My personal opinion is that the man has the guts and the dangly bits to stand up and say what he thinks.  There are far too many in his profession who do not have these attributes ... IMO of course.

> you suggesting the the dogs that are competing at crufts are NOT representative of the breed?
>

i didn;t see any that couldn;t walk properly at crufts and we watched the ring for a good while so perhaps they are not. i think about 200 gsd's were there this year (someone got the right figure??) are your talking about how many? yes they have a sloping back but thats outlined in the standard and its something you also see in the continental dogs. the sieger that won the breed didn;t have much trouble moving but for a bit of mishandling in the main ring.

but when the dog is so crippled it can hardly stagger let alone walk
but why breed dogs that can hardly stagger in the first place!

I'm not sure whether some of these comments are supporting the appalling state of the show GSD or not so I think I will bow out of this debate for fear of my blood pressure.
Judging by some of the comments I've read in this thread, although I don't agree with a lot of it's content, I can quite understand why the producer made this film.  There are none so blind that they cannot see what is happening in front of their own eyes.

"yes they have a sloping back but thats outlined in the standard and its something you also see in the continental dogs. the sieger that won the breed didn;t have much trouble moving but for a bit of mishandling in the main ring"

I can't believe I have just read that.  Are you for real ?

excuse me?

A friend has one these GSD's...I thought they were stacked like that, but it was like stroking a hunchback...it was revolting. Her spine was so curved it made me feel sick. I have owned Sheps since I was a little girl. Changed breed 20 odd years ago. Just awful, to feel such a deformity of the spine.

> i feel they should be given powers and be raised to a form of government body

I think there would be complications to that because of the monopoly issue.  They may be a charity but they do charge for services and, regards of our opinion of them, there are other registries who may argue that they are also entitled to have a role.  To avoid that it would be have to actually be a government body and they may not have the same interest in pedigree breeds, for example, that we do. 
People are naturally upset about the issues highlighted in the programme but I don't think the solutions are anything like as simple as some may feel.

You said : "yes they have a sloping back but thats outlined in the standard and its something you also see in the continental dogs. the sieger that won the breed didn;t have much trouble moving but for a bit of mishandling in the main ring"

I am assuming that you speak with some authority on GSDs, if my assumption is incorrect, then I apologise, but what I meant by my question "are you for real" is your extraordinary cavalier attitude to a dog who could barely stagger, let alone walk ... and you refer to this as ... " a bit of mishandling".

You also say a sloping back is outlined in the standard ... I do not know whether this is true or not, if it is then, the standard should be changed right now because there is no way that a GSD or any dog for that matter, with a sloping back could ever be described as healthy.

I apologise if I appear to be a bit harsh ... I am angry.

lol, not saying it would not be complicated. just there are so many things we would like to see them do aren't there? but they can't at the moment as they don't have the power to. obviously any such large scale change would take a lot of consideration :)

I bet they would love to get their hands on a bit more power :-)

not at all, i am certainly not an authority

> is your extraordinary cavalier attitude to a dog who could barely stagger, let alone walk ... and you refer to this as ... " a bit of mishandling".
>

er, are we discussing the same dog? the german sieger that won the breed this year at crufts but didn't excell in group because of some handling errors? the dog moved beautifully i thought (granted i was quite far back in the stands) but given that the standard dictates

"Length measured from point of breast bone to rear edge of pelvis, exceeding height at withers. Correct ratio 10 to 9 or 8 and a half. Undersized dogs, stunted growth, high-legged dogs, those too heavy or too light in build, over-loaded fronts, too short overall appearance, any feature detracting from reach or endurance of gait, undesirable"

i can't see the dog winning both here and in germany (where they are far stricter i understand on who wins to sieger) if it could barely move so i think we are talking about a different animal.

i didn't actually get to see this, was working, and my comments above were based on the reading i have done about the show

an actual authority such as moonmaiden might be able to comment further

with great power comes great responsibility ;)

Tell Bob to send in his letter of complaint via email

http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/

i do agree that there are those that are to far gone, certainly. but thats something that a breeder should correct and a good breeder would.

I'm so sorry Astarte, I haven't quite got to grips with how this forum works.  I haven't posted on here in years.  I thought I was talking about the GSD, we are indeed talking at cross purposes here.

(Gnasher retires covered in confusion and embarrassment) ...

I will certainly address my comments to moonmaiden who I know is an expert on GSDs.

I still haven't got the hang of this forum though, so someone tell me if I am doing something wrong !

I am confused ... what is the difference between a Sieger and a GSD?

I've read but until now stayed out of this debate as, first and foremost, being in Scotland the programme is not aired until tomorrow night.  That aside, there have been no shortage of reports in the media, info on the web and backlash from local dog owners, breeders and Joe Public who like me have not yet seen the entire footage but merely edited highlights on news and current affairs shows plus newspaper coverage to form an opinion of sorts.

Isabel said

> People are naturally upset about the issues highlighted in the programme but I don't think the solutions are anything like as simple as some may feel

and I completely agree from what I have so far gleaned from the various threads on this forum as well as this week's coverage in the dog press and above mentioned sources.

While there is doubtless validity in some of the coverage, albeit disproportionately sensationalised (from what I can gather), best we not forget that these most horrifying of tales cover an exceptionally small percentage of the number of recognised pedigree dog breeds and within the affected breeds many breeders are doing their damndest to improve on overall health status as well as physical faults which are detrimental to the comfort, wellbeing and health status of their much loved breeds.  However, all this takes time.   It took time, a heck of a lot of it, for a tiny but nonetheless significant minority of breeds to be changed to the extent where their physical characteristics developed to the detriment of their ability to live normal lives as most of us would describe them.  It will take many generations to breed out traits which are now openly acknowledged as being very much against the breeds' best interests.  To castigate the world of pedigree dogs, breeders and exhibitors in the way done will IMO set things back further still as even breeds not mentioned/covered in this show will now be under greater scrutiny from the GP and I would expect puppy sales will be affected across a great many groups and members of same.  This, if anything, will further slow down the ability to improve the affected breeds as without homes breeders will produce less and so have less stock with which to make further progress and all over a longer period.

I'll keep slightly wide of the topic heading until I can reserve judgement more easily on a fully informed basis when I've watched the programme but would add that some of the accusatory responses on this and other related threads undermining the love, dedication and countless monies invested towards health screening and improving/expanding gene pools have left me feeling both very sad and extremely frustrated.

While any breed or any dog within any breed is undoubtedly deserving of the best possible start in life through careful selection when but a thought in the breeder's head it still has to be borne in mind that the pedigree dog world and show scene as a whole is in very good shape and very good hands.  Like any area of course there is always room for improvement and need for continued development, research and resources being spent and I honestly believe that is the aim and intention of far greater numbers of breeders than those mentioned so far in this programme.

A great deal of damage has been done to a great many undeserving breeds and their custodians.

lol, don;t worry about it.

i totally agree that 'over' breeding to standards is detrimental and often cruel (over wrinkly shar peis, dachys with spinal issues and these gsds and cavs). the thing is recently (i understand) such dogs have not been doing well in rings so are less often produced. the kc have altered many of the standards to reduce such a thing- the example i am principally aware of is the bulldog whos standard now is designed to aid health as you see:

"Head, fairly large in proportion to size but no point so much in excess of others as to destroy the general symmetry, or make the dog appear deformed, or interfere with its powers of motion. Face short, muzzle broad, blunt and inclined upwards. Dogs showing respiratory distress highly undesirable. Body short, well knit, limbs stout, well muscled and in hard condition with no tendency towards obesity."

things are definately improving but it does take time and there are always twisted people who simply don;t care out there :(

totally agree

> I still haven't got the hang of this forum though, so someone tell me if I am doing something wrong !

It's tricky isn't it :-)  You can click on the reply button at the bottom of the post you want to reply to but that does not help other posters to know who you are talking to so it helps if you either start your post addressing them by name or using the quote facility.  Using the quote facility involves clicking the reply and then highlighting the piece of text you are referring to in their post which appears below the clear box and then clicking the teenie weenie quotation marks at the bottom of that.  Easy isn't it :-D

sieger is a german champion :) as i understand it they not only have to excell in the ring but are tested on working ability as well so must be physically sound as well as look the part :)

> being in Scotland the programme is not aired until tomorrow night. 

If you really can't wait, and I'm sure the debate will still be raging, you could watch it on iplayer

>> I still haven't got the hang of this forum though, so someone tell me if I am doing something wrong !

Thanks Isabel ! It may be easy to you but it dang well isn't to a bear of very little brain like me !!  I find it very confusing, but I expect I'll get to grips with it !

> sieger is a german champion :-) as i understand it they not only have to excell in the ring but are tested on working ability as well so must be physically sound as well as look the part :-)

well, if that is the case I hope to goodness their working ability is better than their movement because I was absolutely appalled by the state of those poor dogs.  I have just googled Sieger GSD, and frankly continue to be appalled.  NO german shepherd should look like that.

Moonmaiden :  comment please !!

The easy comment was tongue in cheek! :-D

> The easy comment was tongue in cheek! :-D

I guessed !  I was being sarcastic too !!

why not if they are fit and healthy? (though personally i like them less sloped)

Thanks Isabel but I think my stress levels may require the need to pause frequently for lengthy shore walks and rewind when the sound of my own blood pressure drowns out the volume LOL. 

Methinks best I watch it in dribs and drabs over the weekend :-D

> Thanks Isabel but I think my stress levels may require the need to pause frequently for lengthy shore walks and rewind when the sound of my own blood pressure drowns out the volume LOL. 
>
> Methinks best I watch it in dribs and drabs over the weekend :-D

It was one of the most interesting documentaries I have ever seen, very upsetting to see dogs suffering, but IMO just go for it and watch it and have a large glass of something very alcoholic to sustain you !

> Thanks Isabel but I think my stress levels may require the need to pause frequently for lengthy shore walks and rewind when the sound of my own blood pressure drowns out the volume LOL. 
>

Don't worry it is not all doom and gloom the Nazi stuff is like something from the Fringe :-D

Teri said >While any breed or any dog within any breed is undoubtedly deserving of the best possible start in life through careful selection when but a thought in the breeder's head it still has to be borne in mind that the pedigree dog world and show scene as a whole is in very good shape and very good hands.  Like any area of course there is always room for improvement and need for continued development,<

It really isn't Teri, it really isn't in good shape at all. I wish it was, I really do. But I have removed my blinkers a long time ago and if you are lucky to get hold of Hutchinsons and see breeds as they were, when Bassetts worked, Peke's were able to run and play, GSD's could walk proud on 4 strong legs, Bulldogs could mate and give birth naturally and Corgis and Dachshunds had legs. As I said before the list is endless. Fitting dogs, heart problems, hip, eye and shoulder and elbow problems, curved spines and breathing problems for the Poor sweet Pug, The Cavs problems, and a sweeter dog you wouldn't find. It is not in good shape at all. But it can be, with people that are on this list and are doing their absolute best, giving up lines for one problem rather that breeding on. Paying 200.00 each for 2 mri scans, which is fair for the price of a healthy puppy Cav. Sadly these people are in the minority, but they are there and I would buy a pup[ from one of those people.

We need to look at what is around us at a show and raise the bar for the health of our best friend.

Please.

If the programme makers are looking at selective breeding and how they think it makes breeds worse, surley this goes for all animals and not just dogs, racehorses for instance are selectively line bred to produce better and faster runners, there shape has changed over the years, as well as livestock that is bred for the showring, dramatic changes in those , zoo's breeding programmes they have brother sister matings alot for endangered species as well as plentyful types of animals.
They are just picking on dogs because they live in the house mainly and are regarded as part of the family.
I've seen all sorts of weird looking lambs borns as they are inbred alot of the time.

Peanuts

To Golden Lady

while I admire your passion and drive to see improvements in breeds detrimentally affected it is nevertheless an exceptionally small number of breeds which have been exagerrated to an extent that their health, general ability or comfort has been compromised.  Yes, over and above those there are some breeds which are suffering dreadful consequences of genetic/inherited illnesses not being tested for and weeded out from breeding lines.  But still, the number of *breeds* (not necessarily number of dogs within those breeds) thus affected is very much a minority.

I am not blinkered by any means and not likely to be brainwashed either.  I am thankful that I own a relatively healthy breed and one in which most (but sadly not always the most prolific) breeders health check their breeding stock and don't breed from dogs carrying or assumed to be carrying genetic faults.  Over and above which despite some enthusiasts holding views to the contrary, it has not become a noticeable victim of fashion and trends which could adversely affect their natural (rather lupine) physique.

While all dog lovers, regardless of pet only owners, small time hobby breeders, serial exhibitors/judges, dyed in the wool stockmen and all the appointed authorities in dogdom should certainly be apalled by many aspects of the coverage of which I am aware, it needs to be kept in perspective.   Sadly, from many posts on here alone it seems that is unlikely to happen - so nobody will win out of this.

To peanuts :)

> I've seen all sorts of weird looking lambs borns as they are inbred alot of the time

IMO the "inbred" card has been played all wrong as far as its factual content is concerned but thrown in bang on queue for the sensationalist/shock factor

Sure, if there are genetic, inherited or familial faults within lines then of course 'in breeding' or the considerably more common 'line breeding' will stamp these in for sure and may well prove impossible to breed out however it is selective breeding between two dogs for exagerrated traits which causes things to become changed - the animals could be complete outcrosses and still achieve the same results

The pug figures quoted of course are rather more alarming (if true) in that out of 10,000 dogs there are but 50 DNA strings. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suTuSwGd1TQ&feature=related

The "great"  sieger , Hmmm I wonder where in their standard it mentions....  outline resembling a hyena, nicely sloped deformity of the spine leading into greatly over angulated hind legs, producing weak hocks turning in as a dairy cow, Movement crouched and weak, no power in the hindquarters.Totally useless for the job the breed was intended for.

There simple... I have re written their standard for them based on the conformity of the Champion I watched on You tube!!!

And VERY glad I do not own a german shepherd if this the acceptance in the show ring, and is allowed to become the norm.

IMO the "inbred" card has been played all wrong as far as its factual content is concerned but thrown in bang on queue for the sensationalist/shock factor mad

Very true Teri. It's all down to what's in the lines. Inbreeding/linebreeding only brings out what is lurking there already, it doesn't create problems that didn't exist before. I have one dog that is pretty inbred. (19.5 % over 8 generations according to my pedigree programme.) She's also one of the healthiest dogs I've ever had. My unhealthiest dog of a different breed is only 0.8 % inbred. In my main breed there is no such thing as a dog that isn't inbred, because the genepool is tiny, yet it is one of the healthiest breeds around. (Well, you know all that already -so even though I'm replying to your comment, it's more directed at everyone else in general. :) )

in response to earlier post on epileptic boxer.
i had a friend whose belg shep was epileptic. the condition was managed well for about a year, then one day when she was out bsd attacked her gsd. result - bsd pts straight away and gsd pts the next week due to complications from serious injuries.

German shephards are always a taboo subject as many people thought the german shepard in crufts which won its class but didnt win crufts was in terrible shape (if you remember the import actully from germany?) but I thought he looked fab and moved great.

I was not condoning inbreeding , i was just stating that dogs are not the only animals that are line bred.

Peanuts

but would you rather have a random-bred cross or mongrel where the breeder has no idea of the health issues of the breeds which have gone into its make-up?

Do you know I think I would !  Rather that than some of the so-called responsible breeders who deliberately breed dogs with known health problems.  And I do think that, generally speaking, mongrels are healthier dogs.  The ones we had as family pets when I was child certainly were :)

> In my main breed there is no such thing as a dog that isn't inbred, because the genepool is tiny, yet it is one of the healthiest breeds around.

exactly Marianne and I'm sure we're not alone out there but of course that doesn't make interesting TV or other media coverage.  I have no idea the % of 'in breeding' in my own dogs' pedigrees as I don't know the format for working it out but I'd be willing to bet it's fairly high (especially the latest terrorist addition!) yet to date I have only had one with health problems - ironically the only one which had no common ancestors in at least the first 5 generations.....

Hi peanuts

> I was not condoning inbreed

TBH I don't have a problem with carefully selected in breeding - if done knowledgably, i.e. health status, conformation and temperament of the dogs used plus all ancestors, siblings, progeny etc is 100% known and of course absolutely excellent, then it can be in the best interests of a breed albeit an exceptionally rare event :)

My comment was merely stating that 'in breeding' per se was not necessarily the only method by which selected traits can be or are bred for.  Take for eg overly wrinkled breeds - if you breed the wrinkliest bitch you have to the wrinkliest dog you can find you will stamp that trait in, even if neither sire nor dam have any common relatives.  Keep selecting for excessive wrinkle and sure enough you get it, regardless of the lineage :(   Same can be said for shape of skulls, angulation, length of leg, eye colour, dentition - basicaly the list goes on and on!

regards, Teri

>The pug figures quoted of course are rather more alarming (if true) in that out of 10,000 dogs there are but 50 DNA strings.

Interestingly, that study showed that a Rough Collie population of 12,000 dogs reflected the same 50 as the Pugs. Not such a good story though, when they're of so much healthier and more 'normal' appearance.

M.

>And I do think that, generally speaking, mongrels are healthier dogs.  The ones we had as family pets when I was child certainly were

Ah, that'll be what makes the difference. :-) My childhood mongrel died at just 10 years old, and all my pedigrees (roughly same type) have lived healthy lives into their teens (bar one who died of unsuspected anaesthetic allergy following a minor operation).

> You also say a sloping back is outlined in the standard ... I do not know whether this is true or not, if it is then, the standard should be changed right now

This is the problem so many people are complainign about breed standards when in fact they don't know what they say.

Here is the GSD bit on topline.

".......Back between withers and croup, straight, strongly developed, not too long. Overall length achieved by correct angle of well laid shoulders, correct length of croup and hindquarters......"
This needs to be read with the whole paragraph on body though http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/item/136

You can access all the KC breed standards from here: http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/item/435

> You also say a sloping back is outlined in the standard ... I do not know whether this is true or not, if it is then, the standard should be changed right now
>".......Back between withers and croup, straight, strongly developed, not too long.

According to the standard, sloping is fine, curved is not. It specifically mentions that the back should be straight between the withers and the croup. (See here for illustration of the location of these bodyparts - even the dog in the illustration has a poor topline according to the standard!) It doesn't say that the back should be "level", just "straight".

>> I don't see the dreadful rear ends in pet GSD's - only in the show ring....

Really, come all to our dog club with have 9 GSDs attanding at present & only one has a pedigree & oddly enough it's the only one that isn't cow hocks, the three "biscuit"ones could weave a blanket with their bacends-no KC reg & they are a "breeding group", three of the others have the rear pasterns(often quite incorrectly called the hock-which is the joint)so long that it is immppossible for them to walk correctly. The other two are also cowhocked & walk with the hock joints knocking together. All unsound the dogs are what you would term the "straight"backed type & the sound one @ nine months of age is a lot smalled that my Wukee who is a 9 month correct sized BC. Everyone thinks he is a bitch(because his bone is so fine)he isn't he is an entire dog !!

The non KC reg dogs come from un health tested parents because in the words of one of the owners"only KC reg GSDs have any health problems"her last "biscuit"GSD died in a fit @ 4 & was going to be bred from the next time she was in season !!!

Dogs from my childhood - all pedigrees :   Bichon Frise - died aged 17. Three Afghans died age 11, 15 and 14 all had good health throughout their lives.  Mums dog is a x-breed born at battersea - she is deaf.  Make of this what you will.

& what a superb(NOT) example of the breed the KC have chosen to illustrate their standard

Dipped topline, weak head, incorrect ear carriage & overbuilt at the rear lovely dog obviously just ready to go & work sheep for a living(NOT)

Totally endorse your views, what about the pugs? how is breeding a dog that cant breath good for the breed. those GSD's were cripples. I really feel that SOME breeders need to look at what they are doing to the breeds. The KC need to look at breed standards and check that breeders have ALL the paperwork required ot dont register. Its going to cause problems but if this has been going on for years and is well known what have we done?
Im lucky I have two wounderful dogs and Im sure I tried to get from good stock but to breed pups from infected stock and then the KC to register those pups, abomination. Dont care who they are, its an abomination.