[juliemule]

Wow.what's everyone's opinions? I think this is a good start.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...f824BM&usg=AFQjCNFIDwP3bZy41E2DFsUYa5HHgDZywA

 

[Pai]

Do you have a link? I only see the 1998 standard on the website.

 

[juliemule]

That link should go to the may 2012 revision.

 

[Miss Bugs]

me likey..I like how they didnt just remove language from the standard, but actually made those exderations extreme faults, much better methode.

 

[HollowHeaven]

"The tendencies toward exaggeration and steep angles are unacceptable. German Shepherd Dogs with unstable temperaments, sharply angulated croups, overly long front and rear pasterns, and hocks that are weak and wobbly are poor representations of this working breed. UKC is unwilling to condone the validity of using such dogs in a breeding program, and cautions judges about awarding wins to these representatives."

THIS
I sincerely hope we start to see a drastic improvement among this breed relatively soon. Hopefully other registries will follow.

 

[Avie]

It sure sounds good, but I wonder how this will work out during actual shows. I mean, it's not just about changing the standard, it's also about changing people's mindsets. As long as the latter doesn't happen, extreme dogs will still be shown and awarded wins.

Also (but I don't know much about all different kinds of registries/clubs) if the UKC doesn't condone these dogs, people could still go to AKC or CKC, right? Or am I totally wrong here?

 

[juliemule]

Yes, Akc is more popular here anyway. BUT, maybe this is a start that other clubs will hopefully follow. At least they are recognizing there is a problem and encouraging breeders to improve.

 

[cshellenberger]

I just hope they still work by the GSDCA STANDARD, which (as illustrated) gives the ideal working conformation.

http://www.gsdca.org/Noframes/standard/IllStan1.htm

 

[Pai]

Apparently it's not just the GSD, the UKC is planning on revising ALL of their breed standards. They just sent out this press release:

KALAMAZOO, MICHIGAN. March 28, 2012 – The United Kennel Club, Inc., is first and foremost a worldwide registry of purebred dogs, but we feel our moral duty to the canine world goes beyond maintaining data. We are alarmed by the paths of exaggeration that many breeds have taken, all of which directly affect the health, function and performance of those breeds. It is an elemental fact that these breed changes have developed unchecked as a result of fads and fancies, as well as a lack of accountability on the part of breeders, owners and judges.

UKC feels something must be done to address this problem, and we are willing to do our part, hoping the canine world will follow suit. Toward that end, we have decided to revise all of our breed standards to reflect that goal. Breed standards are viewed as a blueprint to which dogs are to be bred. UKC believes that breed standards are more than that, and we will be including directives to breeders, judges and owners.

All of our breed standards will now include the following introductory statement: “The goals and purposes of this breed standard include: to furnish guidelines for breeders who wish to maintain the quality of their breed and to improve it; to advance this breed to a state of similarity throughout the world; and to act as a guide for judges. Breeders and judges have the responsibility to avoid any conditions or exaggerations that are detrimental to the health, welfare and soundness of this breed, and must take the responsibility to see that these are not perpetuated. Any departure from the following should be considered a fault, and the seriousness with which the fault should be regarded should be in exact proportion to its degree and its effect upon the health and welfare of the dog and on the dog’s ability to perform its traditional work.”

In addition, each breed standard will be updated to include problems specific to that breed in order to clarify the direction to be taken when they are encountered.

All of these breed standard revisions reflect the foundation of the “UKC Total Dog” philosophy. The exponential growth in “UKC Total Dog” events is living proof that dogs can have the health, temperament and conformation to be excellent representatives of their breed. We understand that breed standards are left to subjective interpretation and are not a panacea on their own; however, combined with UKC Total Dog events and our UKC Judges Education program, they are a natural extension and essential continuation of our commitment to the future of purebred dogs.

 

[juliemule]

Awesome!!!!

 

[HollowHeaven]

It sure sounds good, but I wonder how this will work out during actual shows. I mean, it's not just about changing the standard, it's also about changing people's mindsets. As long as the latter doesn't happen, extreme dogs will still be shown and awarded wins.

Also (but I don't know much about all different kinds of registries/clubs) if the UKC doesn't condone these dogs, people could still go to AKC or CKC, right? Or am I totally wrong here?

I feel like it will take a long time before judges -mainly- begin to change their minds as to what they think breeds should be (not just the GSD now, since Pai has brought us up to date) but the standard is there and I don't think they really have much of a choice. Sure, they might die inside every time they have to select a dog that isn't broken, but surely we'll start to see a change. And when sounder dogs start to win, breeders will have to follow suit to achieve the goal of BIS, right? Maybe it'll be easier for younger breeders and judges to accept the positive changes to come.

As for other registries, I feel like you're totally right there. But HOPEFULLY hopefullyyyy, other registries will follow in time. After all, it's easy to show in the place of the registry, right?

 

[Keechak]

unlike the UKC, the AKC has no control over the breed standards of it's breeds, those standards are owned and controlled by the breed clubs.

 

[Darkmoon]

Not fond of the way the UKC works honestly. They like to change the game only to their views and not to us dog owners. Time and time again they change things with out little outside input and screw things up then turn it on us owners. If the UKC wasn't so close to me I'd have quit it completely after the whole APBT changes and the Weight Pull programs demise. The UKC is a stingy organization. Why I like to see changes like this, I wonder what alternative motives the UKC has for this change.

 

[Pai]

I wonder what alternative motives the UKC has for this change.

Oh, I don't doubt they're taking advantage of the AKC's public condemnation of health standards in dog shows. They know how badly that statement makes the AKC look to many people (it was a stupid PR move on their part, frankly), and I'm sure the UKC made this decision in an attempt to get more people to move over to them rather than the AKC.

 

[juliemule]

Whatever their motive is, if it improves breed health, I'm for it.

 

[MrsBoats]

Whatever their motive is, if it improves breed health, I'm for it.

I have to agree...if their motives are to improve breed health, structure, functionality, then they can knock themselves out!

 

[jenz]

I wish there were more UKC events in the Mid-Atlantic and New England states--I would totally support them over the AKC!

Jen

 

[Darkmoon]

Whatever their motive is, if it improves breed health, I'm for it.

I wish it was that simple. I've been with the UKC for too long to know better.