Once again, I'm with Doc.
The GSD genome is amazing and a properly bred GSD should be sound regardless of size and coat length. Standards cannot be set in stone because life itself is dynamic. What is the scenario nowadays? Most of us grew up with GSDs in the house and none of those dogs were K9 officers or took care of livestock right? So, yes there's room for wiggle there. By golly, if we went by set-in-stone standards none of us gals here would ever be able to wear trousers or jeans right? Yep. That was the standard when our Grandmas were young ladies. And the list goes on and on.
Ana

 

For what it's worth, myself and I think most of the people commenting here have our own issues with the standard. We are not really defending the standard (whichever one you are referring to since there are several), but the correct form for the working functions of the breed. Like I said earlier, I show dogs and I don't even know the standard, but I know when I see a dog that is overweight and/or too large to safely perform working tasks for sustained periods of time and not have to "retire" at age 6.

 

To set the record straight, I do not have dogs that are 30+" tall. I do not have any dogs that are over 120 pounds. So maybe my dogs aren't giants? I'm not sure how they are defined. I do know that Norse Krim. (29" tall) had a recorded 180 litters that he sired. To say that the German shepherd wasn't going to be a tall dog is hard to accept. You have to remember that Max also had 6 or 7 working farmers (shepherds) that organized the SV with him. These people were farmers - mostly in the Werttember/Barvaria region of Germany that utilized larger dogs to work their farms (herd sheep). The farmers life depended on his dog and the ability to herd. These dogs were much bigger than Max's Thurginia Horand, and had better nerves also. Max recognized the importance of breeding to these dogs. In fact, Max moved to Barvaria to be closer to these dogs and better able to cross breed to them. The Krone Kennel produced outstanding working German shepherd dogs - they were large, calm, had better structure, and better tail set that Max incorporated in the earliest breedings. Max was never able to produce the "German shepherd" he desired. He depended on the old farmer breeders that understood genetics. With Max's overpowering dictator style, the old herdsmen of Wurttember went back to farming while Max overtook the SV and ran it as he saw fit. It's little wonder that he chose smaller dogs to get back to his dream. Horand was a little, horrible worker and was saved from certain death by Max - to be his pet. With the traits from the Wurtember dogs well established in the German shepherd (1920's), Max didn't see any value in "tall" dogs and rewrote the standard and would not list the tall dogs in the offical register of stud dogs in Germany. It was a political move, a power move, a move based more on his desire than the quality of the larger dogs.

So "oversized" shepherds have been around since the breed was invented. Many German shepherds scholars often refer to "old-fashion" as the German shepherds before Klodo v Boxberg. It is not a term that was recently made up to market big German shepherds. I suspect there are few pictures of the really large shepherds from the early days - most of these dogs were on the farm working and would not be in the events of the SV.

 

King Shepherds are kinda like bigger GSD's right???? This is an honest question

 

King Shepherds are not 100% German shepherds. They have been crossed with breeds such as the Great Pyrenees and others. And yes, they are can be very large.

 

I will stop using "standard" as it is a confusing term. I am referring to what Liesja said very well: "the correct form for the working functions of the breed".

I would have much more respect for breeders who breed outside of this if they were simply honest about it. If they were to say, "Yes I breed outside the ideal working characteristics because I have clients that prefer this and are not concerned with standards or working ability, and I like them the way I breed them." Or "Yes I breed soft temperaments with low/no prey drive or working drive because they are most suitable for quiet families." At least then it would not be disingenuous. I would not agree with it, but I could at least respect the honesty.

 

If a breeder were to breed a German shepherd, to have no drive, to have "soft temperaments", to breed over-sized dogs, then they are not breeding for the betterment of the breed. If the Bob Smith wants a GSD, but does not want to do anything with him; does not feel compelled to work his brain beyond the simple trick of sit and down, does not have the time to exercise the dog because he either has no time (gone 12 hours a day), or chooses not to, then Mr. Smith should not own a German shepherd.

The whole reason behind different breeds was because each dog was bred for a purpose. The Shepherds were meant to herd, the Retrievers retrieved, Dalmatians watched carriages, hounds hunted. The fact that they looked different were only second to the ability to do their job.

A Man that owns a flock of sheep, has no need for a Lab, or a hound. They don't fit into the niche of a herder. he needs a Shepherd, whether need needs a GSD or a border collie, or a Kuvasz all depends upon what he prefers.

Why would a responsible breeder purposefully breed out the characteristics that make a GSD a GSD, for the sole purpose of cattering to the gerneral public? The general public has already been identifying as not caring about standards or many of the other things that are important to many breeders. This doesn't make them right. The general poplution has NO IDEA about dogs or breeding. For every one of us here, learning and informing others about the bredd, there are thousands of people misinformed about the breed and about dogs in general.

Why should the informed individuals lower their standards to appeal to the general puplic? They should not. Instead it is your resposibility as a breeder, as an owner, as a trainer, and pack member to inform others as to why certain traits are essential to the GSD breed and shouldn't be bred out.

What purpose does breeding 120+ lb, over weight GSDs carry? How does an oversized GSD do its job better than one that is within or near the standard? I'm not talking about not wanting a severely angulated GSD, or a "roached backed" GSD. There are plenty of GSDs in the world being bred to a standard that might not be to the AKC standard, but does have a standard, a purpose, a function, and an ability to do a job.

These dogs CAN live in a home with a family. They can work at their job, they can watch over their families and be great companions. When the best things you can say about a dog though, is that he is big boned, and a sweet dog that gets along with everyone, and loves kids, you aren't breeding a GSD, you are breeding a dog to meet some demand.

I'm sorry but when you breed animals, nature has a need to remain in balance. In a population, there will always be a natural varience in size as well as temperament and other fators. The "mixing" of the different sizes and shapes and forms, is what keeps a species healthy. The canine is already limited in its variation since breeders stick to one breed (not saying its a bad thing). With in each breed there is variation and as such a breeder should not just breed small GSD or Large GSD, or Tall, or Short, or Black and tan, or black, or sable, high stung or mellow, but all of them. Granted some of this shoudl be watched (for instance an unstable bitch shouldn't be bred, or a diseased dog).

 

My question, as an outsider to this debate, is this - If a breeder is not working toward breeding dogs that adhere to the official standard ary you saying that you know better than the people who wrote and improved that standard?

If the standard says 24-26" at the withers for a GSD male - what in the world are you doing breeding dogs that are over 30"?

It might be kind of amusing, though, to see one of these giants trying to herd sheep!

I would suggest that if you want a giant dog, get involved with Great Danes or some other giant dog.

 

My question, as an outsider to this debate, is this - If a breeder is not working toward breeding dogs that adhere to the official standard ary you saying that you know better than the people who wrote and improved that standard?

The standard itself is fine, and if you show dogs you will see that the judges are not automatically tossing out any dog that's a fraction above or below the standard. My female is a bit small and is a champion; my male's mother is a bit large and is a champion.

The problems are the interpretations of the standard, and those interpretations are what most people now think ARE the standard. So if I say "I am defending the standard!" some people might think I'm defending the extreme American line dogs with ridiculous angulation, loose rears, anteater heads, and a spooktastic temperament. Someone else might think I'm defending extreme German line dogs with a terribly roached and/or broken topline and steep croup.

Maybe everyone should post a picture of five dogs that THEY believe fit "the standard" - whatever their interpretation might be.

 

Originally Posted by Doc
To associate poor function because of size only means you have not experienced or seen a properly bred oversized German shepherd.

Comments that associate poor health, longevity & compromised abilities with over sized GS invariably come from those who appear to have very little hands on experience with these dogs or the knowledgeable breeders that produce them. It’s for reasons such as this that I prefer acquiring over sized GS from breeders with years of experience producing large, healthy, long lived GS.

Originally Posted by Liesje
Maybe you are OK with people misrepresenting the breed and their dogs but I'm not. If such discussions upset you then maybe avoid this part of the forum?

It’s well documented that over sized GS existed even under the guidance of Max Von Stephanitz. Many over sized GS work real jobs as service dogs, SAR, guide dogs, LE & military dogs. According to info posted by MrsK, they’re still recognized, albeit with a wink & nod. Clearly they’re admired & sought after by more than simply pet people. To try & insist differently is misrepresentation. Those piling on assertions that they’re inherently weak, sickly, short lived, lazy & unsuited to any job beyond couch anchor are guilty of gross misrepresentation. I once believed this was due to ignorance, but as it seems to be a determined & willful ignorance, I now suspect it’s to support a bias opposed to over sized GS regardless of what the facts & history are. Perhaps those immune to inconvenient truths should avoid this part of the forum…


MrsK, larger, athletic dogs will have a power & strength that smaller GS can’t match. This is useful in some working endeavors as is the height of the taller GS. It’s why working breeds are often represented by a continuum of sizes, especially all rounders such as GS. In my experience it also increases the deterrence factor which can be invaluable. While I’d never claim the large GS can do everything as well as the smaller dogs, the reverse is equally true. Proponents of the smaller GS seem loathe to admit that but their reluctance doesn’t alter the truth of it. Could my guy catch yours? Perhaps not. I doubt yours could have hoped to catch or keep up with my 28" 50-60lb Sibe. So??? The one piece of info is about as useful or impressive as the other.

My guy is 29.5”. At one yr he was ~92lbs. He might weigh a bit more now but I doubt he’s gained much. I favor tall & lean. He was acquired from the breeder originally linked. Her dogs are fit, powerful & athletic. They don’t look like Mastiffs(???) or act like Goldens. They won’t suit everyone, nor does the breeder pretend that they do. I looked at her dogs for years before getting Sam & later my little Djibouti. The breeder has been forthright, honest & helpful even prior to getting one of her dogs. Those who dislike her dogs shouldn’t get them. I’m not certain why it’s necessary to go beyond that.

 

excellent post GSDSunshine! I completely agree. And one of the things that REALLY gets me is for those that want an oversized, under-driven GSD look-a-like it already exists in other breeds such as the King Shepherd or Shiloh.

 

GSDSunshine, I completely agree with your post. I am in favor of keeping the GSD in line with its original intents and purpose.

I think some of the deviation from what a GSD was meant to be comes about because there is so little need for their original purpose, and this perhaps gives some breeders what they feel is license to stray from the ideal. There are so few "true" working dog homes, with sheep to tend, etc. The modern American dog is often a pampered, humanized member of the family and there is the perception that there is no need for their original instincts. This may work for many people, but is not true to the breeds original intent. So now people buy what looks nice, what they saw in a movie or what a celebrity owns. As GSDSunshine said, it's breeding to demand, when the case may actually be that some people should not own a GSD.

 

There are over sized GS working the jobs traditionally performed by GS. The breeder originally linked has produced these working GS. Khawk is a terrific example of a breeder that produces over sized working GS. In another thread there were many links & pictures posted showing over sized GS working various endeavors. Given this, the assumption that over sized breeders are 'breeding out' the characteristics that define the GS is yet another 'misrepresentation'.

I've seen over weight GS of all sizes. My guy is lean & fit. A dog over the height or weight standard does not need to be obese. Unfortunately, too many owners & breeders mistake plump for muscular. This is hardly restricted to only the over sized GS & s/b equally deplored regardless of whether the dog is large, medium or small.

 

I will argue against the notion that a small GSD cannot do what a large GSD does - heart, power, strenght does not lie in physical size alone, but in the psychological and physiological make-up of the dog.

Some of the top world-class competing and winning GSDs are in the 60-70 lbs range, and believe me, the helpers get a workout working them! The actual working RCMP GSDs I have seen training and working, many are on what many would consider on the smallish size, but actually are within the standard - dogs that have actually caught and brought down perpetrators. Their bark alone is enough of an intimidating factor that suspects usually give themselves up - not due to the dog's size, but due to the dog's presence.
Not to say that larger GSD would not be able to do the same, but to say that a smaller dog does not have the presence or the power of the larger dogs is false.

 

The only reason I can think of where size or height offers a distinct advantage is for service work, for dogs that help stabilize people. Also I think service dogs are better suited with more moderate temperaments and less prey drive, so in this scenario I think a larger dog with less prey drive is appropriate.

For police work or any type of protection, the dog needs to have a presence. Even a 40lb dog can catch up with a perp, bite him, and take him down. I've seen a rat terrier do protection work and believe me that dog was scarier to me than many of the GSDs on the SchH field. Enormous size offers no advantage as long as the dog is quick, committed, and scary looking. I can't say I've ever seen a real working GSD or Mal larger than 80lb. Maybe a few exist but it doesn't seem like any departments are rushing out to intentionally buy larger dogs. Also in many working scenarios the handler needs to be able to lift and carry their dog. Size would seem to only present disadvantages.

I agree there are overweight GSDs and dogs of any size everywhere. My issue is with doing this intentionally, even promoting it and using it as a marketing tool and then breeding overweight dogs.

 

Some one explain this to me. Why are there so few German shepherds being used as "seeing eye dogs" when they were the breed that started the whole movement? Why are german shepherds being replaced daily as dog of choice for police work when at one point, German shepherds were called German Police Dogs? And I could go on and on about our breed being replace in almost every aspect of work that was once dominated by the GSD.

I submit that people have turned the natural working German shepherd, the one breed that is intelligent and versitile, into show ponies and sports specialists. The true work ethic genetics - whatever task it may include - has been diluted to the point that the German shepherd is not viewed as capable to perform the tasks they mastered and excelled in years ago. Above all else, I define "old fashion" in those terms . The sport of SchH is an attempt to prove that the German shepherd is a versatile working dog - and everyone knows I have my problems with SchH. But what is really lacking is the actual presences of German shepherds leading the blind, on the side of police officers, and guarding the family farm. These are "old fashion" German shepherds regardless of their shape and size. I perfer a bigger dog but not a 30"+ and 150 pound dog.

 

Some one explain this to me. Why are there so few German shepherds being used as "seeing eye dogs" when they were the breed that started the whole movement? Why are german shepherds being replaced daily as dog of choice for police work when at one point, German shepherds were called German Police Dogs? And I could go on and on about our breed being replace in almost every aspect of work that was once dominated by the GSD.

Are they? Maybe it's a local thing? Our local PDs and staties use GSDs, I have never even seen a police Malinois around here and the people I know who import, breed, and train for departments typically have Malinois for ring sport, not work, they supply GSDs for the police. The local Leader Dog program uses Labs and GSDs, and a friend of mine routinely gives them GSDs. I think Fidelco breeds their own GSDs.

I know for detection purposes, some agencies have gone with labs and beagles because they appear more friendly. Really any dog has the capability to do detection as long as it has the drive.

 

Oh yes there are wicked good appropriately sized dogs. That is what I look for. I have had larger dogs and don't look for that for my competition dogs. Size does matter and bigger is not always better. I can't see the benefit of breeding larger than life ones for working endeavors when appropriate sized ones do just fine. Due to genetics, there are pups born who grow large and work great, but I don't know that I would try to continue to keep the next generation large. They could be utilized to improve size in lines where that is needed. My pup's Gsire was large and recommended to improve size in breed survey. But to keep a separate line going?


When advertising leans to make claims for 'better pets' I have my antennae go up. This is not a good brag for not breeding appropriate German Shepherds. Having had some bred for pets and some bred for work or performance focus.... amazing which dogs I found to be better pets.

 

It is sometimes more than breeding of GSDs that results in other choices for police departments. The factors are not just the suitability of the dogs for the job.

 

Lies, large size would actually be a downfall when it comes to service work. As far as stabilization, mobility assistance harnesses come in various heights to make up the difference. A lower handle might be an asset but the instances where a smaller size is more convenient outweighs any advantage. Its hard to imagine having a service dog with you all of the time; it turned out to be vastly different than what I had expected. Tessa is 24" and around 65-70 lbs and she has had to squeeze into some pretty tight spaces! Such as between my knees and the seat in front of me at a theatre or concert, under a table at a restaurant, standing or walking through tight crowds, on an elevator, on a public bus, narrow or crowded store isles, and so much more. My Emma is 25" right now and I'm hoping she doesn't get any or much taller as I am hoping for her to be my next service dog. She is longer bodied than Tessa which I would rather her not be.

 

Thanks for the input!

 

As for the downfall of the German Shepherd . . . The RCMP have their own breeding program, a very successful one, most of the dogs working the streets are from their own breeding and training - all GSDs, I don't think they use anything else, but I could be wrong.

 

Lin, interesting to get some feedback from someone with actual experience using a service dog. Thank you, very informative and illuminating.

 

Fidelco is apparently not the only one utilizing GSDs.

Our Dogs: About Our Guide Dogs

I think my Carmspack dog might have made a nice service dog. So devoted, easily trained, independent decision making and thinking type. Won't ever know, but her relatives are in search, police, competition venues and pets. Similar lines but many niches for the pups according to strengths and abilities. Not sure why this can't be done with GSDs still. Many of dogs in her pedigree did get breed surveyed, schutzhund titled etc. This didn't seem to cut down on the utility of the dogs bred from them in real life situations. The breeding decisions matter more than the titles and venues, I think, but there is no harm in asking for some minimal core abilities to me.

Oh my girl is a bit oversized but only weighs 67lbs so not huge. LOL

 

Doc is right that GSDs are not used as much in police work. The ULTIMATE police work is the US military---they now breed their own Belgian Malinois at Lackland AFB in San Antonio, Texas. So much for the superiority of those "titled" "sporting" "working" line GSDs. They are no longer used by our military!

 

Again, this widely varies by location/department. It often has more to do with costs and what is being supplied than which breed is actually better. Last I heard many departments were switching back to German shepherds. The ones local to me use German Shepherds and do not use sporting dogs. The LE agencies have their own breeders and brokers that they go through.

 

I hate to disagree with you, but Lackland AFB supplies ALL branches of the US military, regardless of where the dogs and handlers may be stationed around the world. I have a great friend down there and the military gets ALL of their dogs, including training, from Lackland.

 

There are a number of GSDs in the military kennel at Fort Leonard Wood. Just helped a young fellow getting his bomb alert dog, a lovely red sable GSD, out of the military.

 

There are still a lot of Shepherds in Germany too. Know one of the trainers and I doubt that they can use all dogs they produce as military working dogs. Breeding is very complex and you don't always get what you want out of it.

 

Yes, there are still some around, but the military is trying to phase them out. That is why they have established their own Belgian Malnois breeding program at Lackland. As I said, this is directly from an air force officer at Lackland who has areas of responsibility that include the K9s.

 

Well, certainly the malinois breed is very prey, prey, prey. They love to bite. They are generally small, light boned and agile. They are low triggered and easily stimulated. Aggression can ride on the surface with some. They are probably a breed less likely to make a good pet than a GSD.

I guess the sport dog breeders have not succeeded in breeding such animals as their GSDs are being beat out by animals with the actual extremes they are often accused of producing. If we must compete with these little guys we best amp up the drive, the quickness to bite, add more drive, lower trigger thresholds, reduce size and angulation, etc.

I have a feeling there is more to the decision to go with mals than this, but for sure the Mali are generally a more extreme dog than the GSD. Go figure. They tend to be healthier and have intense work ethic and drive. They are beating the GSDs due to small size, healthy genes, and the go, go,goness of it all.

A little mal is much easier to lift into a helicopter than a GSD... so much for the utility of the larger dogs.

 

I have a question, for all of you that think people shouldn't own a GSD if they don't work them some way. Do you think the breeder should't sell a dog to a family that wants just a family dog?

What is wrong with people wanting a GSD but not "working" it? Who are you to say somebody shouldn't own a dog that they want, will love take care of etc. because they choose not to do anything with it, other then a walk or play in the yard?

 

Family dogs are awesome, and a GSD can be a great one! One definition of "working" to me is obedience training. This is mentally challenging and stimulating for a working dog. Of course, I feel that a dog of any breed deserves to have a more fulfilling life with its owner by having at least basic OB. To me, fulfilling their needs is "love".