Coco - Page 6

"I think, though, that shrugging off more experienced people's concerns because you think you know it all already isn't the best way to go. Besides your dog of questionable origins, have you even owned another GSD?"

I'm not sure who's post you're referring to (please quote), so I'm assuming the ones about Lord vs Fred, where did I shrug it off? I may disagree but I certainly didn't shrug them off, I asked them to enlighten me, one declined (the other hasn't responded). Please don't call me a 'know it all' I know the way I talk may come off that way because I have a way of confidence in my speech, but I certainly never claimed to 'know it all' or suggest it, I always inquire more information for something I am not certain of.

 

"I will say this: what is shown in the photo I posed here would be sufficient cause for the AKC to put a conditional hold on the registrations of any dog which came out of that operation, in order to consider whether the management of the breeding operation was likely to have been conscientious enough to ensure there was no inadvertent or intentional cross-breeding, and to question the accuracy of the purported parentage of all pups in any litters registered by the operation."

 

I totally understand, which is why I asked a valid question, how can she still get away with it a year after? You'd think others would've caught on then, not just us now. Right?

I ordered the DNA test kit from AKC. We are going to a club on the 23rd and they will probably help us do the test.

I understand if you think the chances are 98% a fraudulent registration, and that makes sense, but yeah, the test will tell.

There is no need to "enlighten" you. You already seem to know everything.
Kind regards

I asked you exactly how his head is broad and undefined? I even provided close-up face pictures for you to identify and illustrate it. I even said I was eager to learn what I am missing. So I know everything now? *sigh*

 

When you have nothing to back up your claims, then it's unsubstantiated. I study law. I know someone that has extensive debate experience may be hard to register with, I just simply made my own counterargument, everyone has their right to their say and their turn to say it, and now it's your turn again, but you're conceding the way it looks, by adding a comment that basically spites me saying I already know it all with no further facts or evidence to show your side of the argument. I know there's a technical term you call that, but I forget what it's called. That's right, where you just start going 'ad hominem' on people.

 

Sometimes people come in at an angle looking to dismiss someone, then realize that they hold no real ground, then they start throwing ad hominems, pretty typical sign of someone that is just out to 'prove you wrong'. Now unless you start substantiating yourself, I have no choice but to assume you were wrong. Plain and simple.

 

All I did was post two pictures of two really old dogs that I said I really like the bodyshape of and look just like my dog, and some of you seem to think I'm trying to assault the 'standard' or something and come in trying to dismiss that my dog has any 'integrity' because these dogs are 'obsolete' and look 'nothing' like a very prominant champion Lord, which so happens to potentially be an ancestor of my dog, and not only that, those two dogs I posted, are distant ancestors of Lord, so you guys completely ignoring that Fred and Rolf are distant ancestors of Lord and say they look nothing alike at all is just bizzare and only brings suspicion of omittance/denial.

 

Just because I learn fast and have a lot to say doesn't mean I'm a know it all, especially when you didn't explain anything yourself and 'bait' me by basically dismissing me, then apologizing. Let's be real.

Winnal, at the risk of upsetting the lady by discussing her age, Susie probably IS now around 70, and she is in Germany, so, yes, she could have !

I on the other hand am not / have not; but I AM in my 60s and have also been around GSDs for a very long time, also in Europe (me in the UK). I do not claim to have the intimate knowledge of the better known earlier dogs of our breed, even those which are famous in the 'breed hierarchy' because they were displayed to the public at Sieger shows etc - as were some of the dogs you referred to in the photographs and your accompanying rant post. BUT scratch a reasonably well-bred specimen of GSD today and you can usually find one or more of those dogs in its ancestry, because the 'famous' sires get used A LOT; so it would be no surprise if Coco's recorded sire, in particular, carries some of them. Unfortunately I do not believe that the male GSD whose pedigree is cited IS Coco's sire; I think her daddy is one of the huskies sitting in the photographed piled up crates, at that breeders. I think Mum's pedigree is probably the correct one / half. This is because having seen so many of the more 'everyday' specimens of the breed, I have built up pictures in my "mind's eye" so that, just as Hexe can state "That is not 100 % Siberian Husky", I can say "She is not 100 % German Shepherd Dog". You said you only briefly saw what was reported to you to be the dam; you did not mention whether the father was introduced to you at all. But lets wait and see what the DNA results are, shall we ?

 

There is one advantage to Coco, and yourself, if she turns out to be, as I now strongly suspect, a first cross with a German Shepherd Dog dam and a Siberian Husky sire : being F1 she will have some health advantages, known as "hybrid vigour".

The term for that break point in the planes of the face that you were looking for, btw, is the "stop".

 

 

Can I also just point out, for the sake of other people reading here because they are considering buying a GSD (or a Husky !) and not wanting to be taken in by a puppy mill breeder, that the time to do "due diligence" and work out what to look for, in a puppy and in the place it is sourced from, is BEFORE you spend your money, NOT afterwards on an 'I KNOW NOW' basis ?

I was actively involved with the Siberian Husky breed for 13 years and the GSD breed for 27 years. It won't take a DNA test to know Coco is part Husky. She is most certainly NOT purebred GSD.
Regardless, she is super beautiful. And it will be very cool to see her on a SchH field. You'll have to keep us posted on that endeavor.

Brandi

Thank you Hund, but I am in the fifties. I did not see Fred in person, "only" Lord.
Out of the pictures Fred´s head looks like the typical 50s head, whereas I remember that Lord had the broader DDR type head.

Like you I question the parentage of the sire, not the dam, but even in case the test comes back as 100 % GSD, it won´t change conformation and color of this dog.

I don´t understand this whole discussion, almost everybody said " beautiful, healthy looking dog ", just stay away from breeding because of conformation ( if not parentage ) faults.

Even the OP himself questions the parentage because of phenotype, but to the same time tries to convince us that this dog looks like a German Shepherd Dog, at least for me that´s kind of weird.

As a student of law he will know how to sue the breeder in case the DNA test comes back as "cross breed", and in case it comes back as "GSD" he simply bought a cute GSD that isn´t breedworthy according to the breed standard.

To be honest, I don't find any justification wasting time in speculating whether this dog is purebred or not. Winnal is going to DNA her, and if he decides to share the result, we'll know.

Regarding the breeder, again, the OP admitted that he had no idea then about the difference between a responsible breeder and BYBer or a puppy mill. I don't think he fully understands now, but by the amount of hard work in research he's already putting in, I think he'll know by the time he's ready for his second dog. And, let's not forget the assumed breeder was NOT prosecuted and even got her dogs back, so shouldn't be hanged by the Joe public.

Regarding breedworthyness, a friend has an AKC seizure alert male, who couldn't so far pass his trait to any of his offsprings, but none of his partners were seizure alert dogs. Now she has got an UNREGISTERED seizure alert female. She is still undecided whether to go ahead or not, but shouldn't it be worth it?

The OP's dog is totally NOT breedworthy as of now, but we don't know what lies in the future, do we?

To the OP, I'm too lazy to be a co-researcher on your project, but I can give you some corrections...

Come back when your dog is two years old, and has shown or done something VERY special, and then we can start discussing her breedworthyness.

READ The Breed Standard, there's ONLY ONE which is acceptable worldwide. You'll find the English version in the FCI website.

Read this carefully, "The upper line runs from the base of the neck via the high, long withers and via the straight back towards the slightly sloping croup,
without visible interruption." Now, try to understand the term "BACK".

As the supposed sire of the dog has had his DNA submitted to AKC, it will be quite easy to prove/disprove whether he is the sire. Winnal already has the DNA kit; he just needs to take a swab and submit it.

I googled the kennel's name, and they have at least 3 pups for sale right now that look a lot like Coco (pale sables).  It wouldn't surprise me to find they're from the same mother.

 

Link to the FCI standard: http://www.gsscc.ca/the-german-shepherd/wusv-breed-standard.aspx

Sunsilver, sorry but as I wrote in my previous post, the Breed Standard is available in the FCI website,  so one doesn't need to go look at some interpreted version of it, especially when OP is a student of Law.

I was strongly in favour of OP finding the standard himself, but now I have to provide the link, from where a PDF version of the Breed Standard, both in German and English, can be downloaded... 

http://www.fci.be/en/nomenclature/GERMAN-SHEPHERD-DOG-166.html

 

 

 

Oooops ! Sorry Susie; I have genuinely believed for some time that you must be older than me - you are always so wise !!!