[ SHOWGSD-L ] Re: Bracket's 'White Formula'
- From: "Theresa-GSD Stolz-Scenecrest Farm" <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (Redacted sender "scenecrest.geo@xxxxxxxxx" for DMARC)
- To: marhaven@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2014 07:52:53 -0700
Dog World April 1961
"The Case Against The White German Shepherd Dog"
by Lloyd C Brackett
Of late there has been a recrudescence of the "White" German Shepherd Dog
subject. DOG WORLD magazine and THE WESTERN SHEPHERD JOURNAL, in particular,
have printed letters about this controversy between the pros and the cons. So
far as I know, THE GERMAN SHEPHERD DOG REVIEW has not accepted for publication
any letters it may have received from the misguided fringe who are so
hopelessly battling against our breed’s revised Standard, which disqualifies
the so-called "whites." This is understandable and to its credit because, in
contrast to DOG WORLD, for instance, which is an all-breed magazine, working
for the best interests of no ONE breed exclusively, the REVIEW has that
objective only. Furthermore it is the official organ of the parent body, The
German Shepherd Dog Club of America, Inc., whose capable, dedicated and sincere
officers and board, I feel certain, will never countenance any lowering of the
breed’s Standard by again being
undiscriminating with regard to colorless Shepherds.
Before going into the reasons which eventually impelled us to do what should
have been done long ago, i.e., include a disqualifying clause on whites in the
breed Standard, I want to mention several articles previously written on the
subject, so that any sufficiently interested can refer to them, especially to
those which objected to the disqualification. Perhaps I should use make it
clear at this point that my use of the word "us," above, was intentional, since
I was a member of the Revision Committee. Also that, while I by no means
approved of everything which was included in that revision and, in particular,
of the often weird evaluation of faults in the supplement, I did, and do,
wholeheartedly approve of disqualification of the so-called "whites."
By far the best and most objectively written argument in favor of whites which
has come to my attention appeared in the February 1961 issue of THE WESTERN
SHEPHERD JOURNAL under the title, "The Case For the White Shepherd" by June
Betsworth. The best in rebuttals I have read were Mary Coffeen’s "Answers to
‘The White Shepherd’" in the April issue of the same magazine, and William
Olliff’s masterful "Which Is the More Unsightly Shepherd?" appearing in the
April DOG WORLD’s Shepherd Section. While it may be the latter two writers have
sufficiently covered the case for the "antis," it seems to me that further
explanation is necessary relating to the PRACTICAL and UTILITARIAN reasons for
disqualifying whites.
As little as some of today’s novices and commercially minded German Shepherd
Dog backyard breeders may know of the founders and early developers of our
breed in Germany, certainly we must all admit that it would never have reached
its heights, both in popularity and practicability of use, except for them.
They knew what they were doing when they proscribed both the registration and
the breeding use of whites, and they surely had the breed’s interests more in
mind than those motivated as are today’s off-beat proponents of such animals.
We might argue extensively as to the Germans’ claim that degeneration is
indicated in colorless Shepherds, but that is certainly not the only factor to
be considered, though it may be one of the most important. Suffice it to say
that were our breed’s registry handled in America as it is in the country of
its origin (by a "parent club" instead of by such an all-breed organization as
our American Kennel Club),
whites would be barred from registration so there could be no question of
disqualification in shows.
In the early days of Postum advertising, which, incidentally, was during the
early days of German Shepherds’ importation to this country, we saw many Postum
advertisements including the slogan, "There’s a Reason." Likewise, for
disqualifying white Shepherds and, yes, for barring them from registration,
could it be done in this country, there are several "reasons." I propose to
explain only a few of them, in fact, just those I have read, or which, if
touched upon, were wrongly interpreted.
For instance, the pro-white protagonists claim the superiority of whites as
leaders of the blind because of their greater visibility or as a symbol, such
as is the white cane. It seems strange that this assertion should be made
seemingly without inquiry to the several blind dog schools as to WHY they do
not accept or use white Shepherds, although the reason would seem obvious. As
one reply to this patently faulty argument has pointed out, the hypersensitive
blind person wants least of all to have his affliction made noticeable. More
important, perhaps, - and I acquired this knowledge through personal
questioning many years ago – is the matter of white hairs all over the clothing
of guide dog users, as well as on those who may inadvertently brush against the
dogs in heavy traffic. No amount of brushing or grooming can possibly eliminate
ALL such shedding hair when a Shepherd is "throwing its coat," as owners will
attest. It seems needless to point out
that a blind person can neither see to brush off those so very noticeable
white hairs from clothing or upholstered furniture, nor pick off those imbedded
in the fabric despite the brisket of brushings.
It so happens that those who, in their printed letters and articles, have tried
to make out the strongest case FOR the whites have, no doubt unknowingly,
presented the most plausible and REAL objections to them. This is true not only
in the above example but equally so in all of the other arguments given, with
the exception of the one admitting to getting hurt in the pocketbook. Than this
latter, no reason could be more damaging in the eyes of true dog lovers, and
most certainly it comes as a shock to sincere fanciers of the present, as well
as those of us who have worked for the improvement of the breed since its first
importation to this country. It is difficult for me not to castigate those
imbued with such a purely mercenary motive and spirit, whose selfishness, if
they had their way, would degrade our breed.
In their statement that the German Shepherd Dog was first purified from a group
of superior working animals by the late and great Herr Von Stephanitz and his
associates, and that it should be kept to the same high standard, they are
absolutely RIGHT. But perhaps we should examine the facts of their claim as to
the necessity, or even the advisability, of including whites if we are to keep
it a "natural" working breed. As with their reasons for the use of whites as
guide dogs, just as faulty are the arguments favoring whites for those other
utilitarian purposes for which Shepherds were originally used (animal herding
and protection) and for which they have proved to be superior since.
Suppose we skip to the self-evident problem of keeping white service dogs clean
and take up briefly several functional disadvantages of the whites. In the
early days, no German sheep herdsman wanted, or used, whites because of the
difficulty in distinguishing sheep from dogs at a distance. In police work it
is apparent that white dogs would be at a disadvantage at night, in dark alleys
and streets, where their appearance would be blazoned forth to warn scoundrels
and thugs of their imminent approach. Even the strongest of the proponents of
the colorless Shepherds admit their ineffectuality for work with the police and
the armed forces, and grant that shedding white hair is a drawback to their use
as pets and companions.
What, may I ask, remains for anyone to say in defense of whites when it comes
to the utilitarian uses which all admit must be the final criterion for the
worth of our breed?
As I understand it, white cannot properly be termed a color because it is a
lack of all pigment. While I have several times referred to whites as
"colorless" dogs in this article, I myself have never seen a pure white German
Shepherd Dog which was not an albino. Only a single person amongst the many
fanciers with whom I have discussed the matter claims to have seen an adult
"white" dog which did not have some buff or tan on the ears or back. Young
puppies, yes, many of them. This is not to say there have not been many pure
white Shepherds with dark eyes and black noses, but just that, of the thousands
of German Shepherds I have judged and seen, I have never encountered one
without at least a trace of color.
It is indeed regrettable and reprehensible that many of those who accidentally
get one white or more in a litter foist them off on an ignorant public as
something rare and therefore desirable, that they often ask higher prices for
them. It is heartening that the great majority of our fanciers, and all of
those who are interested in, and work for, breed improvement, discard such
untypical specimens. Such breeders either put whites to sleep at birth, or sell
them WITHOUT registration papers, and at greatly reduced prices, to pet buyers
who are not knowledgeable enough to understand their handicaps.
I can do no better than to second the motion made by William Olliff in his
April DOG WORLD article: "Please leave Shepherds alone and stick to another
breed where the normal color is white."
Theresa
scenecrest.geo@xxxxxxxxx
--------------------------------------------
On Sun, 7/27/14, Carolyn Martello <marhaven@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Chiminey Sweep ...was a Bi-Color. His
Dam...Nyx of Longworth was
not a white
dog...she was a faded black and tan.
Lloyd
Bracket had whites resulting in his breeding program for
a while. At the time of the Standard revision
he was definitely
FOR disqualification of
whites.
Mr. Brackett was a member of the
Revision Committee.
Mr. Lloyd Brackett wrote
an article in 1961 in Dog World Magazine
titled: 'The Case Against the White
German Shepherd.'
His opinion is very
clear! At one point he writes:
".....while I by no means approved of
everything which was included in
the
revision, and in particular, of the often weird evaluation
of faults
in the supplement, I did, and do,
wholeheartedly approve of the
disqualification of the so-called
whites."
Lloyd Brackett finishes the
article with the sentence:
"I can do no
better than to second the motion made by William Olliff
in his April DOG WORLD
article: "Please leave Shepherds alone and
stick to another breed where the normal
color is white".
Carolyn marhaven@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.marhaven.com
============================================================================
POST is Copyrighted 2014. All material remains the property of the original
author and of GSD Communication, Inc. NO REPRODUCTIONS or FORWARDS of any kind
are permitted without prior permission of the original author AND of the
Showgsd-l Management. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Each Author is responsible for the content of his/her post. This group and its
administrators are not responsible for the comments or opinions expressed in
any post.
ALL PERSONS ARE ON NOTICE THAT THE FORWARDING, REPRODUCTION OR USE IN ANY
MANNER OF ANY MATERIAL WHICH APPEARS ON SHOWGSD-L WITHOUT THE EXPRESS
PERMISSION OF ALL PARTIES TO THE POST AND THE LIST MANAGEMENT IS EXPRESSLY
FORBIDDEN, AND IS A VIOLATION OF LAW. VIOLATORS OF THIS PROHIBITION WILL BE
PROSECUTED.
For assistance, please contact the List Management at admin@xxxxxxxxxxx
VISIT OUR WEBSITE - http://showgsd.org SUBSCRIPTION:
http://showgsd.org/mail.html
NATIONAL BLOG - http://gsdnational.blogspot.com/
============================================================================
Other related posts:
