Shiloh Shephards

[BenMax]

Originally Posted by Bold Canine

I know that the rescue group has been involved with some dogs that could be questionable, but what is the wrong in erring on the side of the dogs sake? I mean, end of the day, if you can help a dog - any dog - regardless of "breed" then you've done the right thing.

There have been a few glitches for those in rescue when mis-indentifying a breed. Without crying over spilt milk, I have been 'reprimanded' by one for this error. I must admit that it left a bad taste in my mouth and I try my best not to repeat the same error. Most rescues do not know about new breeds so there is always room for error. Recently I received a 'morkie' and I had never heard of them before. This dog however did go into rescue and was adopted out since I could not find a rescue group for them. And to be honest - it was easy to find a home for it due to the size.

For larger breeds such as the DDB I rather pass them onto a specific breed rescue since I do not know anyone that is equipped to handle the specific problems this particular dog had nor did I (or do I) have enough knowledge to properly assess or screen the 'perfect' family for him.

Are there any particularities about the Shiloh when conducting a temperment test? For instance, since I am more savvy with Rotties I know how to approach and how to assess which is significantly different than that of the golden for instance or the chow.

[Bold Canine]

BenMax, I have to get running, but will get back to you with some added info regarding temperaments.

However, in a nutshell, soft to medium temperaments.

I'll get you some more specifics, but have to get some New Years items in place and be a good grandson and go visit my Grandma (96 years young).

I appreciate all your queries. The more than rescue groups and shelters can know to help identify means the more we can help when the time is needed.

[BenMax]

Originally Posted by Bold Canine

BenMax, I have to get running, but will get back to you with some added info regarding temperaments.

However, in a nutshell, soft to medium temperaments.

I'll get you some more specifics, but have to get some New Years items in place and be a good grandson and go visit my Grandma (96 years young).

I appreciate all your queries. The more than rescue groups and shelters can know to help identify means the more we can help when the time is needed.

Thanks Bold Canine - have a good day and I will review when you are ready. Best to Grandma!

[hazelrunpack]

Originally Posted by Bold Canine

Having said all of the above, yes, the Shiloh was bred by design. To create a good family dog with great size, intelligence, health, and temperament. And simply because the breed's timeline is a bit shorter than that of other breeds does not disqualify it as a legitimate breed. What legitimizes it as a breed is the organization and commitment of the breeders to drive towards the standard as written, to breed healthy sound well tempered dogs, participate in conformation and other such events (herding trials, etc), and to work towards eventually recognition.

My point was that the concept behind the 'design' seems thin...and later on I'll explain why I think it's on genetically shaky ground...

A dog with intelligence, [good] health, and [good] temperament is already the epitome of the "good family dog". Are you just trying to develop a larger family dog then? Why not go with BMD or St Bernards?

Good health is always a concern in any decent breeding program. It does not sound like breeders of Shilohs have found any magic bullets in this regard, nor are they more or less likely to be successful at it than any other breeder:

Originally Posted by Bold Canine

The breed is prone to the same types of ailments that can affect it's founding bloodlines - HD/DJD/Elbows/EPI/Heart issues/Eyes/etc are all areas that breeders focus towards reducing the occurrence of. However, like any responsible breeder, of any breed will do, the dogs go thru various health screening processes prior to entering the breeding gene pool. And hopefully with the aide of science, genetic markers will be found for diseases such as EPI to assist with identification of carriers.

As you say, this is the same strategy followed by any responsible breeder. So this also would not set Shilohs apart as anything outside the ordinary realm.

Originally Posted by Bold Canine

The breed does not make for good police dogs. They do however make good SAR dogs, Therapy Dogs, and do quite well in events suchs as Herding/RallyO/etc. I personally have a St John Ambulance Therapy dog who frequents the local senior citizen home. And a Shiloh gained national attention in 2007 when "Gandalf" found a lost boyscout in the mountains of North Carolina.

Many dogs already make great SAR dogs, Therapy Dogs, etc. Again, if this is a reason to develop new breed, it seems a bit thin since so many others already fit the bill.

Originally Posted by Bold Canine

Hazelrunpack, good points. Not saying there are "no" dogs that serve their original purposes such as your pack. But, you cannot argue that a majority are not active in their original design function (or perhaps you can lol).

In my experience, with the English Setter owners I know, most ES's are house dogs used for hunting. Which pretty much puts them in the category they were developed for. Bench dogs are another matter--they are often not hunted, because to hunt them involves combing the forest out of the coat and damaging the hair, but then, I'm not convinced that bench dogs of any of the working breeds should be the paradigm of the breed. Whole nuther topic....

However, even for dogs who no longer do the work they were originally bred to do...they are all versatile. Given the right humans, they still mesh well with human families. They are intelligent enough to take on other activities--English setters make excellent therapy dogs, have fun at agility and obedience trials, for example. I would venture a guess that most breeds have these capabilities. So developing a breed that has these capabilities seems a little redundant.

Originally Posted by Bold Canine

So, by your arguement, a breed cannot be designed since there are existing breeds? So, in the AKC Hound group there are 23 breeds of dogs. So why not stop after one breed? If you have a hound breed in existance, why the need for 22 other breeds? There are 20 herding breeds recognized. Why not stop after the first breed since there was already a "herding breed".

The fact of the matter is that the breed has already been in development for 30+ years. So, the debate on whether or not the breed should be created is moot. The breed is here, the breed does exist, there is an increasing population and breeder base, and there is a demand for it. So, anything regarding the breeds existance is now irrelevant. At least, IMHO
,

One of our first setters was from a breeder who was developing his own 'line'...but he didn't have the chutzpah to call it a new 'breed'. The bloodline was developed over 65 years. After 65 years, he thought he had the genetic quirks worked out. Sadly, not so...

A mere 30 years is not enough to split off a 'breed' imo. Nor, and please correct me if I'm wrong, since Shiloh's came from GSD lines with no outcrossing (is that correct?), are Shiloh's guaranteeable to be healthier or even more stable temperamentally. Remember that any breed has already gone through a genetic bottleneck. That's what gives a breed it's 'type'. So the gene pool of GSDs (and I use GSDs only as an example that fits the topic of the thread) has already been truncated.

My connection is too slow to get out to the articles on Tina's site...so I can't know for sure what sort of breeding program she used to establish Shilohs. Again, please correct me if I have the basic facts skewed.

Shilohs are basically larger GSDs with longer coats? (I realize that there will be other traits, but the physical ones are easier for me to use as examples since they are the most obvious.) So good-tempered GSDs with these traits were bred together to develop Shilohs?

I'm sorry, but that is another bottleneck in the gene pool. Any time you breed for a certain trait without outcrossing back to some other stock (and to develop a breed with good genetics, I'm a firm believer of using other breeds to infuse into the bloodlines some of those genes that have been lost in bottlenecks), you truncate your gene pool again. Breeding Shiloh to Shiloh will guarantee you 'type', but will not and can not guarantee you health or temperament.

The ES breeder I told you about who developed his 'line' (not a new breed) found this out big time toward the end of his life. Hidden recessives manifested as health anomalies. Our dog was beautiful, his hip integrity was wonderful (linebreeding is great for reducing hip dysplasia), but his genetic recessives and the multi-genic combinations resulted in one problem after another after another in our dog. Any time you create a new genetic bottleneck from an already truncated gene pool, you run the risk of 'fixing' new deleterious alleles in a gene pool. You can't avoid it.

So to start a new breed from an existing one, for a purpose as thin as developing a 'good family dog', when there are already so many good family dogs out there, just seems...well...pointless to me. Obviously, I'm not going to tell you not to do it, but it's not something that trips my trigger, nor would I be comfortable ethically with doing it.

[Bold Canine]

Excellent post Hazelrunpack,

Nicely laid out, and good support on your points. You're points are valid and well constructed.

I can't really comment on the BF's website or pages as simply they're not worth the cyber paper they are written on. IMHO.

You are absolutely correct about a closed gene pool and potential of bottlenecking. Dr Padgett's book, to name one, I know is certainly a key education resource for many of the breeders that I know and am involved with.

However, the one thing that you were off the mark on was that the Shiloh was developed solely by use of selected GSDs. Not exactly the case. Although the breed has a majority of blood being that of selected GSD lines, there have also been outcrosses of White Shepherd, Altdeutscher Schaeferhund, and malamute.

Still, today, there are some that on occasion use GSD outcrosses.

You are absolutely correct (IMHO) stating that without care and management, a bottleneck could be created.

My point was that the concept behind the 'design' seems thin...and later on I'll explain why I think it's on genetically shaky ground... A dog with intelligence, [good] health, and [good] temperament is already the epitome of the "good family dog". Are you just trying to develop a larger family dog then? Why not go with BMD or St Bernards?

Good health is always a concern in any decent breeding program. It does not sound like breeders of Shilohs have found any magic bullets in this regard, nor are they more or less likely to be successful at it than any other breeder:

Regarding the statement concerning ethical breeders, that was my response to what differentiates the breed from a shi-poo, doodlethisorthat, etc and the answer is structure. Structure in breeding practices, structure in the registration process, the formation of a national breed club, a written standard etc etc. So, the point was not that Shiloh breeders are doing something different as you appear to have taken that statement as indicating, but rather that there is a structure to the breed versus some other breeds which lack these foundations and principles.

You've taken previous answers to questions out of context I believe.

As you say, this is the same strategy followed by any responsible breeder. So this also would not set Shilohs apart as anything outside the ordinary realm.

As per previous statement, I believe you misinterpret my answers to earlier questions as you continue to question breeding practices and somehow are relating this to claims that Shiloh are unique in these functions. That is an incorrect interpretation. Again, point being is structures which separates the Shiloh breed from some just haphazardly breeding mix breed dogs and was responding to previous questions regarding the breed, health concerns, etc.

Many dogs already make great SAR dogs, Therapy Dogs, etc. Again, if this is a reason to develop new breed, it seems a bit thin since so many others already fit the bill.

Again, please see previous two responses LOL. I have explained what the breed was breed for and was again answering questions as to what activities the breed is involved with.

And again, to place back on you, there are 20 dogs in the herding group with AKC. So, the same arguement could be held for 19 of them lol.

My pack includes 5 shilohs, and I have met countless numbers of others over the years. I can assure you the breed is unique in every sense, and has very little resemblance both physically and temperament to it's founding bloodlines. And although I find the GSD to be a magnificent animal, I by no means have any intention on owning one after being involved with this breed. Just as the GSD is the right dog for those that love that breed, so if the Shiloh for those that love them.

We could have the debate that we are having with most many breeds out there. Could someone not have argued that the Gordon or Irish setters had not point in existing as the ES was already in existence? But, there are differences in the three correct? (sorry, I'm not well versed on the setter breeds).

We can continue to banter this discussion ad infinitum, but the fact remains the breed is here, has been here, will continue to be here, and will continue to gain popularity and recognition. So, it is futile to allocate further time and bandwidth to debating the if the breed should have been created, as it's too late - it already has. There are dozens of breeders across Canada and the US, and thousands of Shilohs now in existence and think it's a bit late to debate whether the breed should be here.

Way back, Erin_e_123 asked about this breed. There was little information actually being provided about it. I came across this discussion, and helped provide information regarding it.

If we wish to debate the creation of breeds, then I would recommend a new thread be created and we discuss the creation of ALL breeds, rather than thread hijack this topic by diluting the original questions.

I do respect you positions, I simply don't share them

Now, I've got to go recover from New Year's Eve, and start getting some resolutions into place ha! Happy New Year!

Respectfully.

[hazelrunpack]

Perhaps I totally misunderstand then. But did you not give this, in your first post, as being the purpose for developing the breed?

Having said all of the above, yes, the Shiloh was bred by design. To create a good family dog with great size, intelligence, health, and temperament. And simply because the breed's timeline is a bit shorter than that of other breeds does not disqualify it as a legitimate breed. What legitimizes it as a breed is the organization and commitment of the breeders to drive towards the standard as written, to breed healthy sound well tempered dogs, participate in conformation and other such events (herding trials, etc), and to work towards eventually recognition.

My comments were directed solely toward this for the most part, as sounding a little thin for a basis for a new breed. I don't think my comments were out of context for what I see in the above quote, but our opinions obviously differ.

As for the number of breeds and the differences between them: The working breeds, and I'll include sporting dogs and setters in that group, were developed to serve slightly different niches. Herders are specialized for different domestic stock. Setters are developed for the game they will be pursuing. Why an English setter when there are Irish and Gordon setters around? They're smaller and mostly white--makes them easier to see and more maneuverable in the thicker cover that Irish and Gordons weren't specifically bred to hunt. The smaller size and lighter color also makes them more heat tolerant--one of the reasons we went with English instead of Gordons, for instance, was because our summers get pretty dang hot. Gordons, being black-and-tan, tend to suffer in the heat of our summers.

My point is, and for the sake of not totally jacking the thread this will be my last attempt to make it clear, that the reason you stated for developing the Shiloh has no 'unfilled' niche to it. The vagueness of the purpose can be fulfilled by most of the dozens of existing breeds, and even by the vast majority of cross-breeds. There was no 'tweaking' to cover an unfilled niche (i.e., needing a lighter-colored dog to show up in heavier cover, smaller in size to maneuver through brush better; or to herd cattle instead of sheep...) See what I'm driving at?

I'm not against starting new breeds if you can find a strong reason to develop one, I just didn't think the one you stated was strong enough.

I was happy to hear that there was at least some outcrossing done to try to diversify the gene pool of Shilohs.

Good luck with your dogs! And Happy New Year. I hope your recovery goes well.

[Bold Canine]

Very well said again Hazelrunpack, and I appreciate your elaborating on the various setters.

I certainly understand and you've made your position clear.

I just think we'll need to chock it up to differing opinions on why breeds can be created and what is the determining factor as to what should generate a new breed. I personally don't see any issue at all with it, regardless as to the availability of existing breeds. Again, the breed will simply disappear 20/50/100 years from now if it proves not to have a place in the canine kingdom.

The one thing that I am thankful for is that rather than trying to breed GSDs untrue to their breed standard (over sized, long coats, etc), that someone took it upon themselves to strive towards the classification of their own breed versus producing "fault" progeny of a breed. Conversely to our discussion, if the shiloh was being bred as a line of GSDs, the GSD purists would be unhappy as well

There's never a downside to discussing the Shilohs on these forums. So far, almost 1000 views of this thread, so if nothing else hopefully there's a bit more information regarding our breed out there now, versus some of the very early questions and comments in this thread.

Again, thanks for expressing your positions in the manner in which you did. We'll need to see where the future takes the breed.

Happy New Year.

Regards.

[mona_b]

Originally Posted by Bold Canine

Mona_b, well, at this stage the breed has far outgrown the kennel of origin and grown to a national/internation scale. And, although I respect your position that there are "enough breeds in the family", I simply do not agree with it. I'm sure someone said that when the Dobberman was developed, or the Retreiver, or... (insert breed name here).

These breeds were bred for a purpose....

All the Shiloh was bred for was to be a family dog.You have stated that and so has Tina.Again,with the breeds we have,they are "family" dogs.

And I still think she was trying to make another version of the GSD. More or less same colourings,plush and soft coat(same as the GSD)

Originally Posted by hazelrunpack

I'm not against starting new breeds if you can find a strong reason to develop one.

I have to agree with this.

Stating that a breed was bred to be a family dog just doesn't cut it with me..Hence all the oddles and doodles and anything orkie.List goes on.

Originally Posted by Bold Canine

I can assure you the breed is unique in every sense, and has very little resemblance both physically and temperament to it's founding bloodlines.

Really? I somewhat beg to differ...

I know many people who have mistaken this breed as a GSD even the so called "king" shepherd(no such thing)

This came from one of Tinas sites.

I never intended to "change" the breed, my goals back then were to preserve the "type" that I was so in love with. The big, mentally sound, beautiful dogs I grew up with!

First off,the GSD(the breed she is discribing) was never bred to be BIG. This is something my mother has told me..And living in Germany for 10 years she should know..We are talking about the 1940's.....Tina was even breeding "bigger" GSD's...Seriously, a GSD did not weigh 134lbs back then....

Originally Posted by hazelrunpack

Many dogs already make great SAR dogs, Therapy Dogs, etc. Again, if this is a reason to develop new breed, it seems a bit thin since so many others already fit the bill.

Again I agree.

Recently a Dutch Shepherd that is part of the SAR team found a woman burried in snow for 3 days..Ace was adopted by handler Ray from a family who said he was to hyper for the family...With training and certification(both dog AND handler) they are members of the SAR team..And they were trained Dave who is an amazing trainer.....

Sorry,got a bit off topic..LOL

Originally Posted by hazelrunpack

I was happy to hear that there was at least some outcrossing done to try to diversify the gene pool of Shilohs.

Actuall she did some inbreeding before the out breeding.

So my question,what breeds are the Shiloh derived from? You do say that the Shiloh is it's own breed.

[luckypenny]

Regardless of the breed, and whether it's been in existence for 20 or 220 years, there's a difference between supplying the demand and creating the demand in order to supply, imo.

Unless there's a particular trait, or combination of traits, that can not be found in existing breeds or cross-breeds, and in existing living dogs, the creation of new breeds is unnecessary .

What concerns me most, is if in fact the demand for Shilohs is indeed so high, how many unethical breeders/puppymillers will catch on to the trend in order to cash in on this new "breed?" :sad:

[Chaser]

Just wanted to give a to all involved in this thread. I'm enjoying following such a well-educated and civil discussion. It's nice to see

[hazelrunpack]

Originally Posted by Bold Canine

I just think we'll need to chock it up to differing opinions on why breeds can be created and what is the determining factor as to what should generate a new breed. I personally don't see any issue at all with it, regardless as to the availability of existing breeds. Again, the breed will simply disappear 20/50/100 years from now if it proves not to have a place in the canine kingdom.

To create a breed, you have to cull. "Cull" as in kill or otherwise remove from the breeding pool any dogs that show genetic anomaly or don't conform to your standard. This is why I take issue with "creating" a new breed for frivolous reasons--from Tina's (the breed's developer) website (http://www.shilohshepherds.org/kennelof.htm):

By the late seventies I had over a hundred dogs in kennel, and produced dozens of litters per year. After nearly twenty years of experience working with the various available bloodlines, I had selected 3 specific lines that I chose to inbreed on in order to determine more genetic information. These lines were then out-crossed to each other, and my foundation was finally solidified, nevertheless I continued to breed "experimental" litters in order to collect valuable data on my chosen bloodlines, as well as information on their compatibility with other out-crossed/inbred lines.

Color is my addition. Crossbreeding inbred lines of a particular type is not going to eliminate deleterious alleles in a mere 3 or 4 decades. It's just giving you one heck of a genetic bottleneck. Yes, this is how breeds are developed. But this is not a benign activity nor one to be taken lightly.

The geneticist in me cringes. The animal lover in me weeps.

[Bold Canine]

The geneticist in me cringes. The animal lover in me weeps.

A tad on the dramatic side, no? LOL. And while you weep, many rejoice in the additions these animals are providng to homes a families across the continent - regardless of those that do not see the need for their place in the canine kingdom.

Unless there's a particular trait, or combination of traits, that can not be found in existing breeds or cross-breeds, and in existing living dogs, the creation of new breeds is unnecessary .

Ok, think that position has been hammered out enough. But we can continue to banter back and forth. The position is moot.

To create a breed, you have to cull

Really? Isn't that where "pet" home placement come into the mix? I personally wouldn't advocate the slaughter of puppies who fail to conform to a standard, but rather adherence to removing them from the breeding program and moving forward. A puppy that does not meet the standard cannot necessarily make for a loving pet - it simply wouldn't help the breed move forward with breeding programs.

What concerns me most, is if in fact the demand for Shilohs is indeed so high, how many unethical breeders/puppymillers will catch on to the trend in order to cash in on this new "breed?"

Any breed is susceptible to such pitfalls with the biggest occurrences occurring in recognized breeds that would seemingly lose control over breeders. The key is, and will continue to be buyer education, regardless of breed. The cycle of puppymillers and unethical breeders is entirely generated by buyer habits. Combine with this the vigil held by the breed club and registry. I think most of the breeders you describe will continue to see more readily recognized breeds which can more easily fall beneath the radar, and have the popularity to provide quick turnover of stock (since the people I assume you describe are in it for the sole purpose of quick and easy profit).

Stating that a breed was bred to be a family dog just doesn't cut it with me

That's quite alright. That is the opinion you are entitled to and I won't further engage in why I, and others, do not necessarily share that view (as we have discussed ad nauseum over recent days). But, it's well within your right to hold that position. Perhaps then dogs bred for Protective Services should not be in the homes of families with children etc. If you have your opinion, then so too may I. To then say that a suiting temperament of such a dog could fit into that home environment could to me then mean the dog is not true to it's purpose - which seems to be of paramount importance to a fee here.

I know many people who have mistaken this breed as a GSD even the so called "king" shepherd

Perhaps that continues to be a result of continued lack of knowledge for the breed. For those involved and educated would not often be confused between the two - if the GSD was being bred to their standard. This is again why I am thankful for forums and discussion opportunities such as this. Although I may need to fend off the villagers with pitch forks and torches, and often feel like the last man standing lol , it provides yet another opportunity to help people learn about the breed.

And, well, the "King Shepherd" is a breed (officially as the American King Shepherd). Shelly Watts who I believe would be the figurehead behind the breed was involved with the Shiloh earlier on.

The fact that people would confuse the Shiloh with the GSD is simply due to a lack of education regarding the breed. Perhaps you might have an opportunity to attend some rare breed shows in your area - the Shiloh is usually quite a large draw, especially in Ontario and the North Eastern United States. Not sure of your area, but if you're in our neck of the woods, I'd invite you out for a visit at a show (don't worry, we don't bite lol).

First off,the GSD(the breed she is discribing) was never bred to be BIG. This is something my mother has told me..And living in Germany for 10 years she should know..We are talking about the 1940's.....Tina was even breeding "bigger" GSD's...Seriously, a GSD did not weigh 134lbs back then.

I wouldn't argue with you. The size of the dog could affect the function for which the GSD was bred, and hence the size limitations within their standard. And hence why not name the breed something other that GSD - which certainly this breed is not. And for whatever reason for the BF to have chosen to breed to this standard is within one's right.

Recently a Dutch Shepherd that is part of the SAR team found a woman burried in snow for 3 days..

Since you bring up the Dutch Shepherd, I could likely take on the argument that the breed should not have been created given the similarity to the Belgian and the GSD.

So my question,what breeds are the Shiloh derived from? You do say that the Shiloh is it's own breed

Answered previously

Crossbreeding inbred lines of a particular type is not going to eliminate deleterious alleles in a mere 3 or 4 decades. It's just giving you one heck of a genetic bottleneck. Yes, this is how breeds are developed. But this is not a benign activity nor one to be taken lightly.

Certainly agree with you. It should not be taken lightly. And as a breeder, taking ownership of the progeny we produce, I never want to be the recipient of news from a broken hearted owner whose beloved dog has developed a disorder. Hence the importance of LMI data, health screening, and identification of carriers (eg EPI, etc).


Well, I am enjoying the discussion, although it certainly appears to be having the same dialogue and positions being bounced back and forth (including from myself!).

As I have stated numerous times, I certainly don't expect to change peoples opinions - certainly for those with existing opinions, just as I wont change my opinions on things like I would never own a GSD, or many of the other breeds out there. Just as some may say they would never own a shiloh

The genetic concerns and focus that Hazelrunpack raise are certainly valid and that all breeders will continue to focus on, to avoid the pitfalls which she lays out so well. Again, time will tell what the breed is able to achieve.

The need for fresh genetic input will undoubtedly be required from time to time until the breed has reached such a level to allow for closure of the stud books. And of course the potential pitfalls of introducing new bloodlines into the mix.

I'm sure they flurry of posts will continue, which is quite alright. I do enjoy the discussion. Many of the points raised are not new, and not unlike ones that occur within our own breed group. How do we preserve this breed that Shiloh enthusiasts love. How do we protect the breeds future. How do we keep producing sound, healthy, well tempered Shilohs for years to come and avoid the type of challenges that Hazelrunpack so clearly lays out. However, thru continued observance and vigilance of them, we can hopefully avoid many of the concerns raised.

"

Just wanted to give a to all involved in this thread. I'm enjoying following such a well-educated and civil discussion. It's nice to see

Agreed Chase_mom. The dog world in a contentious one, but with civil discussion and logical debate, it does not have to be nasty, but rather insightful and a learning tool for all involved.

[BenMax]

Originally Posted by Bold Canine

Any breed is susceptible to such pitfalls with the biggest occurrences occurring in recognized breeds that would seemingly lose control over breeders. The key is, and will continue to be buyer education, regardless of breed. The cycle of puppymillers and unethical breeders is entirely generated by buyer habits. Combine with this the vigil held by the breed club and registry. I think most of the breeders you describe will continue to see more readily recognized breeds which can more easily fall beneath the radar, and have the popularity to provide quick turnover of stock (since the people I assume you describe are in it for the sole purpose of quick and easy profit).

In an ideal world this would be great....buyer education that is. Any breed is susceptible to 'profit' however this is going to saturate rescues, shelters and lead of course to the unnecessary death of how many in clandestine places?

I guess for me it's the sense of responsibility one has. At what 'life' price are breeders willing to take? Tainted I am I suppose since rescues are called upon time and time again to re-home, vet, train, re-habiliate unwanted, abused, abandoned, overly produced animals...(I am sure you have heard it all before) - but I must say again not really requiring a response.

I am reading this between you and Hazel without much input because I really don't know enough about this breed. Hence the problem going forward to so many when trying to identify them, evaluate them, scrambling to source out a breed specific rescue to take NOW (since that is what we get), and of course having the responsibility to re-home on our own when breed specific rescues say NO because they are equally saturated.

I am very sorry Bold Canine, and I am sorry if this comes off as being rude or ignorant - but the Shiloh seriously looks like it can be mistaken for a mix breed.

For me (and I speak for myself) I don't know why people want to breed in the first place. I loved my Rottie with every cell of my being and as much as I would have loved to have one of his offsprings...I just wouldn't do it. He died and I have nothing of him but memories.

My comments are very elementary in comparison the conversation that you are having with Hazel but I just want to express the feelings on the side of rescue and shelters.

[Bold Canine]

LOL no need for any apology BenMax! None needed at all.

Yes, the Shiloh can look like a mixed breed, because it was derived from various breeds. And due to it being "rare" in nature, means that it could appear as a "mix" breed dog. However, hopefully over time that will change, and instead of people seeing a possible shepherd mix, they will recognize it as a Shiloh instead.

The reason some recognized breeds aren't as confused as easily is simply due to their abundance in population. At least in my humble opinion. If it was 1906 an Horand von Grafrath has run away from ol' Max one day, then perhaps when found someone may not have recognized him, or confused him as some sort of mix.

For those involved in the breed, identification of a Shiloh can be much easier than for those that are not - yet even then not simple since there is subtle variation still in "type".

I applaud your passion regarding the shelters. It's undoubtedly one of the most noble causes in the canine world.

For me, we look inwards and take ownership of our own progeny. When our pups leave, they leave microchipped - with our name as first contact, not the buyers. If the need for a rehome ever occurs (only once so far), the dog returns to our home as was the case two years ago. We then will find a suitable forever home (and that includes progeny from studding). My point is simply, if more breeders take more ownership and observance of their progeny, then your task with shelters would be reduced. I don't see how anyone could argue that.

It is extremely unfortunate the number of dogs that end up in shelters. But the answer is not to stop breeders from breeding, but to hold breeders directly accountable for the lives they bring into the world. IMHO of course.

LOL, dont worry, that's no where being rude of ignorant of you. Your points are good. Rude or ignorant was when I was stalked at my workplace during a Wikipedia discussion on the breed lol! You're just raising points that concern you, which is well within your right.

[BenMax]

Originally Posted by Bold Canine

I applaud your passion regarding the shelters. It's undoubtedly one of the most noble causes in the canine world.

For me, we look inwards and take ownership of our own progeny. When our pups leave, they leave microchipped - with our name as first contact, not the buyers. If the need for a rehome ever occurs (only once so far), the dog returns to our home as was the case two years ago. We then will find a suitable forever home (and that includes progeny from studding). My point is simply, if more breeders take more ownership and observance of their progeny, then your task with shelters would be reduced. I don't see how anyone could argue that.

It is extremely unfortunate the number of dogs that end up in shelters. But the answer is not to stop breeders from breeding, but to hold breeders directly accountable for the lives they bring into the world. IMHO of course.

Thank you Bold Canine for your response.

To start off with I do not want to be applauded as I wish I could live a peaceful life without having to always worry about an animal in need. It is a passion I could do without as it now becomes a necessity....and many sleepless nights.

Breeders should take ownership however they do not. There are a few but a BYB or a miller will absolutely not assist nor would I request it. They must be eliminated and then perhaps those that are truly passionate about the breed can network amongst each other to ensure their pups and mature dogs are well placed - therefore our involvement no longer required.

Indeed your last paragraph is a wish or a dream. I am not against breeders Bold Canine, but I am against those that breed for profit and those that do not take responsibility. I know that the CKC and the AKC are also used as an 'umbrella' to protect some of these breeders by allowing them to continue producing dogs that are not of 'standard' if you will allow me to put it this way. Dogs from CKC and AKC do come into rescue more than people think. Some even intact. So this shows me the lack of control or regulation.

Perhaps if I was not within the rescue/shelter/animal welfare circle - I would know no better. The fortunate or unfortunate part is that I am and I know how many rescues struggle. I know how the staff at shelters feel when an animal must be euthanized...they feel more pain then any breeder ...because it happens daily.

[Bold Canine]

I am against those that breed for profit

Breed for profit? LOL, I've yet to see that in our program. Between health testing, conformation and activities, vet bills, etc I'd be elated if we were even remotely close to a break even

I do understand and appreciate all of your points. Although we are not as active as yourself, my wife if pretty involved with our local humane society as their on call trainer for assessments and rehab work (Upper Credit Humane Society) and you are right - There are truly a number of dogs that need loving forever homes in their life.

And I wasn't applauding you, but rather your passion I figured you too humble to want an applause.

[Dekka]

I have been reading this with interest so far..

Originally Posted by Bold Canine

I just think we'll need to chock it up to differing opinions on why breeds can be created and what is the determining factor as to what should generate a new breed. I personally don't see any issue at all with it, regardless as to the availability of existing breeds. Again, the breed will simply disappear 20/50/100 years from now if it proves not to have a place in the canine kingdom.

The coloured parts are what really gets me. How many of these dogs will end up in shelters or other dogs will die just cause someone wanted a pretty pet?

I am a breeder of a breed that still works. (JRTs) I also have Long Haired Whippets (which are NOT new lol) who race and must prove they still have the instincts. My biggest pet peeve is people who remove all the mental characteristics that the breed was created for in the first place.

Thats where all these people breeding "Irish Jacks" come in. The are breeding dogs who couldn't hunt even if they still had the insticnt left. Why not simply pick another small terrier like a Norwich.. that is still cute already has a larger body and short legs.. and isn't so drivey that you have to kill that too... but I digress

I have NO problem with people cross breeding or making new breed as long as its done ethically, with purpose and to fill a niche.

What new niche is the Shilo filling? A good GSD is already a great family dog. The leonburger was created to be a great pet and a big dog.. people could get those.

I am not yet a geneticist (working on it though.. I am a forensic biotechnologist) and I agree. Crossing lines does not make recessive alleles just disappear. They hide.. to come out later and bite you if you don't know what you are doing.

If there weren't so many similar dogs in shelters and rescues it would also be different. And I do get that if shelters/rescues were.. lets say all full of yorkies and mastiffs people might not want them.... but you can go on Petfinder and find all sorts of sheppardish big fluffy dogs needing homes.

What are the future goals of these dogs.. what will they be able to do as well or better than other breeds out there?

[hazelrunpack]

Originally Posted by Bold Canine

A tad on the dramatic side, no? LOL. And while you weep, many rejoice in the additions these animals are providng to homes a families across the continent - regardless of those that do not see the need for their place in the canine kingdom.

I'll admit, it was an emotional reaction. It will continue to be, and your comment regarding culling is why:


Really? Isn't that where "pet" home placement come into the mix? I personally wouldn't advocate the slaughter of puppies who fail to conform to a standard, but rather adherence to removing them from the breeding program and moving forward. A puppy that does not meet the standard cannot necessarily make for a loving pet - it simply wouldn't help the breed move forward with breeding programs.

This is false. If you go back and read the quote from the BF's website, she highly inbred her lines to examine the genetics. Do you really think she was able to place hundreds of puppies with families willing to take on the risk of a highly inbred puppy? Do you think she offered health guarantees to all the recipients? She certainly could not have marketed them as Shiloh Shepherds without destroying the "breed's" reputation, could she have?

We're not just talking about 'breed faults' with this sort of inbreeding, Bold Canine. We're talking serious genetic problems.

[Dekka]

heck the inbrededness (lol new word there) of the general CKC/AKC dog scares me. (I love open registries) That level of inbreeding is down right silly.

[Bold Canine]

Hi Dekka,

Also a good post!

I like to employ the term "takes all comers" lol. Leaving the friendly confines of our own breed discussion groups does not come without it's challenges lol. But I do my best

Your question is a hypothetical one, and one that really has no answer. Depends on many factors, and the same question could be held for any dog of any breed out there. How many GSDs will be in shelters? How many Goldens? How many... well, you get the point.

The answer with regard to the Shiloh, as with any other breed, comes down to the breeders themselves. Get a group of breeders haphazardly slinging pups anywhere and everywhere with a wanton disregard for their well-being of course will result in a % of those pups being abandon for any number of reasons.

However, as I have mentioned, if breeders investigate their buyers, pre-screen via applications, face to face visits whenever possible, microchip, and educate their buyers then the likelihood of one of the pups they produced working it's way into a shelter system will become substantially reduced. And if every breeder starts with their own program rather than worrying about what others are doing, there were be far fewer dogs in shelters.

I know that courtesy of the application process and face to face visits, we have declined a number of puppy applicants. If we don't feel the environment is correct, or that the buyer has enough experience, or if we simply don't have a good gut feeling, then they simply are not put on our list.

Now, this goes for our own program here. What other breeders do, what other breeders of other breeds do, is not for me to say. Guess you gotta start with the man in the mirror right?

I appreciate your points, but I think they hold true for virtually any breed of any kind. I could just as easily say that JRTs maybe shouldn't be bred as they too could wind up in a shelter right? But I'm sure the same holds true with you and the ownership you have over your progeny.

I am a breeder of a breed that still works. (JRTs) I also have Long Haired Whippets (which are NOT new lol) who race and must prove they still have the instincts. My biggest pet peeve is people who remove all the mental characteristics that the breed was created for in the first place.

what will they be able to do as well or better than other breeds out there?

Ah, but the Shiloh is active in a number of working areas. Many are titled in herding (I have two in my pack, and a third will start with her HIC in the Spring), many take part in tracking events and are active with SAR organizations, and also many are participants in Therapy services (I have one bitch who is with St Johns Ambulance).

Some like Takota have been a perfect fit for the TDI program http://www.shilohs.issdc.com/ISSDC/I...sAtWorkTDI.htm and as I mentioned earlier was entered into the NJ Vet Hall of Fame in 2008.

Others, like Nikita are in the R.E.A.D. program helping children with learning disabilities http://members.cox.net/librarydogs/NJ_Nicki.html

And then there's Tangus who was The Hero Award from the Pet Therapy Society of Alberta for his work http://www.spiritualdirections.com/Tangusaward.htm

The SAR accolades are starting to be seen, as with Gandalf (previously mentioned) along with others such as Tango and Ben. http://www.shilohs.issdc.com/ISSDC/I...AtWorkS&R.html One of my progeny is currently working towards his SAR certification, and many others are pursuing it.

Others are working on Service titles http://www.shilohs.issdc.com/ISSDC/I...orkService.htm

Others are working on Herding titles - per our Group designation - with AHBA, ASCA, and RBPCO. http://www.shilohs.issdc.com/ISSDC/I...orkHerding.htm

Not trying to spam you, but simply to illustrate that this breed's intelligence and instincts from it's founding bloodlines is by no means lost. Simply because the dogs has a soft to medium temperament does not mean that they lack ability. And for a relatively small population (in comparison with other breeds) they are certainly making a lot of positive news - and I would venture to guess that per capita in the breed - more shilohs participate (per capita) in various working activities that many other breeders - per capita. Perhaps someone can dispute that, but most shilohs that I know are titled or active in some area apart from conformation.

Their temperament is what allows them to excel in the areas of Therapy and Service. A 30 inch, 120 lbs male with a soft disposition is the perfect size for a pet and bonding with someone like the elderly in a wheelchair.

I cannot speak for everyone, and is just my humble opinion, but is today's GSD the GSD of 40-50 years ago? Again, not saying better or worse, simply different. Yes? No? And if you agree with the answer being that of "yes", then what if someone preferred the "past" version of the GSD, and preferred that idea. But of course in doing so, you wouldn't conform with type in the conformation ring, which in turn would likely lead to those saying that you're not breeding true to the standard correct?

This is not my page, not my site, but was sent to me today. It's not to illustrate anything wrong with the 2000 GSD, simply the change.
http://royalair.org/pasttopresent.htm (ps. I'd argue that the Shiloh is closer to the structure of the 1940 GSD, than those of today).

I don't provide that to be inflammatory. But simply that you cannot dispute the evolution (or devolution) of the GSD over the past half century. And that the GSD of today is not the version that everyone may have wanted - go to Europe and ask their feelings on the American Show GSD (illustrating a dispute even within the breed). So, rather than create GSDs not of "type", a new breed was developed.

The GSD breed standard (with the CKC) states "The breed has a distinct personality marked by a direct and fearless, but not hostile, expression, and self-confidence and a certain aloofness, which does not lend itself to immediate and indiscriminate friendships. The Shepherd Dog is not one that fawns upon every new acquaintance." and the UKC standard states in the breed history "...enabling the German Shepherd Dog to switch easily from herding duties to other fields of work, particularly military and police work."

Based on these two passages, I personally fail to see how a "Good" (meaning to the letter of the standard) GSD should be a great "family" companion... Designed for "military and police work, with a temperament which does not easily form friendships". And then states that it does not wag in excitement upon meeting new people (fawn)...

I am not stating that the GSD is not good - which I'm sure I'll get lynched for someone interpreting that I am insinuating (I'm only trying to illustrate a point). It's an INCREDIBLE dog, capable of a multitude of tasks that have served mankind in a seemingly infinite number of areas. Quite possibly the most versatile dog every created. But, to say that it makes for a great family dog, per the above standard quotes, would indicate to me at least a dog that is not true to the standard or for which it was designed.

So, to answer your question what it does as good or better... there you have it. And it's certainly shown in the Therapy Dog area which doesn't allow for indiscriminate or non-immediate friendships.


LOL, anyhow, there's my two cents on that. LOL. I'll await the boos and throwing of rotten tomatoes

I'm not putting down any breed, certainly not the GSD. Just illustrating my personal position

Regards

[Bold Canine]

This is false. If you go back and read the quote from the BF's website, she highly inbred her lines to examine the genetics. Do you really think she was able to place hundreds of puppies with families willing to take on the risk of a highly inbred puppy? Do you think she offered health guarantees to all the recipients? She certainly could not have marketed them as Shiloh Shepherds without destroying the "breed's" reputation, could she have?

Respectfully Hazelrunpack, I cannot speak for the BF, her breeding practices, her health guarantees, or her placement of pups multi decades ago. Nor do I hold much stock in her online diatribes. I personally feel that means apart from a cull would be more likely followed. But, since the breed in which you are involved has been around over a half millenium, it's not an issue that you would need to face.

And as I mentioned before, I spend time reading those pages many moons ago and put little stock in them. Self-written accounts of history are seldom entirely truthful, or without self-serving positioning. (and you must have been on her website given the colourful text.

I focus on where the breed is now, what my involvement is with it, what my contribution to it is, and how as a community - regardless of club or registry - can collectively continue to move the breed forward.

I think I see how you have obtained over 16,000 posts now (and I do say that respectfully).


Regards

PS. At this pace, I might just catch you in posts lol (just kidding

[Dekka]

with a temperament which does not easily form friendships". And then states that it does not wag in excitement upon meeting new people (fawn)...

This describes one of my JRTs to a T. She is a great family dog. She has no fear of new people, but isn't going to fawn over them (unless they have food) she has a strong protective drive and is Dog Reactive. My grandparents always had GSDs some of them were the best family pets a person could want. Its all about what you want in a family pet.


I am glad your breed does well. But what do they do better. There are many many rescue dogs and dogs who came from puppy mills who have excelled in dog sports.. all they way up to representing their country at the worlds in various dog sports. Does that mean we should condone the puppy millers or the breeders who throw dogs away.. their dogs are successful!

What do shilos do that is better.. unique to them. So far I don't see them doing much that a leonburger or GSD couldn't already do.

So they herd.. I am sure Aussies, cattle dogs, Kelpies and BC can do it better. My couple of my JRTs can herd sheep quite well but IMO that doesn't make them worthy of breeding. Lots of breeds are already good at all those things you mentioned.. as are many rescue dogs.

So you will have to work harder to convince me that this isn't along the same lines as labradoodles and cockapoos.

[hazelrunpack]

Originally Posted by Bold Canine

Respectfully Hazelrunpack, I cannot speak for the BF, her breeding practices, her health guarantees, or her placement of pups multi decades ago. Nor do I hold much stock in her online diatribes. I personally feel that means apart from a cull would be more likely followed. But, since the breed in which you are involved has been around over a half millenium, it's not an issue that you would need to face.

Her "diatribes" are your "breed's" foundations, Bold Canine.

And you are correct. The breed I have most experience with is very old and I'm not a breeder, so you're right. I don't have to deal with the culling aspect any more. To be frank, no breed, having undergone the inevitable bottlenecks to establish "type", is immune to the occasional genetic anomaly, especially if breeders mistakenly believe they have the 'kinks' worked out. This sort of chutzpah resulted in our Evan and his subsequent loss. But time does weed out many of the genetic problems. Time that Shiloh Shepherds have not yet had.

I focus on where the breed is now, what my involvement is with it, what my contribution to it is, and how as a community - regardless of club or registry - can collectively continue to move the breed forward.

May I respectfully submit that being only 30-40 years down the line...and the bloodlines...of this "breed", you will still have to cull genetic anomalies. And I still find the "purpose" of the breed to be too vague and mundane to be worth the types of culling that will still be necessary to set the "type".

But that's your choice and I wish you luck in your venture. I don't intend to be around 50 years from now to see if the "breed" ever gets established. Or, if I am, I'll be too far gone to notice...

Bottom line is, if I were in the market for a dog now, nothing you've put forth about Shiloh Shepherds would tempt me to acquire one.

Regards.

[Bold Canine]

LOL, Dekka frankly, and I say this respectfully, I have no plan or intent to convince you of anything You'll draw your on conclusion and feeling however you see fit.

You're welcome to lump the breed into any classification you wish. That's your position. Just as many JRT's I have met have Napoleonic syndrome and do not make for good pets - too high of energy levels for my taste. But that's me, and there's little you could conversely do to convince me otherwise But I'm not a JRT enthusiast, so my opinion on it means little correct, and certainly will not cause you to waiver on yours.

I think I've provided enough links to illustrate the abilities of the breed. You can decide if they are superior, inferior, subferior, exterior, ulterior, lol or whichever in comparison to whatever

Obviously, their soft temperament and intelligence helps them excel in Therapy services - which require prompt acceptance of strangers/invalids/etc, and I would without hesitation say that they are superior to many breeds in that aspect.

And again, when you read articles like http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/duip/dog3.pdf I think it is fair to be breeding a softer version of the beloved shepherd.

But again, you're certainly entitled to lump them in with whatever doodle/poo/or other such beast or label if you so wish. That is the sheer beauty of living in the country in which we do - you're entitled to your feelings, and I certainly have no ill will towards them.

You're in Central Ontario, which as far as the Shiloh world goes, is the Meca for Shilohs in Canada. So have a look the the RBCSWO website and stop by for a visit in the spring or summer. Or the RBPCO and see some of them at work. Meet the breed in person before judging it on paper is all that I could possible offer you.

Sincerely.

[Bold Canine]

Bottom line is, if I were in the market for a dog now, nothing you've put forth about Shiloh Shepherds would tempt me to acquire one.

That's quite alright Hazelrunpack I respect that it's not the breed for you. And I'm truly sorry for whatever unfortunate ailment took Evan.

Regardless as to your interest, there are those that are. So the best we can do is proceed using the tools available to us, and the passion for a healthy successful breed. Regardless as to whether or not your on my buyer's list

You're points are all very good, especially regarding the concern on genetics. I won't doubt that for a moment.

Her "diatribes" are your "breed's" foundations, Bold Canine.

Perhaps. Thankfully the breed is greater than an individual at this point.

I don't intend to be around 50 years from now to see if the "breed" ever gets established

Well, you never know. Grandma Bold Canine turned 97 in April, and I was advised December 31st she has her target set for 2012 to see the century mark. And who knows, maybe even the end of the Mayan Calendar in December 20012 and the end of mankind as we know it. Which will mean all this is for not anyhow, and we can all spend the sweet here-after debating this for eternity hehe

Thanks for all of your input and points made.

[Dekka]

I would never own a GSD a Lab or a Beagle etc.. but that does not mean they can't make a great family pet for some people.

And you did say they weren't a designer breed. So far you haven't said anything that has convinced me otherwise.

I do think the show lines of GSDs have issues and that something needed to be done. But to breed out the drive and temperament that makes a GSD a GSD to make a dog that is bigger (which equals shorter life span and MORE health issues) and a fluffier coat (which equals more shedding which isn't a great pet trait) just to create a pet dog which thousands dogs are dying to be...

just doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Oh and I DO show at the RBCO and have met the breed. They are big fluffy sweet dogs.. but so are many other breeds.

[mona_b]

Originally Posted by Bold Canine

To then say that a suiting temperament of such a dog could fit into that home environment could to me then mean the dog is not true to it's purpose - which seems to be of paramount importance to a fee here.

Are you saying a Working Police Dog can't be a working dog and a family dog? Because if that's what you are implying,then you don't know anything about these dogs.These dogs know the difference between work and play..They love their work and their families...

Originally Posted by Bold Canine

And, well, the "King Shepherd" is a breed (officially as the American King Shepherd). Shelly Watts who I believe would be the figurehead behind the breed was involved with the Shiloh earlier on.

Again,this is not a breed...It's another one of those "rare" breeds with it's own registry....

Originally Posted by Bold Canine

Based on these two passages, I personally fail to see how a "Good" (meaning to the letter of the standard) GSD should be a great "family" companion... Designed for "military and police work, with a temperament which does not easily form friendships". And then states that it does not wag in excitement upon meeting new people (fawn)...

I am not stating that the GSD is not good - which I'm sure I'll get lynched for someone interpreting that I am insinuating (I'm only trying to illustrate a point). It's an INCREDIBLE dog, capable of a multitude of tasks that have served mankind in a seemingly infinite number of areas. Quite possibly the most versatile dog every created. But, to say that it makes for a great family dog, per the above standard quotes, would indicate to me at least a dog that is not true to the standard or for which it was designed.

So, to answer your question what it does as good or better... there you have it. And it's certainly shown in the Therapy Dog area which doesn't allow for indiscriminate or non-immediate friendships.

OMG your kidding me right? You really don't know much about this breed....My current is a retired Police Dog. He was my brothers partner...I did the initial training. I had him till he was 18 months...He is a big suck...As my brother has been on the force for quite some time,he also has a family...His dogs were/are very protective of the kids..These dogs have a gentle soul..And just because they are working dogs,does not make them less of a family dog. And if people don't think these dogs can't do both then you soooo don't know anything about these dogs...Doesn't wag in excitement?? Yeah right.LOL.

As for the therapy part.

http://www.sjacornwall.ca/therapydog.php?id=8

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a2...y3-08-p2-m.jpg
http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a2...y3-08-p1-m.jpg

These dogs make amazing therapy dogs.And all around amazing dog.So don't go buy everything you read...There are also other GSD owners on this site..And I'm sure they agree with me.

Talk to some ETHICAL GSD breeders..You may learn a thing or two..:

[Bold Canine]

Wow, like a dentist drilling a tooth, looks like I hit a bit of nerve.

Mona, please, you need to be able to read my position and supporting details without taking it as a jab against the breed you love so much. Do not interpret my previous post regarding the GSD as some sort of slander or defamation of the wonderful character of the breed, but rather an argument on why perhaps the GSD was not breed by design as a family companion.

There are MANY that are excellent family companions, otherwise it would not rank in the top three breeds in the US. So for anyone to say they are not good family dogs of course would be incorrect.

However, if the standard is to be the blue print for the ideal in any breed, then you simply cannot argue with me that by the letter of the standard the GSD is the ultimate family dog. Or perhaps you could - I suppose that it would come down of what you want in a dog.

I personally don't believe MVS's intent was likely to have been designing companion dogs, and that rings true in the word of the standard - but I haven't had a seance to channel his spirit recently. I didn't write it, I simply read it to the letter and draw my interpretation from it. Is that wrong? You can obviously draw your own interpretation from it which is your entitlement.

Pre WWI Imperial Germany (from where my grandparents originated), and MVS's breed was about to be formed at the end of von Bismarks Iron and Blood Policy era was undoubtedly a very different place than today. World War I began in 1914. The German Revolution in 1918. Hitler to moving into the scene in 1923. And WWII in 1939. So my point is, the environment in which the breed was developed was not necessarily to breed a companion dog as a priority. In my humble opinion of course You said yourself a few posts back that the breed was used as War Dogs (which is true). So in 60 years the dog's function goes from War Dogs to family companion? Maybe they were cuddling with the soldiers in the fox hole

Where does the GSD appear on national dog bite statistics? If the breed appeared high on the list could that not be part in the "slow to make friends" description of the breed standard? No fault of the dog, and perhaps the protective properties kicking in? Or perhaps some remnants of functions of the past? And that is by no means to say that all GSDs bite, as that is obviously not the case at all - but a percentage of them will.

And you're 100% right Mona. I don't know all regarding the GSD, and it's not the breed in which I am involved. I'll leave the GSD folks to focus on the challenges within their breed. And I expect any GSD owner to be equally passionate about their breed, and Shiloh owners are with theirs.

And if people don't think these dogs can't do both then you soooo don't know anything about these dogs

Didn't say they can't. Said the breed standard wouldn't indicate it was necessarily the best suitability for the breed. But I like the extra "oooo"s on the "so".

Thanks for the links regarding the therapy dog work. Again, didn't say the GSD can't do them, but rather that the standard would indicate that perhaps it's not the best task for the breed. And I do stand on my position that the Shiloh makes for a better Therapy dog based on the information I had previously provided.



Obviously, this thread is starting to go off topic. The discussion as originally raised was regarding the Shiloh, and in the absence of information I was able to provide some. The debate over which breed makes for the best family companions can best be held under a separate thread. Otherwise, this thread is developing into a debate complete different from the topic as originally posted.

Mona, I'm sure your/your brothers/your friends all have incredible German Shepherds. I've seen some that are beyond striking in looks and temperament. And that is not the debate being held here, nor is it the intent.

And yes, the AKS are a Rare breed with it's own registry until such time as an application for acceptance into the national kennel club is performed and accepted.

I guess the Cane Corso, Coton de Tulear, Black Russian Terrier, were more of these "rare breeds with their own registry" until the CKC recognized them recently eh? Fact is Mona, breeds migrate towards recognition by a national kennel club, and at some point so will the Shiloh (hopefully hehe)

Regarding your statement:

Talk to some ETHICAL GSD breeders..You may learn a thing or two.

Another GSD enthusiast here stated:

Sure the good ones are few and far between, but if you know what to look for and you really take the time, you can find it

Respectfully.

[hazelrunpack]

Originally Posted by Bold Canine

However, if the standard is to be the blue print for the ideal in any breed, then you simply cannot argue with me that by the letter of the standard the GSD is the ultimate family dog. Or perhaps you could - I suppose that it would come down of what you want in a dog.

I just had to ask...since the GSD is not, in your opinion, the ultimate family dog, why try to develop a new line from that particular stock?

Originally Posted by Bold Canine

That's quite alright Hazelrunpack I respect that it's not the breed for you.

If you had a breed, Bold Canine, I might be inclined to agree with you.

[Bold Canine]

just had to ask...since the GSD is not, in your opinion, the ultimate family dog, why try to develop a new line from that particular stock?

Not in it's current state. Perhaps because it has a foundation to be a good family dog, as some traits that would make for the perfect family dog. When bred using certain qualities and traits, versus those which are indicated in the breed standard of the GSD HRP - as previously stated - but we can keep beating this dead horse to consume more bandwidth.

And it was not creating a "new line" as you put it, but rather a new breed - contrary to your persistent claims that it is not lol.

If you had a breed, Bold Canine, I might be inclined to agree with you.

* Yawn *

LOL, okay HRP, I see you just wanna keep on dragging this out. Not much to offer in your little jab there. Perhaps you should go back to weeping at this point versus a need to always take a last little jab lol.

I'm sure that some still feel the earth is flat, I'll just consider you as someone that simply cannot be reached and as I have stated numerous times throughout this discussion - you are entirely welcome to whatever opinion you so wish I certainly didn't come here to post to seek your approval, and frankly, will sleep just fine with or without it. I was contributing to questions posed.

You just keep focused on those setters of yours, and we'll stay focused on our BREED.

And honestly HRP, regardless as to your opinions, our breed moves forward - with or without your blessings

For someone that feels that our breed is persona non grata, you sure have taken a length of time involving yourself in the discussion