Dismiss Notice
Hello Guest!
We are glad you found us, if you find anything useful here please consider registering to see more content and get involved with our great community members, it takes less than a minute!

[fci] Dobermann Breed Standard Changes On 1st Of January 2015

Discussion in 'Doberman Talk and Discussions' started by iceman, Sep 6, 2013.

  1. Matt Vandart

    Matt Vandart Hot Topics Subscriber

    Well first of all Mr doberman didn't write 'The standard' or any other standard
    Secondly: docking and cropping is not as you well know a genetic trait but was done for functional reasons, so that they could not be got hold of or they didn't get caught up in carts (for cart pulling dogs) it was not and still isn't exclusive to dobermans.
    Thirdly: The general purpose of the dog is very similar to GSD/Mal/Mastiff etc, dogs which LOOK nothing like the doberman or each other in the case of the Mastiff v's herders (although many european dobermans are starting to get to mastiff sizes) yet all FUNCTION perfectly well in this purpose, ergo the defining factor is looks, the standard is all about look.
    There are beucerons, pitbulls, american bulldogs, kelpies, Malinois, Schnauzers, Russian terriers, English bull terriers even poodles that perform the original function of the doberman, they look nothing like dobermans............see a pattern emerging?

    I know that people are gonna come up with the 'Form follows function' clap trap bandied about by people that have no idea what they are talking about, but this is not always the case, certainly not down to minor points like 'wet necks' and uneven markings etc or in fact a cropped or docked tail.

    I would bring to your attention this very good article on the very subject of man made standards being off the mark for function:
    The functional Saluki

    and also (admittedly about GSD but still relevant):

    Sirius Dog

    Extract:
    "Sketches and radiograph pictures in my book on the breed represent the typical German Shepherd with a good shoulder. Dogs with better reach and a floating gait have close to the same angles and layback. I suspect much more credit for such gait lies in the muscles and ligaments than has been imagined, measured, or hinted at in the past. And of course, desire and drive make a big difference, too. In actuality, the ideal shoulder with an angle approaching that much-vaunted “90-degree” number (from point of elbow to point of shoulder to highest point on scapula) has about a 30 to 35-degree shoulder blade layback, not 45 degrees. Factors such as the relative lengths of scapula and humerus, the angle at which the humerus inclines, plus the dog’s attitude, play parts in both the standing appearance and in the reach in motion. While they didn’t have all the answers, Humphrey and Warner had most of them, and they determined that a scapula-humerus angle of 102° was ideal for the working German Shepherd Dog."

    If these standards are flawed in terms of real life function...............


    and just to hammer the point home, the modern doberman looks and is built NOTHING like the early dobermans, or most likely the dogs Mr Doberman bred, you only have to look at the size difference to see that the modern dog is not what Mr doberman had in mind and as for temperament.......

    The standard is and always has been about the 'look' of the dog, follows trends and has been changed virtually arbitrarily over the years to suit the politics involved in the breed of the time. I have gone over the finer points of this before, search it if you like.
    The doberman standard is flawed, subjective and open to interpretation, it is and will be, like all the other standards, the hammer that hits the nails into the coffin of the breed. Once the stud books closed the genetic material available was set and there cannot be any more, the breed is unfortunately doomed unless the standard is relaxed and the stud books reopened for new genetic material to be introduced.
    This and the health problems that come with it come from the obsession of the 'look' of the breed. Many other breeds have the required physical attributes of the doberman standard but introducing the genetics through a complete outcross would almost certainly alter the look of the breed and so the idea is poo pooed and mostly ignored.

    To see what I mean about 'a natural standard developed' look at greyhounds and other sight hounds, breeds that have not changed much, if at all in milenia, that's a thousand years plus. They have not changed because they are true examples of 'form following function' the dogs that didn't catch the bunnies didn't last long.

    Unfortunately many dobermans that can't even pass WAE are bred, Dobermans that should have been laughed at in the ZTP pass with excellent ratings!!??! Dobermans the size of a small hippo are winning rossettes........all passing on their genetics.
    The doberman standard in it's current form is a good read and that is about it as far as function goes.
    Can a doberman with a few less teeth do the job? YES
    Can a doberman with very light tan markings do the job? YES
    Can a doberman with a tail and natural ears do the job? YES
    Can a doberman which is brindle do the Job? YES

    Can a Doberman with the incorrect temperament do the job? NO yet the temperament part of the standard is a passing courtesy.
    Anyway enough of this guff, dobermans are better off with their tails and their ears.
     
  2. Ingrid H

    Ingrid H Hot Topics Subscriber $ Forum Donor $

    I'm blown away by this idea and can't agree with it for a second. "Form follows function' is what I was taught in college when I was studying architecture. Same with dogs. Form follows function in all pure bred dogs.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  3. Matt Vandart

    Matt Vandart Hot Topics Subscriber

    Correct, but the form doesn't follow the function particularly, it is becoming the other way round, with people looking for reasons the 'form' in the standard is functional, also we are not talking about buildings.

    All pure bred dogs eh, Mastiffs, bulldogs, dachshunds, basset hounds, english bullterriers, to name a but a few, many pure bred dogs cannot 'function' for their purpose anymore that is if they ever did.
    Taking the Bulldog as an example (English) it looks and is nothing like the dogs that used to fight bulls. It wouldn't last a minute I would guess, last I heard the modern breed wasn't even descended from real bull baiting dogs. but rather another victorian 'invention'

    IF the standard is written to preserve the dog in its capability of its job then I am sorry but most are failing miserably.
    It is an undisputed fact by anyone that has bothered researching it, the Victorian high society INVENTED the idea of a standard for each breed and it's function, many of which were written by people that knew BOG ALL about what the dogs function actually was let alone actually stuck a dachshund down a hole after a badger. The gun dogs were probably among the only exceptions.
     
  4. Gelcoater

    Gelcoater Expert ThreadCrapper $ Premium Subscriber $ Hot Topics Subscriber

    I have to disagree about it being an "American aesthetic".
    The breed came from Germany,cropped and docked.I wouldn't argue with you that it seems to be much more important to Americans theses days than many of the Euro countries.
    I think it stems from our(US) desire to keep our rights,such as having a decision to c/d.We can see the writing on the wall so to speak,we see the rights being stripped in the UK and Euro countries.
    I don't think anyone here finds you dumb,but with a topic like this emotions are high.Also,stop a second and consider that some of these folks on here have been involved with this breed,and vested much time,perhaps more time than the 25 years you have been alive.
    When I talk with someone with that much more life experience than myself,even when I don't entirely agree with their view I have to respect the fact they have seen and done things I have obviously less experience at.
    I hope you don't feel I'm attacking you here,not my intent.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  5. Gelcoater

    Gelcoater Expert ThreadCrapper $ Premium Subscriber $ Hot Topics Subscriber

    :pt:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. FredC

    FredC Guest

    Ice? I was wondering how this conversation is taking place on the other side of the big pond? I wonder if some euro breeders will come to appreciate the DPCA/AKC standard just that much more.. I know previously the General consensus was that the American Standard sucked by European standards. I have to wonder how that's changed now with the new cropping and docking law going into effect in 2015.. Id bet in some respects they are more envious today then they have been in the past????
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 20, 2013
    • Like Like x 3
  7. FredC

    FredC Guest

    Dont forget a large portion of Canada Banned the practice just a few short months ago to.. Except im not really convinced we will follow suit at least not any time soon.. I dont believe for a second the federal government is going to pick up this cause anytime soon and im guessing that if the laws do change they will be state by state still allowing us to travel with our pups to get cropped. And if like in the case of the DV and FCI it comes down to the DPCA and AKC changing the standard i dont believe that is really even on the radar just yet.. Id also be willing to bet that this will only cause the DPCA to stand more resolute then ever on the subject as the USA is the last standout.. Mark my words now if the DPCA ever pulls some crap like this i will use all of my resources to create a new Standard and breed club to protect that standard.. I have little doubt that i could muster up all the support we needed to make that a reality.. I dont know what makes this so different on the other side of the pond short of the fact that the ban is actually written in to law in a majority of the FCI's turf...
     
    • Like Like x 2
  8. Betty

    Betty Notable member

    ok I probably have no right making to much of a comment, because I am NOT in any way shape or form a breeder. However, I am sitting here with a 7 month old puppy who's losing his eyesight! I have a dr. appointment on the 30th to see if there is anything I can do to prevent the total lose on site.

    So, I have had "pure breeds" my whole life. My first GSD died at 9 from a tumor on his heart. My 2nd GSD had mega esophagus and muscle and nerve degeneration. She lived to 12 however, not without a ton of work and love from me. Both dogs bought from 'well known' breeders.

    Jade and Rocco are both rescues. I've been very lucky with Jade so far thank God, however she did have some personality things that had to be worked on and I still am, because of whatever happened to her before I got her.

    Now, with Rocco. Yes, I adopted/rescued him from a not to well known and now out of business rescue group. OK, my bad maybe, not sure... because what would have happened to him if he didn't end up with me.

    My point to this posting is. I want my dog to have sight and I want breeders to breed healthy dogs and some how stop people that do this backyard breeding crap who have NO clue and the puppies either die or have really bad health issues.

    I personally don't think allowing or not allowing cropping is going to change the love for the Doberman anyone that has owned one will love them no matter what.

    Let's breed healthy dogs!!!!! that live happy long lives!
     
    • Like Like x 3
  9. iceman

    iceman Active Member

    Well...since last night the cat is out of the bag..It was rumoured for the past week but since last night it was announced that the European breeders opposing the standard change decided to unite and fight against this decision..
    Idea is to unite & form an International Breeders Club to raise our voice.

    Attention World Dobermann Breeders | Doberman Chat Community
     
    • Like Like x 8
  10. Matt Vandart

    Matt Vandart Hot Topics Subscriber

    Betty, there is a good chance the root cause of your dogs health problems tie back to the obsession with adhering to a 'standard'.
     
  11. MyBuddy

    MyBuddy Moderator Hot Topics Subscriber

    :scratch: Really? I don't believe that for a second.

    And 'obsession to adhering to a standard'? Wow. :scratch:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Dobs4ever

    Dobs4ever Hot Topics Subscriber

    So now you are flip flopping and it did have a function - Guess what - if you study - the Doberman has a thin tail without the hair and padding of the breeds you mentioned so are far more prone to injury - it's called function and now you are correct we darn well prefer the docked tail. I am not a fan of tails period as I hate being whipped with it and I hate everything being knocked over by it. So function is function and the docked tail functions better allt he way around.

    so the way to solve the problem is throw out the standard and WALA a miracle suddenly without any guidelines people will breed correctly - that is really reaching out into cyberspace. For some reason you are obviously very angry to the point of unreasonable thought process. The standard is written to not only describe the TEMPERAMENT need to perform its original purpose but also to describe the correct look - right down to the last eys, color, markings, chect and toenail. It takes it all to make the BEST of any breed. I know lots of Dobermans that can show and work - really sorry you don't as they are BEAUTIFUL to behold especially as you watch those ears work like radar as they are tracking, doing obedience or doing protection.

    Betty had you bought from good breeders you would have had better outcomes. You can't compare rescues to dogs bred by knowledgable caring breeders. It is not reasonable to blame good breeding practices on people who obviously did not care about improving the breed. We try to follow the standard, we health test, we train, show and trial our dogs. Most rescues unfortunatley came from less than caring breeders.
     
  13. Matt Vandart

    Matt Vandart Hot Topics Subscriber

    Mr Buddy- yes obsession with the standard to the point of blindness to ruining the health of the breed, I can see no other reason to ruin the health unless it was deliberate.

    I never once said the cropping and docking had no function I said Dobermans with tails perform perfectly well (if not better due to the slight increase in agility).

    The way to solve the problem is to slacken the standard or have it rewritten by people that know what they are talking about if you have to have one. Fact of the matter is it's ass backwards, the standard has been written for a function, it should have developed over time naturally through selecting the dogs that were good at the job, then the standard written using those dogs as the baseline.

    Who said throw out the standard? You? Not me, I didn't say that, you assume to much.
    But why not?
    Malinois breeders generally pay only lip service to the standard and their dogs are healthy and outperforming the doberman by miles. They have a generic dog that is a 'malinois' but the vast majority has the correct temperament and physical aptitude to do the work well.
     
  14. Dobs4ever

    Dobs4ever Hot Topics Subscriber

    HOLY MOLY - no wonder we are in trouble - the standard did not ruin the health of any dog. This is pure AR propaganda - no one can spout any statistics on how long mutts live because there is no way to track it. But if you knew one thing about genetics you would know that when the breed was established and the breeds or specific dogs that Herr Dobermann used to create the doberman brought a genetic LOAD. That load became imbeded in the gene pool and by the very nature of purebred dogs it has carried down through today. The only REAL solution is to destroy the breed. Is that what you advocate??? I read one thing then another as you try to prove your points.


    What do you mean "slacken" the standard??? If people can't get it right with a solid blueprint then how do you think today they could get it right without one???

    "Who said throw out the standard? You? Not me, I didn't say that, you assume to much."
    Matt V

    That is exactly what slackening the standard is - throwing it out. You need to read what you write.

    "IF YOU HAVE TO HAVE ONE????" If there is no standard to follow what so many seem to miss is you would get mutts. The standard perserves certain aspects of each breed - without one from what I read here we would certainly have a hodge podge of MUTTS. The standard prevents that with good breeders. This is so far off base as to be unbelievable. You can never be too obcessed with the standard and believe you me we are all praying that science will catch up soon and give us answers to health issues without destroying the gene poo. Genetics is not an easy thing to pin down and I certainly have never seen anything get better by 'slackening" the requirements in fact just the opposite has been proven over and over to be true.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. Matt Vandart

    Matt Vandart Hot Topics Subscriber

    Hmm...

    1. Every breed starts out with a certain number of dogs. 2. Once the stud books are closed, no more genetic material can come in. 3. The dogs become more and more inbred over time, popular sires and linebreeding exacerbate this. 4. Inbreeding leads to the rise of recessive genes including those which cause health problems. 5. You can't get rid of one gene, you have to remove an entire dog and all of its genes, thereby narrowing the gene pool. 6. Everyone carries lethal genes, but in their recessive, heterozygous forms they are harmless. 7. If there are no alternative genes to select for, due to breeding in a certain direction, it means that the problem will be permanent. For example, the very limited number of vWD clears in existence in the US... if people don't select for clears and avoid breeding affected x affected and affected x carrier, there will soon be no alternative, ie. no clears. There can be no "cures" as long as the genepool keeps getting narrower.
     
  16. Gelcoater

    Gelcoater Expert ThreadCrapper $ Premium Subscriber $ Hot Topics Subscriber

    Just an FYI,Matt.
    Buddy is the name of HER dog;)
     
    • Like Like x 4
  17. Dobs4ever

    Dobs4ever Hot Topics Subscriber

    Who says there is not a lot of clear dogs in the US??? Do you have anything to back that up??? Clears are on the rise - I know I have a kennel full of them and it was not that hard to get there. While you might not be aware - hetrozygous is not harmless by your own definition as it keeps the gene going. BUT in a breeding program - you know the big picture not anyone's little personal desires and quirks it has been proven very dangerous and detrimental to radically eliminate any one gene. It has be be done over time and through careful selection or you run the risk of running into another problem that crops up and then you have no where to go to eliminate it.

    BUT since you feel so many other breeds are so superior to the Doberman then I am curious as to why you chose dobermans??? I know for me I want the king, cadillac ultimate dog and for me that is ONLY THE DOBERMAN. If I felt another breed was so suprior I would change rather than try to change the breed. I would go get one of those $450.00 great Mal that are standing around everywhere.

    Persoanlly I have seen some very poorly bred mals which is exactly why they have declined in popularity. I have seen them get so insane in training that they turn on their owner and they deliver some pretty serious nasty bites- but maybe that one was only $350.00 so not as good.
     
  18. Matt Vandart

    Matt Vandart Hot Topics Subscriber

    lol, I liked the last line, genuinely I did, it made me chuckle.

    I have a Mal by the way as well as my Dobes, I made the decision to leave the breed a while back, mostly because I see it going nowhere but downhill on the whole, which is very sad.
    Cadilacs are shite by the way I would much prefer a Mitsubishi any day, or maybe a range rover, nah VW beetles are my favorite.

    That's great you want only a Doberman, I love dobermans, problem is everyone is sticking their heads in the sand.

    In 2005, 75% of dobermans carrier or affected.....
    VetGen: Veterinary Genetic Services - Canine - List of Services - Von Willebrand's Disease (vWD) - vWD Type I

     
  19. Matt Vandart

    Matt Vandart Hot Topics Subscriber

    Also, sorry MyBuddy, my eyes aint what they used to be I thought it said 'MrBuddy' I apologise.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. Dobs4ever

    Dobs4ever Hot Topics Subscriber

    That is probably a very good thing - and if I remember correctly you posted that you are fairly new to the breed, have not had dobes very long and you did not buy from the best breeder so I am beginning to see a pattern.- People who have not been in the breed very long anyway - don't go to the best or most knowledgeable breeder then when they dont' get what they want salm the breed, thieir heath and their failure to meet the standard which you feel is the whole problem. If I remember I am betting your dobes are under 3 years of age and now you have a mal. It amazes me that breeders will sell puppies on top of puppies to someone with little experience.
     
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page