USCA to develop a plan to improve the breed - Page 1

According to the latest issue of Schutzhund USA, the USCA Breed Warden has been tasked with developing a 5 and 10 year plan to improve the German Shepherd. This will be addressed at the GBM in November. The NBW is asking for input. Maybe we can come up with some ideas here.

Part of the plan is to implement the scoring system into the sieger show performances as has been done in Germany. This actually has been in place by USCA since the sieger show in Indianapolis, it's just not public. The focus seems to be on the performance side of the conformation lines, that's OK by me. I'm sure they will address structure in the working lines too. All suggestions and Ideas can be discussed.

Typically the SV directs the breed. Each year something new is addressed and the group of dogs to bring about the change emerges. Normally other countries follow the SV and implement their changes a year or so later.

What USCA is doing is a departure. Why not? We're in a position to do what we want in this country. We have our judges. The system is in place. Can we build a better dog than the Germans or will it just be different? Let's just accept the fact it's going to be different. Is that a problem? If our trend is a little different, does that matter? For the handful of those that still participate in Germany, maybe so. For the other 99.8% probably not. If we sever the tie to a degree the opportunities open up. We are not restricted by what the others do.

Let's think outside the box a little. Performance scores published. Good move. You can do publicly what breeders have been doing for years. In the process give some recognition for those that take the time to train their dog. Give the GSD Community an incentive to develop training techniques and put more focus and emphasis in the intelligence of the breed.

So what's the plan? Here's my thoughts..... Why not incorporate the performance results into the show rating? A system similar to the Universal Concept where the final rating is a combination of structure and performance, the total package. The sieger show evolves into a mini Universal competition. Use the current Universal scoring system, it gives the working lines an advantage and open up the sieger show to be more of a breed show by having both the best of the working lines and the best of the conformation lines graded against the standard. The breed standard incorporates both aspects of the breed, why shouldn't the criteria for judging be the same?

What would this do? What what would be the benefits? Well, the breed would gravitate back to what it appears it should be in the first place. Structurally sound healthy dog that can work. This concept gets both sides involved.

Can this be done? V rated working lines are out there. Let the working line breeders have an incentive to improve structure and retain the work ethic. Conformation lines,,,,this would have been better to attempt a few years ago while there were more genetics to work with, however there is still some out there. You just have to know where it is and use it.

Is this feasible? Could the two be competitive in the same arena?

Personally, I went to WLs to get away from SL structure. No way will I emplement a breeding program to produce SL structure in my dogs. Too many of the WL dogs look exactly like SL dogs with a sable or black coat. Sad.
I am not criticizing anyone who wants and likes SL, but to me, creating SL dogs out of WLs is not 'improving structure'.

"Let the working line breeders have an incentive to improve structure and retain the work ethic." to this I say, my dogs already have very sound structure, and sound work ethic. Things are going to remain divided on this subject, as it should.

IMO, more breeders and buyers in the US first need to understand that in order to better the breed in the US, they must support their peers and stop importing and breeding to so many German owned and bred GSD's. Until they can get past that German-is-always-better (and/or cheaper or sells more puppies etc) mystique, the best dogs in the world could be living right under their noses and probably are but  go unrecognized regardless of US show and trial results and ratings.  Perception is reality in the GSD world.

I agree with Joan, if the intent is to combine the WL's and the SL's to benefit the breed, it's not going to "catch on". Most WL breeders won't touch a SL and vice versa.

Joanro,

I think you miss my point a little. I'm not suggesting combining the two lines. I'm suggesting a system where the best dogs can be judged on a more equal basis. Your well structured working line that a really super example of a working line can compete against an excellent conformation line dog. You working line has a chance to place high because it's working ability is factored into it's final placement.

This concept could work well. When you look at the USCA judges they are conformation and trial judges so they have knowledge of both.

I understand what you meant, Dogs1. My experience with a USCA judge, who was a conformation judge, knew nothing of schH rules. Maybe she has learned them by now, but when you're dealing with people, they tend to keep to what they are most familiar and comfortable with. Breeding dogs for the show ring is not good for any breed. JMO.

I have no problem with the performance ratings of the Sieger Show being published.  Club level results for that novice person wracked by nerves showing for their first IPO1 are already published in the magazine, so why would we keep the Sieger Show ratings a secret if presumably the owners/handlers have put a great deal of effort into showcasing their dogs at a national, public event?

As far as WL vs. SL I think aside from the obvious differences in type, it's still going to be a matter of priority.  Not many WL folk (heck, not many SL folk!) care to spend the time and money to campaign a dog and its progeny to the extent that is expected in order for a dog to contend for a high V or VA rating at a Sieger Show.  If we want to see WL higher up the ranks, we'd probably have to address that aspect of the show as well.  My understanding is that a judge isn't likely to place a dog high in the rankings just based on his/her impression of the dog on that day but having seen the dog being shown before and also the progeny presented.

I think the concept of bringing performance to the show ratings is an excellent idea assuming it actually happens.  Look at all the VA dogs in Germany who have a 3/3 performance rating.  That tells me that there's more politics involved than should be. 

A few years back, Ravi Iyer had an excellent idea that was voted down by the USCA board.  He basically proposed that in order for a dog to go VA he/she had to repeat their working title within the previous 12 months.  Considering how many fake titles are out there I found this to be an outstanding concept.  Naturally, it was voted down.  If you really want to improve the breed this is a positive first step, ensuring that all titles were fairly earned. 

Judy