Size Development Of The GSD - Page 6

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 joanro on 16 July 2015 - 14:07

Mac, HD is not dog height. HD is structural malformation, size can be influenced by nutrition and other environmental influences, as well as genetics. Same can be said for HD. However, a dog that is an inch or two over designated standard is not going to have his health and wellbeing devastated by it. Not a good comparison.
Not interested in making the hall of fame, only in producing gsd healthy and representative of what the breed is supposed to be. :-) I'm not interested in turning this into a promo for my dogs, but making my point using personal experience.

by Mackenzie on 16 July 2015 - 15:07

Joanro - the point that have missed is that it is not about  comparing chalk and cheese but the the experience of skill factor.  You say that your experience comes from your skills as a breeder but you are avoiding sharing something by way of information which the breed that you love so much could benefit from.  Seems strange to me and probably other readers.

So many dogs carry the gene for size that breeders would be interested in seeing whether any of the bloodlines in your breeding would be beneficial to them and the breed as a whole.

Mackenzie


by joanro on 16 July 2015 - 16:07

'Joanro - the point that have missed is that it is not about  comparing chalk and cheese but the the experience of skill factor.'
Mac, YOU are the one who used breeding for generations of clear hips as an example of breeder 'skill'. Hd is not comparable to dog size, so why bring it up in this discussion?


' You say that your experience comes from your skills as a breeder....'
No, I did not say that. I was using my experience of close line breeding to illustrate that close line breeding does not always produce oversized dogs....its all about selection.

'....but you are avoiding sharing something by way of information...'
The information I'm sharing is, when line breeding and if oversize is a concern, then choose dogs that are not oversized and not known for producing oversized dogs..... ie, selection. The female I line bred on will not be of much interest to people breeding b/r dogs. Anyone breeding oversized sable dogs, probably want to. Its not difficult at all to find 'within standard' sable dogs....in my experience.

by Mackenzie on 16 July 2015 - 16:07

Journo - Returning to the topic of this thread and that you said more than once that it was all about selection.

In making your selections did the males come from all American lines, or, German lines, or, Czech lines or uncle Tom Cobbleys Lines? The colour of the dogs does not matter. I like the grey dogs and this is still an acceptable colour under WUSV and SV rules and therefore admissible, it is a matter of choice. Also, it would have been interesting to know the bloodlines behind your female and the males that you used and try to understand how the breeding families came together so well. It is all very simple really. I like to hear success stories because they give others hope.

Mackenzie


by joanro on 16 July 2015 - 17:07

I'll send you a pm to satisfy your curiosity. Selection applies to any line you mentioned....

kitkat3478

by kitkat3478 on 17 July 2015 - 03:07

It's really not that difficult in the showline either to control your size. Thats where your knowledge of the dogs and the lines come into play.

   I used to get more oversized years ago, once I changed my practice and educated myself, i do stay pretty much within the standard these days.

   Every now and again I get a hefty size dog, and those ones are the first and easiest to sell, go figure.


Sunsilver

by Sunsilver on 17 July 2015 - 11:07

Both Star and her litter brother were a bit oversized. I don't know about her brother, but she is about 25 inches tall. This happened just around the time the SV was beginning to crack down on oversized dogs. Star's breeder solved the problem quite simply: in spite of the fact he'd paid a lot of money to import a son of the famous Ursus von Batu, he only used him one more time as a stud, and that was because someone else wanted to breed to him.  I guess he also wanted to see what the sire would throw with another bitch.

Those two breedings were enough. I'm sure he could have made quite a bit of money in stud fees if he'd wanted to promote the dog, and trial him, but he chose not to.


by Mackenzie on 22 July 2015 - 13:07


It seems that Lothar Quoll is keeping his promise to reduce size in the breed. At the recent Australian National Show he had a dog in first place in the Open dog Class and then he measured the dog at 67.5cm.  As I understand it the dog, Fremont Hells Bells, was demoted from the VA positions to V2 because of his size.

A picture of this dog together with his breeding is on this database.

Mackenzie


by Ibrahim on 22 July 2015 - 14:07

Thanks for the info,Thumbs Up


Dog1

by Dog1 on 22 July 2015 - 15:07

Size is being addressed. Surprised there's not more written about it on this thread. Anyway, here goes my awkward Readers Digest version. Where do I start to put this in perspective????

OK, a few years ago it was height, not necessarily size, and dogs were penalized. This produced the short legged, 50/50 dogs we saw popular a few years ago and a lot of really good specimens left Germany. It was height, height, height, only one dimension was changed so that's what you got. Stretched 50/50 dogs. Hmmmmmm. Not really what they were looking for. As you think about the size factor. Shouldn't it be size, the balance in the dog through correct proportions vs. simply height? Make sense so far?

A new system is in development. Similar to the ZW score for hips. The dogs dimensions are considered and the product of the assessment will be provided to breeders in the form of a numerical figure. It's a 5 year process in progress.

Why 5 years? Why not now and what are we doing in the mean time? Germany has acknowledged the information collected previously is; well; not really representative of the dog. It's a little misleading and they don't want to start with corrupt information. Everybody is supposed to be honest now and record real time accurate information going forward for these results to be accurate.

The new system has a few obstacles to overcome. If you slam the big dogs, no one shows them, you don't get the data from them. What you should be seeing now is no large dog in front of a correct size dog. Big dog should have a few smaller ones in font of it. It's still going to be subjective in the ring as there comes a point where the correct size dog just doesn't measure up to the qualities of the larger dog and all faults considered the ones in the smaller dog are still more than the larger dog leaving the larger dog in the best position. At least that's how it was explained to me.

The has been some publication of the new system, the committee working on it and what they are trying to accomplish. Not sure where this link is, maybe someone else can post it.





 


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