Free Web Hosting Provider - Web Hosting - E-commerce - High Speed Internet - Free Web Page
Search the Web

I had started writing this article late in 1988, motivated by the oft-heard complaint that the GSDCA is "out of step" with the rest of the GSD world.  I drew on information and experiences from my membership in three recognized GSD "parent clubs" -  the GSDCA, the German Verein für Deutsche Schäferhunde (SV), and the United Schutzhund Clubs of America (USA) - and incorporated facts and ideas from other AKC breed "parent clubs."  Before I finished, the facts made it clear that, not only is the GSDCA undeniably out of step with the rest of the GSD world; far more importantly, all evidence proves that it is not even fulfilling its role of "parent."

Distinct, verifiable, and well-documented contradictions exist between the GSDCA's stated founding purposes and values, and its practiced (demonstrated) purposes and values.  Sadly, although many excellent proposals have been made in the past; most have been defeated.  Some measures taken had given the appearance of moving in the right direction; but in the 19 years that I've been in GSDs, little has changed.  Much of the GSD Fancy is still separated into opposing "camps:" those who want to be "in step" with the rest of the GSD world, and those who want to march to "a different drummer."

Occupying the one camp are those members who wish to adhere to the GSDCA's founding principles and stay in step with the rest of the GSD world.  They feel that maintaining the German Shepherd Dog as the "total dog" it is/was intended to be, requires American-born GSD's to meet international standards for the breed.  This necessitates membership in a parent club itself governed by, meeting (or exceeding), and enforcing international standards.

Occupying the other camp are those members who wish to exercise their right to march to "a different drummer."  They feel that as "Show Dogs," American-born GSD's should only have to meet the requirements imposed by the AKC.  This merely requires membership in a club governed by, meeting and enforcing (as a minimum) only AKC standards for registration and exhibition.  Historically, the GSDCA has been firmly entrenched in this camp.

Regardless of the fact that my own philosophy, standards, and goals in GSD's fall within the international framework, even while living in the U.S. I never found it necessary to lodge in one camp or the other.  I achieved what I wanted in dog sport unaffected by the GSDCA's problem of contradiction, and my membership in the SV and USA merely broadened my access to wider knowledge and base of activities.  However, as an American GSDCA member living in Germany (and especially as a GSDCA Ortho/HD committee member), the problem was constantly brought to my doorstep.

On my first few sorties into SV activities in Germany, I found myself (singled out as a GSDCA member) in the extremely insulting and frustrating position of being completely discounted as having even the most basic knowledge about GSD's!  I kid you not!  The word had spread (by SV judges, from their judging of GSDCA specialty shows, as well as by SV members and their exposure to our dog publications, photos and pedigrees), that GSDCA members know nothing about GSDs.... Not only is it implied, but also bluntly stated that, in the United States only USA membership (the WDA has also gained some attention) indicates any semblance of intelligence or knowledge in the realm of GSDs...

I was constantly challenged to explain and defend GSDCA policies and positions (NOT those of the AKC - they are NOT the "Parent club!") which are basically inexplicable and indefensible!  For instance:

1.  How can the GSDCA define the "standard of excellence" for breeding (per its founding purposes) while ignoring or omitting genetic soundness?  With hip, elbow, pastern, reproductive, and thyroid problems (to list but a few) affecting the breed in THREATENING numbers, how can any policy that allows the breeding of such dogs be justified?

2.  How can a policy that allows the breeding of dogs as young as 7 to 11 months old be explained?  They are far too young to evidence total genetic make-up, yet there is a rush to "prove" super-star prospects as soon as possible.

3.   What good is a policy that does NOT make breed warnings public (thereby protecting members from catastrophic genetic results); yet DOES protect the secrecy of those breed warnings?

4.  How can the GDSCA define the "standard of excellence" for awarding prizes of merit while omitting proof of sound temperament, character, or trainability?  A grown dog managing to get through a simple "Temperament Test," can hardly be called evidence of "soundness."

5.   How does one defend a policy that condones awarding the most prestigious breed titles to dogs which are UNtested, UNtried, UNproven for any "breed worthiness" beyond a conformation judge's pronouncement of superior movement, showmanship, and good looks?

6.  What happened to the purpose of PROTECTING the best interest of the breed?  Since when is it in the "interest of the breed" that dogs with hip and elbow dysplasia (e.g.) be used for breeding?  It may be in the interest of the breeder, his show-win record, or his bank account; but it's certainly not in the BREED's interest!

7.  How are "working qualities" encouraged, promoted, tested, and demonstrated?  Certainly not by creating (as eyewash) separate, mostly unrecognized and ineffectively supported search and rescue, herding, and working dog offshoots? "Separate and divide" is a clever way to keep those "Total Dog" nuts from interfering in the activities of "real" show people.  Another clever way is to disenfranchise that large portion of the general membership who do not, or cannot, attend Annual General Membership meetings.  Such a proposal was actually made at the '88 meeting.

8.  How can a rebuttal be successful against the charge that under past and present policies and government, the GSDCA is merely a "specialty" Kennel Club; not a "parent" club?  Or that present policies, practices, and proposals usually favor that small segment of membership prominent in conformation show-winning?  Even when such proposals are made, such as those to require drug testing, OFA certification, and a working/ training degree - they will only apply to those few dogs fortunate enough to come under consideration for the title "National SELECT!"  While ANY move in the right direction is to be encouraged, to truly serve the best interests of the breed as a whole, the scope of such proposals needs to be broadened and applied to ALL breedable GSD's owned by GSDCA members.  Under scrutiny, there are few grounds for successful rebuttal.  The evidence proves the charge!

Have you read the purposes for which the Parent Club was formed in 1916?  They were essentially unchanged from those established internationally.  Whether in 1916 or 1998, a body established to hold the position and role of a breed "PARENT Club" is expected to, agrees to, and MUST fulfill that role.  As a "Guardian of the Breed," the GSDCA must set physical and mental standards for the GSD (there are a few; but even they are poorly enforced).

As a good "parent" to the general membership, there is an obligation to be tough and lay down laws.  The "Tough Love" of parenting demands that practical and ethical standards for breeders/owners/ exhibitors be prescribed and enforced, with prohibited acts and behavior detrimental to those standards disciplined strongly, immediately, and effectively.  Equally as important in fulfilling the role of good parent, there must be support, nurture, guidance, advice, and education of the "children" members in all aspects of the GSD breed and dog sport.

Since "founding purposes" are held to be the intentions and reasons for a parent club's existence, the club's By-Laws, policies, and practices should reflect those objectives.  The GSDCA has a large membership. This voting membership elects a Board of Directors.  These elected officials do not, and cannot do whatever it is they feel like doing UNLESS THE VOTING MEMBERS ALLOW THEM TO. Voters are supposed to direct THE BOARD'S actions; NOT the other way around!

The bottom line is that the GSDCA is not functioning as a parent because the majority of The enormous voting membership (all of us "little" guys, as we were referred to at the '88 General Membership meeting) is either uninformed, disinterested, or too lazy to protect the Breed's interest by taking an active voting position to determine policy and direct actions.  Too many sit around, crying and complaining because "the Board," or "the club" does such-and-such.... That excuse won't wash, because YOU are the "club," and YOU elect the Board.  If ANY of you sit idly by and let a small number of other active, participating, VOTING, and therefore DIRECTING members determine club policies, you have nobody to blame but yourselves!

There has been nothing to keep the GSDCA from assuming its proper national and international role of parent in all American GSD breed matters!  The GSDCA's membership in the Weltunion der Vereine für Deutsche Schäferhunde (WUSV), in fact, requires it to fill such role.  The fact that it does not is the reason the USA had taken and is holding American preeminence in the WUSV.  Unless the GSDCA takes on its proper parental role, those wanting to operate under a parent club actually governing and performing as such, are going to be forced to join the USA.  If the GSDCA starts fulfilling its parental role, the Fancy will quickly capitalize on the fact that they will have "the best of both worlds" (AKC and international) available to them.

As a parent, The GSDCA must insure that American GSD's are in step with the rest of the world and remain markedly similar to the world GSD.  Writing of this need for similarity, noted author and geneticist Malcolm B. Willis emphatically warned, "...there can be no doubt that the breed is and must remain a German breed and of a type that is acceptable world wide..."  (Malcolm B. Willis, The German Shepherd Dog: Its History, Development and Genetics, p. 44-45)

However, this is America.  Those who have no interest in international standards, or who feel that their show-winning successes, breeding programs, sales, or reputations would be endangered if the GSDCA actually performed its role of Parent, are really in no way threatened.  They do not NEED affiliation with, or membership in the GSDCA to be successful in America.  With only AKC registration they would still be able to exhibit at AKC sanctioned/licensed matches/shows/ trials, still earn championship points, and still have titles of record.  They would also still be able to enjoy those GSDCA-sponsored/authorized events for which their dogs might qualify.  They would still be able to march to several "different drummers!"

Those who want a parent club actually performing the role of parent, and who want to be aligned with the rest of the GSD world, will not suffer by being "in step."  Dogs having Schutzhund or other international working/protection degrees will not be (and are not presently) refused entry at AKC shows, nor denied AKC championship titles, any more than our international counterparts are knocked out of competition for FCI/ CACIB titles!  Instead, we would benefit on all fronts by having a more secure base of genetically sound physical and mental attributes from which (and to which) we can breed; broader opportunities for international competition; real acceptance into the world community of GSDs; and have doors opened that are otherwise closed.  How can this NOT be a good thing?

Dogs having international-type GSDCA pedigrees/registration will then certainly be more highly sought after for breeding purposes due to the survey requirements and breed-warnings barring the mating of fault-to-fault.  There is no question but that these dogs, and dogs from such breedings will have a far greater intrinsic worth to the buying public (think about the prices German dogs command) than what presently exists.  This is proven continuously by the fact that world buyers do NOT come to America looking for dogs, and even many of our service organizations have to rely on foreign purchases....A sad comment on the state of the GSD in America!

Based on just the few points I have mentioned, it seems fairly easy to conclude that the Breed (and owners/buyers/breeders) could not help but benefit from trying once again to have our GSDCA actually function as a parent and get in step with the rest of the GSD world.  YOU, as a voting member, could not help but benefit from making your voice heard.  It's pretty simple, really.

1.  Change or modify the present GSD Standard into FCI/WUSV compliance.
2.  Changing the By-Laws to allow/facilitate input from the general membership.
3.  Implement policy and procedure necessary to bring more (if not all) breed-issue decisions to a vote of the general membership. For example:
    a.  Require publication of all proposals and issues in the GSDCA REVIEW.
    b.  Require a "mail" vote on all issues affecting the breed nationwide.
4. For all dogs over Survey age (2 yrs), restrict paid advertising in the REVIEW to
    those which have been successfully surveyed.
5. BEFORE the dog can be bred and progeny registered, require that the dog:
    a. Is identified by ear tattoo, nose-print, or micro-chip implant.
    b.Is 2 years of age; both males and females (due to OFA requirement).
   c. Has an advanced training degree obtained under the GSDCA-WDA/SV system of performance
    training and testing.
    d. Has a minimum evaluation of show-worthiness in the conformation ring, to include size, dentition,
    and secondary sex-characteristics.
    e. Has radiographically certified hips and elbows (OFA).
        (1 ) all information and results to be kept and compiled by the
             Ortho/HD committee (which should be under "Survey" control).
        (2) all information to be published in GSDCA REVIEW.
    f. Has been DNA certified.