If the Capt. was alive today - Page 4

My point was not about which lines are what.. in all honesty I think the Martin Brothers did a large disservice to the breed and I am not sure Raiser is helping it either. 

The BREED.. was designed to work... and originally that included the work of herding (which, BTW is not for the feint of heart!).  It also included protection of shepherd, family and property. 

Today I see show lines that have weakness (but not in all dogs) when it comes to nerve and combat drive.. a lack of hunt drives.  I see working lines that are mostly prey drive with insufficienty fight/combat/hunt drives and often a lack of biddability (but not in all dogs).  Confidence is lacking when drives are not sufficient and balanced. 

If the dog is balanced, he does not need to bite to succeed.  He needs to believe he has been the victor and the one controlling the situation.  I think this dog was more prevalent in the past in both the working and show lines.. and it was more prevalent in the American lines.  This is a dog that enjoyed the fight.. that escalated the fight, and was not afraid to hunt down and detain.. and did not need a bite to satisfy his drive. 

"shrinking popularity of the breed"  I haven't heard that phrase before, but sounds like it couldn't be all bad.

There already ARE seperate venues and club organizations for the varying proponents of whatever flavor GSD suits you.  That's not a solution, that's part of the problem.  IMO, THE central problem IS that there is a very noticeable splintering of ONE breed in which a common name is shared, but each branch of which is used for different purposes and stems from uncommon heritage.

I say, let's call a duck a duck and quit kidding ourselves.  And forget about which fracture deserves the right to use the breedname, I'd be willing to call MY breed anything else, in order to not be associated with it's portions I find disgusting.

deleted by author

I feel that's a completely a different topic, and hopefully won't derail this particular thread.  Breedworthiness by my personal standards aren't in question to myself ;-)  But in part, MY "golden middle" is a dog suitable for three primary facets; a dog that can appropriately immerse itself in a social or family environment, has the necessary drive to be competitive in sport, and the true grit to test their mettle in the sometimes very harsh world of real working conditions.

The schutzhund venue should ideally be an appropriate test for such a dog, but unfortunately in itself does not produce such a dog.  Other heavyweight factors of my selection process would include the inheritable health, trainability, and inclination to serve (biddability).  It seems to myself that I hold a greater respect for "genetic obedience" than many folks in the protection sports do.  And appearantly, the protection sports themselves cannot adequately test for this with much more accuracy than their "courage test".  And don't get me started on FST.

My point is, while there are differing aims by various groups in ONE breed, there will be "specialization" toward those goals.  That does little to help ANY of the group's sense of identity for their version of the breed, whereas their their selection for these specialized functions have appearantly resulted in vastly different dogs.

I think we ought to get over this notion that we can "bring them all together", to recreate one beautiful golden middle for everyone.  Let's instead, celebrate them for their differences, and give them each an identity of their own, as they deserve!

I think he'd buy a malinois.

ROFLMAO......

What will it take for people to learn and understand that from the very beginning there has only been ONE German Shepherd? Let me say at this point that whatever the faults of the SV it has the best system in the world in the way that the breed should be organised and its continuance for the betterment of the German Shepherd Dog. It is the human failings that is responsible for the implementation, administration and enforcement of the rules.

Responsibility for the anatomical changes in the breed lies squarely at the feet of the breeders whether they are show line or working line. The breeders are not breeding to the breed standard as a matter of good practise. Add to this the poor level and numbers of good trainers today. The trainers are at the two ends of the spectrum. One set does just enough to pass a test to satisfy the show requirements while the other is obsessed by the protection work. Like everything else in the world when the participants cannot achieve the protocols necessary and obligatory they bring about change in the infrastructure to fit what they are achieving which is coming up short all of the time. That is NOT the way forward anymore than allowing the suggestion that different clubs should be allowed. This breed is one family whatever your particular preference as an individual.

I am fed up to the teeth of hearing about the sch H that are bought and seeing the show dogs just lumber up to the helpers with no zip in their work. As for the working side I am also sick of the people whose main priority is the biting and everything else is secondary. Posts like “who breeds the hardest dog?” does the breed no favours at all and confirms what I am saying here.

The breeders are responsible for the bottleneck in the gene pool by simply following the leader with their breeding programmes. They must ask questions about the way development is going and make the necessary changes for the betterment of the breed. What makes a good breeder? Is it political influence, in whatever way, that allows even their below average dogs to win, or, is it the breeder who consistently breeds to the breed standard and produces consistently above average animals that can work and be shown?

It is noticeable on this database the divisions in the breed but so many of the so called top breeders from either side are silent. Is it because they are fearful that the limits of their knowledge is not really that good, or, is it a political decision?

Quite often on the databse we read about the comparison between our breed and the Malinois.   We do not need to be compared to other breeds because of weakness's in our breed.   Our breed is the German Shepherd Dog, the best utility dog in the world.

Mackenzie

 

Mackenzie,

The only thing I agree with you here is the German Shepherd was and should remain one breed. The SV is a leader and has the power to promote what present and future GSD looks like, behaves like and perfoms. It is natural that the majority follow leadership and thus majority of breeders follow the SV and its vision. There will always be breeders who are stong believers, determined and self assured who will breed their beliefs no matter what the SV promotes but they will never be the majority. So the blame lies mostly on the hands of the SV not the breeders, though this does not relieve the breeders from their responsibility towards the breed and the creator of the breed. To say that trainers nowadays are  worse is also not true, trainers train according to individual needs and to standards set by authorities. I appreciate your contributions and learn from them but this last post of yours I disagree with.

Ibrahim

Many thanks for your post. I agree with you that the SV is a leader and what it should promote is the breeding according to the breed standard in every department. The SV should also take steps to make sure that the bottlenecks that we have seen in the years before do not arise to the levels we now see for future development. In the past the SV as a body under he guidance of the President of the day permitted the gene pool to be drastically reduced by disqualifying dogs because of colour alone. They naturally took the fees for registration from the members who owned the greys, bicolour and blacks in the knowledge that they could accomplish nothing in the show ring. The owners personal preference for colour meant nothing.

The SV would not exist if it were not for the breeders. Simple, no product no SV.

I agree with you that people be allowed to breed to their beliefs but this has to be done within the framework of the rules, otherwise, there would be no need for a breed standard and all that goes with it. It is for the SV to administer, control and enforce the rules as set out and which has held good for the breed since it’s beginning. Sadly, the SV does not always enforce the rules with the rigour that is sometimes needed.

The level of expertise of trainers depends on their individual circumstances. There will be, as in every walk of life, a high level of experience in the professionals and this can be seen in the results that they achieve. The working people mainly keep a low number of dogs because they then have the time to train the dogs themselves and, they get good results. These are usually are the hobbyists who get a great deal of pleasure from their animals. On the other hand the breeders quite often keep too many dogs. I know some breeders with more than twenty animals. How much time can they give each dog? Not enough and, despite what some of these people say about training a dog they themselves have never trained an animal. The numbers in this group are the highest in failures regarding the ability to work. Some would say that it is up to the trainers to mould the dogs but without the breeders there would be no dogs to train. There will always be excellent trainers but they will be in the minority in relation to the overall number of trainers needed in the breed world wide.

Mackenzie

 

it is too easy to point your fingers at the SV and the showlinebreeders , as the only ones to blame really for the quality of workingline shepherds today , is the workingline breeders , as they make the combinations and select what  pups to keep ,

I know many breeders who select their  studs for one reason , will he sell my pups , another group goes to breed the winner of the day , which is another big problem , pretty soon an interview with Helmut Raiser will be published in english ,where he will command some of these topics , and yes I think you should support RSV2000 and put pressure on AKC and CKC to accept the pedigrees of this club , as they are FCI  pedigrees and should be accepted like any other FCI pedigree

As for the original topic , I think captain Max would hate to see the breed to go to whatever over the top specialism possible , so as much as he would hate the showline that cannot do anything else than show , he would also hate the sport/points  dogs of today that cannot do anything else  , and he would be sad for the lost versatility the breed was known and wanted for  , like in   seeing eye dogs where they dont use shepherds anymore , the many other jobs where german shepherds used to be the standard , but now are hardly found anymore ,because this was what he worked for so hard ,to create a versatile workingbreed ,not only loved but even more so , used by many