Best breeding dogs don't win big events - Page 7

I know and understand that you all are either experts on the breed, breeders or trainers, I myself I am neither of the above so I will speak as a simple GSD owner and what I will say should be understood in this sense, why I am saying this is because when and if I breed I may not be in a position to do what I will just say, so I speak as an owner and enthusiast.
I think breed authorities in order to keep the breed in good status and improve it they put certain conditions for breeding a dog, I here take the SV as an example. To breed a dog it needs to pass HD/ED test, title and koerung. Therefore a breeder should at least meet those basic conditions to breed GSDs. Any justification for not titling does not make you right, rules are made for the whole breed, SV can not make specific rules for each breeder's individual case, it makes general rules for all to maintain the well being of present and future GSD. If I breed and I have no branch for SV or have no training clubs etc in my own country I may find other means to make sure my dogs qualify for breeding, I may make my own rules, that's ok but I should not justify what I'm personally doing by attacking the rule of titling to justify and beautify my practices.
To take care of the total breed terms for breeding were put and applied, saying that some buy titles is true but it does not make titling wrong. International competitors might not be the best producers, that is correct, but it does not make competition wrong. There is no thump rule that the highest marks winner is the best producer and there is no thump rule that the highest marks winner is the worst producer either, a good dog is a good dog irregardless of titles, but titles give indication and necessary proof.

Dogs that work for police etc give you indication for their good quality, that is good for individual breeding but for all breeders everywhere titles serve as the main general indicator.
I can't see why this simple thing is debatable when all say they want the good for the breed.

Ibrahim

Criteria for evaluating quality in a dog is a personal decision. If one lives in Germany or has GSLs, then to get show ratings with SV they must follow SV rules. But, if one chooses not to be dictated to by SV, then that should be their prerogative. The SV, for example has an unrealistic herding test for dog owners living in south eastern US to abide by. So, if one wants to achieve a herding title in that part of the world, the SV is not of any importance. Nor does the SV matter when PP training happens to be a dog owner/breeder goal. If schH is the primary title being debated, many people have seen how false the training, tracking for example, can be in the schH discipline. If a person is using titles as a dog's resume' , then a write up of a dog's accomplishments should also serve as a resume', which could include accomplishments in organizations that happen not to be endorsed by SV.

Do you mean that in Czech, Belgium, Britain, the US or Canada you don't have to title and koerung in order to breed a GSD?

Criteria for evaluating quality in a dog is a personal decision

This is a call for a disaster in the breed


Ibrahim

In Canada and the US all you have to do is toss two German Shepherds together.    ( well DNA is required on the stud if he sires more than a few litters) Easy peasy to fake paperwork etc.  SV may not be perfect but I rather like the breeding requirements :)

I think that breeders of experience and caliber such as Duke might take exception to "...disaster for the breed". To me, disaster would be one organization having complete control and say so regarding all breeding.

Brynjulf,

If that is so, I wonder why Americans criticize other American breeders for not titling their dogs 

That's what I said, personal preference.

I guess it depends on whether the Dog/Breed or the Organization is more important. The assumption implied is that though the Breed organizations are not perfect, they are better than nothing in place. I think that premise has too be looked at carefully. I mean in the end you have to evaluate the consistent final product and see how much it agrees with the intent for the breed. The organizations have some rules and regulations that have helped the breed, but they have allowed other practices that certainly have been harmful also. You can't just look at the good of an organization without eveluating the negative, weighing one against the other and then determing the good/bad of the organization. Some organizations become counterproductive to their original goal over time....in all walks of life. They have a need for modification. In the end the welfare and vitality of the breed will reflect the good of the breed organizations (or the bad) or need for change....this I submit evryone must do for themself. I don't believe you can legislate quality....that's just me. I believe there are quality breeders in each camp, and also not so quality breeders in each....either by omission or comission. Just some thoughts.....