Max v Tiekerhook
It is common knowledge that after the trial certification the second hurdle on the way to breed improvement is the breed suitability test or the Körung. Or does anyone dispute that? Because people had concerns over the low working value of the dogs out of show lines the rules of the breed suitability test were tightened some years ago.
The dogs had to be handled off leash, they had to out and guard, etc. That was very promising! But in praxis many Körmeisters interpreted and applied the rules much differently and according to their own standard here and abroad. In other words, they did what they had always done, and that is where things went wrong.
Rules have to be followed. Or what is the point of making them? Don’t you agree?
In these breed surveys dogs have to be examined all over again for the crucial elements of what is necessary for the preservation of the breed. It simply can’t be that at a breed suitability trial, in which I myself participated, two dogs come off the sleeve at least twice during the pressure phase and only came back on because the helper helped them still got the rating TSB “pronounced”
The Körmeister commented that the dogs in question had after all proven themselves under a performance judge. Otherwise how could they have been titled?
The helper who carefully helped these dogs on the bite was praised. Sadly, this young helper showed that he could also do different kind of work. But it is unfortunate that he gave such a performance, or maybe he had to perform in such a manner. If he hadn’t, it is probably likely that he would not be seen again anytime soon!
During this trial two very different reactions could be observed on the sidelines. For me it was crystal clear that in this case the rules were grossly breached. But whatever I may think, the result was a lot of smiling faces on the sidelines. And one got the license to breed, especially since one of the females had already been bred by a top rated V-dog.
The next step on this slippery slope is that a dog shows himself affected during the gun fire sureness test. We accept that because the dog has proven himself under a performance judge?
Wrong!! Wrong, and more wrong! But who can criticize a judge or call him on the rules?
The way I see it, and I have said this often, it is wrong that board members who have held the same office for years remain in that office even longer. Any individual sports friend would not accept that for himself. But in praxis is apparently quite different and it is accepted.
When I think about all of this I come to the conclusion that many of the fact I have mentioned above have led to the decline of the German Shepherd Dog as a working dog. I am now, as I have always been, of the opinion that we have to try to improve the organizations internally, but in a democratic way and on the basis of a true majority.
If that can’t be accomplished members are forced to take their own initiative like in the case of the RSV 2000. Instead of prejudging such initiative it is better to engage in dialogue and to look whether common ground can be found. I hope for the future of the German Shepherd that people will not disengage further because of some of the things I said above, or worse give up on the German Shepherd. Right now we need every single member. But if we acknowledge that we need the individual member they also have to be listened to.
Who will take this challenge?
With greetings in the sport,
Koos Hassing
Riethoven
Photo:
http://www.prlog.org/
