German Shepherd Movement

[huski]

I have to say I think that German WL dog is just stunning! I know nothing much about GSDs but it definitely appeals to me.

[Tazar]

The American and German lines are way to low for my liking. The American especially

[OSoSwift]

What is DDR Line please?

[Tazar]

Deutsches Demokratische Republik Dogs. It is an old working line.

http://www.ddrlegends.com/index.html

:)

[Lhok]

What is DDR Line please?

From googling it appears they are East German lines.

--Lhok

[Red Fox]

The GSD clubs, at least the one in Vic anyway, are working towards designing a better test of working ability/temperament - plenty of things go on behind the scenes. There are people passionate about the breed who want and strive for the best of both worlds. There is a new working line male soon to hit Aus that is beautifully constructed and I imagine will be well used amongst the show and working breeders alike.

What is wrong with the ORIGINAL test?

Oh I forgot, the ANKC don't support it..

There's nothing wrong with it and I'd love for it to be a prerequisite here as it is in Germany - but I don't make the rules. Obviously I meant a better test than what is currently being done

Apologies if my response was rather blunt, it was not meant as an attack on you personally.

It's beyond me that the ANKC refuses to recognise something that is a prerequisite in the country of origin. IMO there is no need for a 'better' or newer' test when one already exists.

It is only Victoria that has "outlawed" protection training (ie a dog is automatically declared dangerous if it has had the training). That shouldn't stop dogs in other states?

Even without protection training, a dog could still prove its working ability with obedience and tracking.

Protection training is an integral part of the character test.

There is nothing stopping anyone. What is ridiculous is that the ANKC will not recognise Sch/IPO titles.

My girl (though not a GSD) has her BH and TR1 titles and will hopefully gain her IPO titles in the future. An achievement for me yes, but it will never appear on her pedigree.

[Santo66]

What is DDR Line please?

DDR lines were East German working dogs used in border patrol. They were large heavy boned dogs with defensive aggression that worked best as guard/sentry dogs. DDR lines were mixed with Czech lines to add prey drive and better trainability producing some extremely good dogs of breed improvement over the DDR and Czech lines.

Back when I used to show there used to be quite a few breeders who would support it and there was enquiries made. I cant remember exactly what happened but I believe it was politicians that made it quite clear what would happen to those dogs that were trained. Not the gsd people. Thats in my town anyway.

Who is behind the banning of Sch in Victoria is the GSDCA. They were put under notice from the German SV for non compliance and had to seek an exemption on the basis that Sch was illegal in Australia in order to retain their SV membership. They actually put their foot in it as the Victorian Ban declared Sch titled imported dogs as dangerous dogs so through the back door at the ANKC all the Sch titles fell off the paperwork of imported dogs and their ancestory for a period of time a few years ago until the GSDCA pulled a deal in the legislation to allow Sch titled imported dogs to be shown without a muzzle and striped collar. Technically a Sch titled dog in Victoria is a dangerous dog supposedly to be declared as such.

Edited August 12, 2013 by Santo66

[Jed]

All 4 dogs pictured above are sickle hocked. Is that ok?

The standard says

The topline flows from the set on of the neck, over the high long withers and over the straight back to the slightly sloping croup without a noticeable break. The back is moderately long, firm, strong and well muscled. The loin is broad, short, strongly developed and well muscled. The croup should be long and slightly sloping (approximately 23 degrees to the horizontal) into the set on of the tail without disruption to the topline.

According to my reading, the back should be straight, with no slope until the croup.

Standard again

The position of the hind legs is slightly set back, when viewed from rear the hind legs are parallel to each other. Upper and lower thighs are of almost equal length and form an angle of approximately 120 degrees, the thighs are strong and well muscled.

The hock joints are well developed and firm, the rear pasterns stand perpendicular under the hock joint.

This disallows cow hocks (hind legs are parellel) and also sickle hocks ... it allows for he legs to be set back, but the pasterns shold be perpendicular under the hock joint.

How does this equated with all the photos we see of GSD?

Unfortunately, Ish, the link you gave is broken

Edited August 14, 2013 by Jed

[dogmatic]

This might interest some of you. Of course that is only a very generalised picture as you can only include so many dogs but it should get the point across.

All 4 dogs pictured above are sickle hocked. Is that ok?

The standard says

The topline flows from the set on of the neck, over the high long withers and over the straight back to the slightly sloping croup without a noticeable break. The back is moderately long, firm, strong and well muscled. The loin is broad, short, strongly developed and well muscled. The croup should be long and slightly sloping (approximately 23 degrees to the horizontal) into the set on of the tail without disruption to the topline.

According to my reading, the back should be straight, with no slope until the croup.

Standard again

The position of the hind legs is slightly set back, when viewed from rear the hind legs are parallel to each other. Upper and lower thighs are of almost equal length and form an angle of approximately 120 degrees, the thighs are strong and well muscled.

The hock joints are well developed and firm, the rear pasterns stand perpendicular under the hock joint.

This disallows cow hocks (hind legs are parellel) and also sickle hocks ... it allows for he legs to be set back, but the pasterns shold be perpendicular under the hock joint.

How does this equated with all the photos we see of GSD?

Unfortunately, Ish, the link you gave is broken

Jed

The breed standard calls for the rear pastern to stand perpendicular under the hock joint. We'd be in trouble if it was perpendicular above the hock joint.

In relation to GSDs, the term "sickle hocks" is most applied in American Showline circles - and rightly so. With the rear pastern fairly upright, the angle at the hock joint is less than 90 degrees such that the stifle (knee) is actually closer to the ground than the hock joint.

The standard seems to have overlooked a description for the placement of the far-side hind leg which is placed forward and appears to display a "sickle hock" in many cases. However, it is the near-side hind leg which is placed back, and can thereby demonstrate the "capability" of a GSD to stand with the rear pastern upright and the hock joint at a more pleasing angle greater than 90 degrees, i. e. not "sickle hocked", or not.

The photos of early GSDs show a rudimentary "three point stack" which is natural to many GSDs.

[BlaznHotAussies]

Ooh excellent picture showing the different lines!!! Gosh that American one is a bit unfortunate

I definitely like the German Working line & the Czech line. beautiful dogs!

[Nekhbet]

I think people need to look beyond photos in some cases and see that some dogs are actually stacked in an extreme manner. It's why I don't take 'stacked' photos as gospel. I did it as an example once, we stacked a few dogs at dog school, not GSDs, and made them look similar. All were square breeds including one working Mal.

It's why I tell people if you want a GSD look at photos of them playing or go meet the dogs.

[Jed]

If the dog is stacked in a different way you can still rearrange the legs in your mind --- or with your ruler, and stil discover the dog is sickle hocked, and has a convex back.

Dogmatic, the important word in that sentence, for me, is "perpendicular", not "under". If the stifle is actually lower than the hock, I don't think the dog would be a trotting dog, but never having seen one with that conformation trot, I don't know.

Maybe the breeders got the standard wrong, who knows, but whilst the dogs are being awarded the conformation will not change.

[mita]

Have a look at the Military Working Dogs, purpose-bred at Amberley Air Base in Qld. German Shepherds & Belgians. Movement is of prime importance with these dogs. This program has been in operation for some time now:

https://www.facebook.com/RAAF.MWD

[Nekhbet]

THere's a reason more and more departments are moving towards Mals for a lot of things...

[mita]

THere's a reason more and more departments are moving towards Mals for a lot of things...

Yes! Can't resist a pic of Mal puppies from the Amberley program:

[mixeduppup]

I met a few show line GSDs in America (kept as pets not show dogs) and I was not impressed by the extreme way they were bred, it was quite weird watching them walk/trot along.

[dogmatic]

If the dog is stacked in a different way you can still rearrange the legs in your mind --- or with your ruler, and stil discover the dog is sickle hocked, and has a convex back.

Dogmatic, the important word in that sentence, for me, is "perpendicular", not "under". If the stifle is actually lower than the hock, I don't think the dog would be a trotting dog, but never having seen one with that conformation trot, I don't know.

Maybe the breeders got the standard wrong, who knows, but whilst the dogs are being awarded the conformation will not change.

Jed

I was having a dig at the standard. If the rear pastern is perpendicular and the hock-joint is at on end of the pastern, then the pastern can only be directly under or directly above the hock-joint. Luckily the standard specifies that it's under, to avoid confusion in the show ring. LOL.

If you start with a perpendicular rear pastern and perpendicular forearms, the natural geometry of the dog should show itself. If the rear paw is too far forward, the rear pastern would slope backward (from the ground up), and if the paw is too far back, the pastern would slope forward. This would affect the angles in the legs and the slopes of the back and croup. I believe there are tricks of the trade to manipulate angles and slopes with a certain degree of force, but I think that a great number of American SLs have a natural tendency toward sickle hocks. I am not sure that the wording of the International (FCI) Breed Standard actually disallows sickle hocks, except to say that the general appearance of GSD should be balanced and have a firm overall structure. The American Breed Standard differs in that the angle at the stifle (knee) between the upper leg (femur) and the lower leg (tibia) should be as close as possible to a right angle. The International Standard says 120 degrees - a significant difference! The American Standard has probably lead to the proliferation of sickle hocks in America, because the more acute angle at the stifle (knee) would tend to lead to a more acute angle at the hock.

To their credit, many American SLs display straight backs, and the word "noble" has not been removed from the American Breed Standard. Has anyone seen a noble-looking GSD in the conformation ring in Australia for the past thirty or so years?

My link

I haven't seen an American SL in the ring, so can't comment on their trotting ability either. However, I have heard that loose ligaments allow the rear pastern to "flip" out, giving an impression of greater rear-extension of the hind legs in movement. This also applies to German SLs, whose bowed backs also seem to allow greater forward extension of the hind legs. That's where I believe the emphasis has gone wrong.

A lot of modern breeders poo-poo the "sway backs" of earlier GSDs - some even call them "weak backs". Perhaps they should look at the backs of some of the other breeds in the working-dog class. There is little doubt that Kelpies and Border Collies could outwork the GSD in a paddock despite their "weak backs". Unfortunately, when you say "work" in relation GSDs, there is usually an entirely different meaning. That's another mistake. IMHO.