some excellent points. It still boils down to one very basic fact - keep importing dogs, don't support domestic breeders and nothing will ever change in the US. Conversely, US breeders need to realize that continuing to charge outrageous prices for puppies is not going to get them over the goal line either. It has to work both ways.

There will always be the working line diehards who think that show lines have no virtues and are not worth breeding. The same for show line diehards who feel the same way about working lines.  The one time in 9 years on this board that I mentioned that my ASL x GSL did a better job at a trial than the working lines, I got tarred and feathered and told that was because those WL's weren't in good enough physical condition to compete, etc. Otherwise no show line would have ever bested them in anything.  Good luck getting anything positive from people with that mindset.

What is the role of a breed warden in the US?

I don't see a problem with breed wardens in any of this. The breed warden program sort of fizzed and died a few years ago. When USCA offered USCA registration only, the need to register the litter, tattoo the litter and have a breed warden sign off on the litter went away. When the microchip came into acceptance and you didn't have to take your litter to a USCA tattower. The breed warden went further away. The position has no place any longer except at the Organizational level.

You could almost use this example as the US breaking away from the SV way of doing things. When I first started years ago. The litter registration, stud reports (things done in the US to replicate the SV system) were pretty popular. They were published in the USA magazine.

We broke away from that tradition and the SV is still talking to us. We can do what we want in this country and remain within the SV embrace.

When we test children or students on a course they have done or class they have attended we do so without them knowing exactly what will be asked. We do so in a suitably random manner to try and uncover the extent to which they understand the work they are doing.

So in the spirit of thinking outside the box, why not have breed tests, because that's what they are, follow the same approach. Imagine going into an IPO protection phase of a trial where you do not know what tasks will be put to you and your dog. Obviously the tests will never be wildly dissimilar to what the dog would have dealt with in training, but it could be applied to more real world type situations and may cross a bit of the sport-work gap. This to me is an essential gap to close.

The idea of a required shape or conformation is illogical in a functional breed. Form follows function, always has, ask Darwin, ask evolution.

If Hussain Bolt were a GSD and GSD's were sprinters he would be wildly atypical of what is bred for and in all likelihood dismissed as oversized or some other catch phrase people love to hate. Reality is, he is the greatest sprinter/GSD of all time. Point being we may dismiss incredible dogs because of inherent biases and largely illogical physical requirements. Is it sound mentally and physically? Does it work well with versatility, commitment, drive, discernment, intensity? Then it is a good dog. I also understand the need for smaller dogs, and living in a very hot climate I wish mine was smaller, but I feel like there will always be dogs in a variety of sizes, to satisfy whatever is required.

Hireddog spoke about it in another thread. Mali have surpassed GSD's because they are bred to work, no one cares about anything else (mental and physical stability is a given).

So my 2 cents, random and different breed assessments, challenging dogs in different ways, testing their versatility, discernment and understanding.

I am not going to comment on WL/SL. I know SL breeders who know their dogs don't 'work' and don't care, and I know SL dogs who kick ass. Its a GSD issue, not a WL/SL issue. GSD's are functional working dogs. Breed assessments should match those criteria. Performance tests functionality, form does not.

**Dog1 said outside the box :).
 

zdog, my sentiments exactly, the post starting @ ".......elitism, huh?"......

Maxleia...an excellent post. The type of evaluation you are talking about is what the NVBK program is all about and there is only Malinois competing in that....ever wonder why?
I will tell you what the problem is with the GSD and why it lost its position to the Malinois in the working dog world. Too many alphabet soup names...WUSV, SV, WDA, CIA, DEA and more BS. All these different organizations care about the promotion of their OWN ideas and not what may be best for the breed.
KISS...breed to return the dog to what it was 50 years a go and if people dont want to own that type of GSD, so be it, let them get a poodle.