“OUR BREEDS FUTURE IN OUR HANDS” (UK) article now on website - Page 4

Pedigree Database

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

by Ibrahim on 26 September 2009 - 21:09

Videx,

I have read your article, it looks a complete and thorough study. I think the British can do it. Only thing please do not kick out the small breeders, help them keep their pace with yours. I am not British and I am only enthusiast.

Wish you luck
Ibrahim

Videx

by Videx on 26 September 2009 - 22:09

Ibrahim: the hundreds of small breeders are as important as any other breeders to the future well being of our GSD breed, They must never be side lined or ignored, they must be appreciated, informed and assisted whenever they require it. Our breed will always belong to everybody who enjoys it, and everyone who takes part in forming its present and its future. Here in the UK we are at the crossroads, and we must rise to the challenge and make bold and meaningful decisions, for our breeds sake. I live in hope.


http://www.videxgsd.com/our_breeds_future_in_our_hands.htm

by Mackenzie on 29 September 2009 - 08:09

What a disappointing response to the subject of this thread now that the awaited paper from David Payne has been published. As of today only one response (from a foreigner) on the subject itself. David has done a good job in bringing all of the suggestions into one paper, the topics themselves have been in the public domain for some time. The breed desperately needs a proper system, one that is comprehensive in it’s detail in introducing all the necessary health checks and, collating information. Even the SV has faults in it’s system and, however bad that may be, it is better to have some system rather than no system at all. Administration is important to the future of the breed.

I was disappointed in the paper in that no reference has been made to the vital ingredient for the future of the breed and that is the dogs themselves. Do the breeders really understand the breeding families and how they come together to produce better animals? What are the breeders doing about paying attention to character and workability? What about the size problem? What about the problem of cow hocks and unsoundness and, please do not say that if the dog has good hips that is enough, whilst it is an essential part of the dog the matter of unsoundness occurs below the hips where the movement of the dog is a mechanical action. If one part is in too much quantity then the action will break down. If you do not believe that then put the question to the true working handlers and breeders whose dogs are working every day, seven days a week.

Over the years there has been many German imports, some better than others, but even when these dogs are sired by VA males and top V males the breeders are rarely reproducing the quality that we see abroad. We have seen many animals come in to Britain only to find out later that the hip scores and working qualifications are incorrect. With this mind should we re x-ray every dog to check the hip and elbow status and, perhaps, make it a condition that they must be presented at a UK Breed survey and perform, at least, a Sch H1 test under the scrutiny of our own Schutzhund people in order to pass.

This is not meant to be a comprehensive comment but I hope that it will stimulate this debate in a polite and civil manner. Anyone that would like to comment to me privately is welcome to do so.

Mackenzie

missbeeb

by missbeeb on 29 September 2009 - 10:09


I thought this proposal has already been put forward to the KC via the Partnership, having been written by S Belfield / West Yorks?  I know that "Reason" came up with the original 2 tier idea on this very board.

I haven't read it properly because it seemed pretty much a replica... is there some substantial difference please?

by Mackenzie on 29 September 2009 - 11:09

To Miss Beeb

You are quite right it is essentially the same as been previously discussed, it is just that all the topics are now on one paper.

Mackenzie

Videx

by Videx on 29 September 2009 - 12:09

The GSD Breed Council - The ITEM "Accredited GSD Scheme" was withdrawn in favour of a GSD Partnership presentation, and the council voted in favour of the "presentation" which meant pursuing the KC Accredited breeders Scheme" with the possibility of 'all things nice' from the KC, including our GSD Breed Survey as an "Accolade" - GOD HELP US.

KC proceeded to KICK US in the teeth, and announced the Suspension of CC's for 2012

Then The KC Chairman reported as saying he was willing to KICK the GSD out of the KC if we didn't fall into line.

NOW. I am simply advocating a RETURN to the foundation principles which will give our breed a promising future, here in the UK, with the GSD fraternity having the major influence and control.

I make no claims for originality or for any personal recognition, I simply want our breed to keep up with what is going on, and too consider all options and hopefully make meaningful and structured progress.

My articles are published in the canine press, and this one will also be published. 

My apologies for my very poor grasp of English, and my obvious signs of old age, and fragility. I am not as robust as I used to be. Perhaps I should stop doing this and potter around in my garden. Perhaps others can write our much needed articles defending our breed, and challenging unreasonable attacks, no matter who makes them. "heads above parapet" comes to mind.


missbeeb

by missbeeb on 29 September 2009 - 13:09


David, dont get your hair off... I simply wanted a little clarification, I thought I'd missed something.  I couldn't stand to think what you'd do to a garden... after pottering!!!

I think most of us are right behind you.


by Mackenzie on 29 September 2009 - 13:09

Miss Beeb

Now that you have contributed to this thread "Our Breeds future in our hands" I would be interested in your views on the future of the breed in relation to the dogs themselves rather than the administration.  This side of the coin will continue whatever is accepted, or not, by the KC.

Mackenzie

missbeeb

by missbeeb on 29 September 2009 - 15:09


I'd like to see more diversity... a few more "lines" used in the breed.  My friend Gustav, makes a lot of sense on this subject and I agree with him... we're bottle necking all too often these days.

I'd like us to be a little more like Germany in some ways, but not all... they don't have everything right imo.  I'd love for the working side to play a more relevant role, for all breeders and I am totally behind the 2 tier pedigree scheme... if we have to stay with the KC.


by Mackenzie on 29 September 2009 - 15:09

Thank you for your post and I hope that now others will follow.

I agree with you regarding opening up the bloodlines but the problem is where do we turn to.  Because of the inbreed over the past years and as a result all the top lines carry the gene for size.  Character and workability is also a problem with many animals being reluctant to work.  I have seen quite a few animals by Zamp who display this kind of character.

Another problem is that dogs are coming into the VA group at too young an age and without progeny on the ground.

Where the breed is going in the UK  I am afraid that I have no idea.  Although many females are being taken to top bloodlines they are not really producing that well and, therefore, I think that the breeders are more concerned with the male Sieger placing than whether the male and his breeding family is suited to the female and her breeding family.

Kind regards

Mackenzie





 


Contact information  Disclaimer  Privacy Statement  Copyright Information  Terms of Service  Cookie policy  ↑ Back to top