MODERN GERMAN SHEPHERD DOG

THE STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF THE GERMAN SHEPHERD DOG:
REAL DOGS AND BLOODLINES

The strengths and weaknesses of the German Shepherd Dog are not a new subject. History allows for endless discussion, and since every generation and every era brings its own unique questions, it is necessary for us to approach this topic with new questions and fresh perspectives.

BLOODLINES: What do we mean by this?
A bloodline is formed when a certain number of related dogs are bred—through inbreeding or linebreeding—based on a dominant breeding animal, with the goal of consistently passing on specific traits. The Germans use the term “Hochzucht” to describe this concept. In breeding, it refers to bloodlines that, within a defined period of time, represent the best examples of the breed—in other words, the lineage of the top dogs.

These dogs emerge in the German Shepherd Dog world primarily through events such as Landsgruppen and Sieger Shows held in other countries, as well as through the most important and largest show in the breed’s homeland of Germany, the Hauptzuchtschau. Dogs that are able to compete in these events, along with their descendants, become part of the Hochzucht system.

This system has dominated the German Shepherd Dog world for decades and continues to have a strong global influence. Within this system, stud males have a significant impact on the population as a whole. Females, on the other hand, represent the breeder’s true individual achievements.

The modern German Shepherd Dog is, in fact, a result of this Hochzucht system. As noted in several respected books written in the United Kingdom by authors such as Malcolm Willis and Brian Wootton, the history of the breed shows that each era has had to confront its own specific challenges.

Many young people tend to view the past through a romantic lens. The reality, however, is that during the formative years of the breed, this new dog appeared almost like an unattractive mixed-breed when placed alongside the elegant show dogs of the time.

By the early 20th century, rapid progress was made through the use of inbreeding and linebreeding. Inbreeding refers to the mating of dogs that are more closely related than the average of the population. Close inbreeding includes matings between parents and offspring, or between (half) siblings. Linebreeding, on the other hand, refers to breeding practices that involve dogs from the 3rd, 4th, or 5th generations.

During the 1920s, the breed suffered from serious problems in temperament, and the Nazis exploited these issues in ways that need not be discussed here. It took a very long time to erase the negative image that resulted from this period.

When we consider the development of the breed, we can clearly observe changes in overall type and structure. Looking at the breed standards of other dog breeds, in which the ideal representative had already been firmly established, we see significant differences when compared to the German Shepherd Dog. Max von Stephanitz, the architect of the breed, defined the standard that the dog was meant to achieve in the future. At the time of his death, his work was not yet complete, and his final wish was the preservation of the German Shepherd Dog as the ideal working companion of mankind—defined by its appearance and character, both rooted in excellent mental qualities.

In the past, discussions about bloodlines were essentially debates about what constituted the correct type. Today, however, there is a broad consensus regarding the standard type of the breed.

Key Questions We Need to Address Today:

What is your assessment of today’s standard type?
What is the current state of the breed’s durability, health, performance, and public image?
Where does the German Shepherd Dog stand today as a suitable working dog?
Is there a balance between appearance and character?

Alman Çoban Köpeği Hakkında Herşey, Alman Çoban Köpeği

STANDARD TYPE

The development of the standard type can be clearly observed by looking at dogs such as Klodo von Boxberg, Sieger of 1925. At the time, he was both a surprising Sieger and a turning point in relation to the problems present within the breed. During an era when large, square, long-legged dogs were common and overall character quality was beginning to deteriorate, this dog played a leading role in establishing medium-sized dogs as the accepted standard type.

When von Stephanitz awarded the German title to this Czech Sieger—known for his excellent character but also for producing a high number of long-coated offspring—the German Shepherd community was taken quite by surprise.

The 1929 Sieger, Utz vom Haus Schütting, represents another major turning point. His bloodline continues to dominate Hochzucht even today. Since Utz, black and tan (Schwarz-gelb) has become fashionable, while sable has fallen out of favor. The sable color originates from bloodlines in which Utz was not involved. The Utz line has been criticized for weaknesses in character and dental issues.

VA 1950/51 Rolf vom Osnabrücker Land and Sieger 1955 Alf vom Nordfelsen are examples of successful complementary breedings. VA 1962/63 Jalk vom Fohlenbrunnen, followed by the Siegers and VA dogs of the 1970s, culminated in the so-called “Big Three”: Quanto von Wienerau, Canto von Wienerau, and Mutz von der Pelztierfarm.

Mutz von der Pelztierfarm formed an excellent combination with Quanto von Wienerau. Mutz contributed a strong working-dog character and a distinctly masculine structure. His influence as a direct male breeding line, however, was gradually fading—until Remo vom Fichtenschlag.

The Female That Shaped the Future: Palme vom Wildsteiger Land

The 1980s marked the years in which the Wildsteiger Land Kennel rose to prominence, largely due to the emergence of the female Palme vom Wildsteiger Land. This bitch, on her own, exerted a significant influence on the breed. Her sons, Uran vom Wildsteiger Land and Quando von Arminius, each became Sieger twice in consecutive years.

With Sieger Quando, the “Q” litter of Arminius produced the legendary Odin von der Tannenmeise. Through the “Q” litter of Arminius / Uran vom Wildsteiger Land (Palme), combined with Odin von der Tannenmeise (Quando A) and Cello von der Römerau (Quana A), inbreeding became increasingly narrow at this point.

This PALME / URAN / QUANDO / ODIN / CELLO family line carried us into the 1990s, and from there, directly into the present day.

When we examine the dogs mentioned above, we can clearly see how far they are removed from the exaggerations (Übertypisierung) associated with the American-standard Alsatian type. We do not want merely a cosmetic dog. The German Shepherd Dog must not be defined simply as beautiful, more beautiful, or most beautiful.

A Zuchtschau is not a beauty contest. The Martin brothers—Walter (Wienerau) and Hermann (Arminius)—brought cohesion to the breed through this Hochzucht approach. As breeders, the question we must ask ourselves today is whether we are still producing the dog envisioned by Max von Stephanitz.

Perhaps we should keep the following warning in mind: wanting more can mean becoming worse.

Overall, we have indeed improved the general type of the German Shepherd Dog. One could argue that in the 1980s, through Quando Arminius and via Odin von der Tannenmeise, together with the Quanto von Wienerau line and Uran vom Wildsteiger Land, we reached the peak of breed development.

However, every advantage brings its own disadvantages. While we achieved genetic uniformity, we also lost genetic diversity. Similarity in type—and in pigmentation—can ultimately lead to weaker pigmentation. Hochzucht breeding increasingly became a matter of copying the work of successful breeders and repeating the same formulas. Demand focused on a single dominant type, largely defined by the world-renowned kennel von der Wienerau. Deviating from this type meant deviating from Hochzucht itself.

In the end, Hochzucht turned into a one-directional path that narrowed the gene pool.

If we are to be critical, we must measure our criticism against the objectives of the breed standard:

Forequarter angulation, particularly the relationship between the scapula and upper arm
Clear visual sexual dimorphism between males and females
Rich pigmentation
An athletic dog with a correct height-to-weight ratio
Silhouette—especially a firm topline and correct underline
Proper length-to-height proportions
A balanced dog with moderate rear angulation, rear assembly in harmony with the midsection and forequarter angulation, and strong second thighs
Correct forechest and chest development
Correct joints, elbows, hocks, and proper movement

For a true working dog, we must add to these: harmonious movement, endurance, sufficient speed, the ability to change pace, ease of turning, and even the ability to sit quickly. Of course, a champion should stand out in appearance and charisma—but must not be oversized, heavy, cumbersome, or lacking adequate muscle. A correct representative of the breed should behave like a confident, reliable gentleman.

Where there is sunlight, there is also shadow. Since the 1990s, the German Shepherd Dog has increasingly been pushed beyond the upper limits of height and weight. Most criticism has focused on poor toplines, excessive rear angulation, unbalanced chest construction, loose elbows and hocks, overly long-bodied (sagging) dogs, roached backs, lack of balance, and overly steep upper arms.

How do such dogs still receive excellent ratings at the Hauptzuchtschau? Because, when presented by expert handlers, these flashy dogs—with long, sweeping side gait—are very good at creating illusion.

While some expect “exaggeration” at every corner, sometimes preserving what already exists is better than trying to improve it.

Let us illustrate some of the problems associated with the most influential popular sires:

Palme vom Wildsteiger Land – excessive size, ears
Uran vom Wildsteiger Land (Palme) – dwarfs, ears
Quando (Q-litter) von Arminius (Palme) – excessive size, upper arm, loose back
Cello von der Römerau (Quana A) – excessive size, ears, upper arm
Odin von der Tannenmeise (Quando A) – borderline height (65 cm), ears, character (lazy)

Issues such as excessive size, ear problems, deficiencies in character, and certain physical and health problems may also be the result of continued close family breeding.

Over time, Hochzucht has effectively become a large family, something that is clearly reflected in both pigmentation and character. Without question, we have improved the breed. The German Shepherd Dog has become noticeably more friendly, while its character has simultaneously softened. This has made our dogs more suitable as pets; however, it has also led to many dogs losing their former brilliance and self-confidence, becoming less capable of coping with stressful situations.
Overall, temperaments are more reliable and less dangerous—but those overly soft, excessively friendly dogs are unfortunately far removed from the spirit expected of a true working dog.

Can we place the blame solely on the Hochzucht dog for this development? This does not mean that Hochzucht dogs lack good character—but it is clear that something has been lost along the way.

A DIVIDED BREED?

In his 2002 Annual Report, SV President P. Messler identified the following problems:

Health issues: HD/ED and rear assembly problems
Übertypisierung: excessive angulation and lack of balance, both standing and in motion
Insufficient attention to overall appearance, becoming lost in details
Problems caused by excessive size (height and weight) and pigmentation
Color (type) diversity and its relationship to genetic diversity
The need for greater genetic diversity to produce healthier, longer-living dogs, despite the excessive focus on uniformity of general appearance.
In the same 2002 report, President Messler further stated that two distinct German Shepherd Dog populations exist within the SV.

The first population consists of closely related dogs, and a clear distinction can be observed between Hochzucht and Leistungszucht (working lines). Leistungszucht represents a population of working dogs, selected from closely related lines through national and regional trials, and supported primarily by working-dog enthusiasts. In short, this situation has led to polarization within the SV, between the organization itself and a group focused on its own specialized interests. This second group breeds primarily for its own “private domain” and its followers.

Put more simply, two camps have emerged: show-dog enthusiasts and working-dog enthusiasts.

If one compares the direct male sire lines of the VA/V males at the 2002 Hauptzuchtschau, the differences between pedigrees containing Utz von Haus Schütting and those without him—as well as the percentage of sable dogs—become immediately apparent. When comparing the two populations, clear differences can be seen in size, weight, type, overall appearance, and pigmentation. Their genetic structures differ significantly.

In general, working dogs fail to reach the high level of quality that Hochzucht has achieved in terms of breed standard compliance. Conversely, Hochzucht struggles with the drives and instincts expected of a true working dog. This polarization has led to divisions within local clubs (Ortsgruppen) and the emergence of differing delegates at general assemblies. In many cases, the opinions of a large portion of pet dog owners are not represented at all.

It is evident that the SV is facing a crisis regarding breeding goals and regulations.

We have discussed the problems within Hochzucht breeding. However, Leistungszucht breeding is also facing a crisis. In this type of breeding, reliance on four or five dominant dogs or bloodlines has resulted in a narrowing of the gene pool. Many working dogs struggle even to achieve the minimum evaluation rating of “Good,” not to mention their quality within the Breed Survey classes. Additionally, health and physical problems are beginning to emerge in these lines as well.

The core of the crisis lies in the fact that the dogs forming the foundation of today’s working lines no longer meet the breed standard.

In the past, there was one unified breed, represented by VA and V class dogs:

At the Hauptzuchtschau: VA Bernd vom Lierberg, VA Seffe vom Busecker Schloss, VA Mutz Pelztierfarm, VA Frei vom Gugge, etc.
At the LG Shows: V Nico vom Haus Beck, V Mike vom Bungalow, V Greif vom Lahntal, V dogs from Busecker Schloss, etc.

These dogs not only formed the ancestors of today’s working dogs, but also embodied the standards of Hochzucht breeding.

Should today’s working-dog breeders follow in the footsteps of the great masters of the past—or should they settle for less?

Polarization is harming the German Shepherd Dog breed as a whole. Separation and exclusion are not reasonable approaches. Moreover, they undermine the SV’s leadership position within the WUSV and worldwide, casting a shadow over the future of the “German Shepherd Dog—created in Germany.”

A Changing World, A Changing Role

The world and society have changed. The primary task of a GSD today is to assist humans in complex environments. Malcolm Willis (1998) stated:

“Breed-specific traits and behavioral characteristics are the most important attributes in dog breeding.”

Naturally, as our dogs age, we acknowledge that soundness and health must be preserved as top priorities. Willis also emphasizes a fundamental principle of animal breeding: incorporating a broader range of traits and diversity into a breeding program helps overcome task-related challenges.

It seems clear that in both Hochzucht and Leistungszucht, narrow-minded selection and one-directional breeding have caused us to exclude far too many potentially valuable breeding animals. For example, if a dog is not a VA offspring or does not come from a VA line, market concerns often prevent us from selecting it as a breeding partner.

The same applies to working dogs: a dog must have an exceptionally high profile within the working-dog scene to be considered. In reality, when we consider all the traits we desire in a GSD, we exclude many “desirable” dogs from breeding—and thus from the gene pool itself.

The Consequences: Fewer Health Issues, More Behavioral Problems?

Perhaps for these reasons, while some health problems appear to be decreasing, behavioral problems are increasing. These issues commonly manifest as:

Aggression
Shyness / fearfulness / nervousness
Disobedience / lack of control
Hyperactivity and excessive vocalization

Temperament vs. Performance

In 2002, the Dutch SV established a committee to advise on banning the use of shock collars in dog training. The committee identified an increase in shock collar use and linked it to dogs with extreme behavioral issues. Breed experts were urged to exercise great caution and to exclude animals showing unmanageable behavior or aggressive tendencies.

This raises an important question:
Should we improve temperament by applying stricter courage tests (with a more combative emphasis) through Körung regulations—or should we develop more comprehensive behavioral tests? Does the trial judge truly want an even harder courage test?

A Real-World Example

In December 2002, during a Körung in the Netherlands that I personally conducted, I evaluated over 40 GSDs. Most achieved KKL 2 status. I observed exceptionally strong dogs during the courage test.

On the same day, DNA testing was conducted in a small veterinary room. Dogs were required to enter a crowded waiting area. It was observed that several dogs who had performed outstandingly in the courage test displayed extreme tension during the DNA procedure. In some cases, blood samples could not be taken without muzzles.

Basic temperament is not tested in the courage test.
Personally, I would prefer the behavior observed during DNA testing over perfect performance in a field courage test.

Training, Not Just Testing

Another issue concerns not the dog, but the handler—the changing criteria of SchH, VH, and IPO training. For SchH, I can recommend a training program requiring twice-weekly sessions over the course of a year. This demands skilled trainers and well-trained helpers.

Are we testing the dog’s abilities—or the trainer’s?
How many potentially good dogs are lost along the way?

Modern IPO obedience demands near-perfection. Obedience has become the most important element of the character test. Margaret Pfleiderer Hogner (Munich, 1979) questioned whether obedience is genetically determined. I fully agree with Willis (1998):

Functional dogs that are not trained or worked can develop damaging behavioral traits.
Selection based purely on physical beauty has minimal value unless linked to functional ability. Dogs that retain working qualities must be selected to preserve quality.
The Körung is a crucial tool, measuring dogs against the breed standard while also incorporating character and working evaluations.

Minimum Criteria for an Entry-Level Program

Testing social behavior toward humans and animals (e.g., Swiss temperament test), environmental testing (acoustic and visual), gunshot test, prey/play drive test
Companion Dog Certificate (BH)
Tracking aptitude

Work Is the Foundation of the GSD

Work is fundamental to the German Shepherd Dog. Keeping a GSD confined to a kennel is torture to both its body and spirit. Personally, I believe that to preserve the breed, we must give our GSDs meaningful work.
Position the GSD as Humanity’s Helper.

Toward a Unified Breeding Philosophy

GSD breeding must not involve discrimination, polarization, or division. The correct combination is not pairing one extreme with another. It must incorporate both Hochzucht and Leistungszucht. Sometimes, the dog you intend to exclude from breeding may actually be the one you need most. This also means greater genetic diversity.

Strengths and Weaknesses of the Current Breeding System

Strengths

The SV is a well-organized and professionally managed organization. It provides a framework of local clubs, experienced trainers, helpers, and well-trained judges. Overall breed quality is high, and current standards have reached a peak where further “improvement” risks exaggeration.

The SV regulates and controls GSD breeding and maintains interest in the breed in Germany. It dominates the WUSV—likely due to the weakness of other member organizations. Initiatives addressing HD, particularly the Breed Value system, ED scheme, and DNA program, deserve admiration. The Hauptzuchtschau and Bundessiegerprüfung are well-organized mega-events.

Before discussing shadows, we must acknowledge:
There is a great deal of sunshine.

Weaknesses

Currently, both Hochzucht and Leistungszucht face a genetic bottleneck due to lack of diversity. The German Shepherd Dog is not solely the Wienerau/Arminius type. The show world is dominated by pressure groups—sometimes functioning like “cartels”—that exert excessive influence over breeding and exhibiting decisions. At times, there is a tendency to control the market and exclude others.

Even well-informed judges sometimes defer to established status rather than making independent decisions, reducing opportunities for other dogs.

Bloodline group criteria must be reviewed. The Hauptzuchtschau should be the WUSV World Show, but is often perceived as a German showcase. Bureaucratic rules favor privileged groups, conflicting with the core idea of the WUSV.

The Future Image of the GSD

We must improve the image of the GSD in modern society. If the GSD is a working dog, it must offer more than Schutzhund or IPO. There is a division between SPORT and SHOW. Other countries must also contribute criticism and take more initiative. Breeders, judges, and clubs should imitate less and create more.

In a 2003 forum discussion, the well-known working-dog kennel Kirschental (Füller) stated:

“I believe that many of the health and working-ability problems—also seen in Leistungszucht—are the result of repeated breeding from the same ancestors. I am convinced that non-inbred litters are more robust and present fewer problems, and experienced breeders will agree. We see the same in livestock breeding. We produced fantastic uniformity of type—but at what cost?”

The first 50 dogs at a Hauptzuchtschau often look alike, with similar anatomy and expression.
BUT UNITY DOES NOT REQUIRE UNIFORMITY.
GREATER DIVERSITY IN BLOODLINES IS ESSENTIAL FOR CORRECT BREEDING.

Where Change Must Begin

When a breeding female is mated, it is rare to keep all puppies—most must be sold. To sell puppies, the sire must be a “legend,” a top dog from the Hauptzuchtschau or Bundessiegerprüfung.
This is where we must change.

Proposals to Broaden the Genetic Base

VA should only be awarded to anatomically sound dogs that have proven themselves as producers. A dog should receive VA no more than twice. New generations must be given a chance.
Only dogs placed VA twice may become Sieger.
A Sieger should not be allowed to enter the HZS the following year.
Judges must not automatically award VA to dogs simply because their parents were VA.
Judges for adult classes should rotate annually to reduce personal bias.

The Average Buyer Matters

We must also recognize that in working lines, we cannot focus only on a small elite group. The average GSD buyer wants quality: a healthy dog, a good representative of the breed, sound in character, reliable, manageable, obedient, and a trustworthy companion. They want to enjoy time with their dog—not navigate bureaucratic complexity.

The GSD can and should be this dog.

Final Thought

It is our responsibility to breed the German Shepherd Dog in this way and preserve it as humanity’s best friend.
If Max von Stephanitz were alive today, this would still be his goal.

PETER VAN OIRSCHOT (1954–2010)
Former Breeding Director
Dutch SV