History of the German Shepherd Dog Breed

Standardizing the the GSD Breed

One of the early GSD Horant lines, that of “Graf Eberhard vom Hohen, SZ 1135 produced the 1908 Sieger “Luchs vom Kalsmunt Wetzlar,” and then again the 1910 Sieger in Dortmund. This was no small fet with 280 dogs entered in this show. The open class in that show had a whopping 72 males entered. During this time, another famous dog, through “Munko von Boll” was Horst von Boll. These dogs during the early 20^th century were heavily bred— probably overbred to some extent. During those early years, many of the early German Shepherd Dogs were closely linebred and even inbred. The goal of this close breeding was to eliminate some of the nervy, flighty character. The end goal was to produce a more solid built, “dry” dog. This was particularly thought to be true of dogs going back to Horst.

During those early years, the breed standard for females was set at 50-55 cm (22-24 inches) for a female and 55 to 60 cm (25-27 inches) for males. Dogs with massive, oversized heads were excluded as unfit for working dogs. While they might have been a sight to behold, the oversized heads were thought to impede the protection and working abilities of the GSD. Other traits that were excluded were dogs with “friendly ears” —friendly ears are those that flop forward or are somewhat droopy. Angled tails, curved tails or tails were the ends showing a kink or curl were also excluded.

Oversized Dogs in German Shepherd Dog History

Many breeders today emphasize what are commonly known as “oversized dogs” or “giant GSDs.” Dog historians not that these oversized German Shepherd dogs show up as early as 1909 in the breed registries. Two famous dogs that exceeded breed standards were “Uckermark” and the earlier referenced “Horst von Boll.” Both these stud dogs were oversized. Both were heavily used in many breeding programs. Reasons for limiting the size of the breed were thoughtful and well-reasoned. The taller, heavier dogs were often hindered in their agility. Think back to the children’s cartoon of Clifford, the big red dog. Oversized, giant dogs were less able to move quickly, with deft movement.

The 1925 Sieger show which saw a more moderate framed dog “Klodo vom Boxberg” winning the show put a damper on breeders producing these oversized, giant GSDs. Klodo vom Boxberg was a medium sized dog more in line with the breed standard at the time. To be fair, he would never win in today’s show. 21^st century American show lines as well as west-German show lines have radically moved away from the working line German Shepherd breed standards. The toplines on these working line German Shepherd Dogs from the early 1900’s was flatter with a modest drop over the hindquarters to the tail. These dogs were what today are referred to as “flat backed dogs.” This isn’t to say that their top lines were actually flat in an unnatural “wooden” sense. But rather they retained a much more natural look more reminiscent of some of the wolves and more ancient dog breeds from which the German Shepherd dogs were produced.

This 1925 Sieger show was a turning point in German Shepherd Dog history. Seeing a dog like Klodo with the 1925 Sieger show and seeing his speed and agility as compared the larger, more lumbering oversized giant German Shepherd Dogs shifted breeding emphasis and brought the pendulum shift back from these oversized dogs more into line with dogs that were able to perform protection work as trained guard dogs with speed, agility and precision.

History of the German Shepherd Dog “Toe Walkers”

 On the other size of the spectrum were smaller dogs. Dogs with more narrow and receding chests were light on their feet. So light they were described as “toe walkers.” These toe walkers came about in part due to an increase in breeding following WW1. With the GSD’s popularity rapidly on the rise, many smaller framed dogs were bred that simply did not fall in line with the expectations of what the German Shepherd breed ought to look like. This is turn hindered these dogs’ ability to do their “working” jobs as intended.

Pendulum shifts tend to go from one extreme to another. While the history of German Shepherd Dogs show early 20^th century saw many breeders selecting for oversized, giant GSDs, the pendulum went the other were going into the 1930’s. It was during the 30’s and 40’s that many of these smaller, “toe walker” dogs were said to have been “Mendeled out.” For those of you that remember the history of genetics, Gregor Mendel’s (1822-1884) is credited for discovering the science of inheritable traits through experimenting with pea plants. A century later we now know Mendel was observing the expression of certain genes. (And, while neither time nor space does not permit an in-depth discussion on how environment plays a huge role in gene expression, we do look at how epigenetics does play a significant role in the history and development of the German Shepherd Dog as a breed. See here for an article on epigenetics in dog breeding. And click here and here for articles on how early neurological stimulation, ENS, can literally turn certain genes on or off and in so doing greatly improve the long-term health and character of German Shepherd Dogs.). These under-sized “toe-walkers” were aggressively mendeled out during the 1930’s and 1940’s. They were eliminated from the gene pool.

German Shepherd Dog Makes Historical Shift Towards Human Protection

With wild animal populations reduced a shift in breeding emphasis moved away from breeding dogs more suited to a dual purpose as livestock guardian dogs that watched over their human shepherds— hence the name, German Shepherds— the early 20^th century saw a major shift towards human protection over that of livestock. The GSD more and more began to be selected to specialize in human protection as well as search and rescue tracking (SARS). Such emphasize began to emphasize the traits ubiquitous with what today has become the working line German Shepherd Dog. Emphasize health, longevity and highly trainable dogs demonstrating a high capacity for obedience training, tracking and protection work, the historical development of the GSD as breed began to shift towards the kind of dog that we see thriving as good family protection dogs, Schutzhund sport dogs and the more serious law enforcement trained guard dogs both in military and police contexts.

The Off Switch Emphasized in the History of the German Shepherd Dog Breed Development

With the emphasis on German Shepherd Dogs as working dogs, particularly that of protection work. Right from the early, early 1900’s, from the earliest days working line German Shepherd dog breeders actively selected for dogs with calm temperaments. These calmer, less reactive dogs were in dog parlance described as “dry dogs.” These dry dogs stand in contrast to “nervy dogs.” Where dry dogs tend to present with calmer dispositions, the nervy dogs are more easily frightened. Their nerves are simply less stable. One ought to not mistake dry dogs with the assumption that these dogs lack drive. Dry dogs can have a very high ball or food drive. They can have a crazy high prey drive. This “dry” personality is not to suggest these dogs are couch potatoes. But rather, these dry dogs are not nervous nellies, constantly afraid and frightened by new sounds, noises and environments.

In those early days, the vom Blasienberg kennel owned by Tobias Ott in Bietigheim has been credited greatly improving the dry dog nerves in the historical development of the German Shepherd Dogs. Many breeders leaned heavily on dogs produced by Tobias Ott as they sought to improve nerves in their dogs. Fast forward to the 21^st century and we see a renewed need for a shift away from nervy dogs back towards a drier character. With so many GSD breeders primarily breeding for the show circuit, the modern show lines are now both in conformation and character farther and farther removed from the true, authentic working line German Shepherd. With many generations of such show line dogs no longer tested against any kind of serious objective standard, verifying the ability of these dogs to demonstrate dry nerves, more and more the show line German Shepherd Dogs simply do not and cannot meet the historical expectations for the German Shepherd Dog as a working line breed. It is for this reason that we here at Czech Working Line only breed true working line German Shepherd dogs. The lack of objective testing has led so many show line dogs towards nervy personalities, something to be avoided at all costs.

In our home as breeders here at Czech Working Line, we have been blessed with six children. The more protection training our dogs receive, the drier the dog’s personality must be. We simply cannot have a highly trained guard dog with an IGP 3 title or even something more specialized such as close combat training or training intended to prepare dog to guard a confined space such as a large transfers of cash inside a vehicle. Highly trained personal protection dogs of this nature simply must have that off switch where when they are not working, they “turn off.” They bond with their handlers and the families that own them. They are calm. Their love their people.

As we have noted above, here at Czech Working Line one of the reasons we never mix the show lines into our working line German Shepherd Dogs is because just like the GSD breeders of the 1930’s and 1940’s that “mendeled out” the toe walkers and the small framed, narrow chested dogs of their time, once again we find the need to go back to the basics. Too many modern German Shepherds have bad nerves. They are nervous dogs. And these are the kind of dogs that are not what you want around family or children. And as we as GSD breeders in Oklahoma work at improving our working line German Shepherd Dogs, we are actively working to exclude these nervy kind of dogs from our breeding program.

GSD History Post World War I: 1914 to 1918

In World War I, dogs acted as Red Cross dogs, messengers, supply carriers, sentinels, tracking canines, and guard animals. Numerous service members from the USA, UK, and the Commonwealth witnessed the bravery, intelligence, and loyalty of German Shepherds, and many tales were brought back home. It is not unexpected that several dogs were obtained by servicemen and brought back with them.

The German Shepherd Dog Club of America was established in 1913 by Anne Tracy and Benjamin Throop, along with 26 founding members.

In 1915, the inaugural specialty show of the German Shepherd Dog Club of America took place in Greenwich, Connecticut.

In 1917, following America’s entry into World War I, anything related to Germany became forbidden. The breed’s name was altered by the American Kennel Club to Shepherd Dog, and the German Shepherd Dog Club of America was renamed the Shepherd Dog Club of America. In England, the breed’s name was altered to the Alsatian. As we note later in this article that name nearly stuck with the GSD as a breed nearly being renamed to this new name.

In 1919, when the English Kennel Club established a distinct register for the breed, around 54 dogs were initially listed, but by 1926, the number had surged to 8,058 due to the dog’s remarkable success. After the War concluded, it was believed that the breed would struggle to thrive if “German” was included in its name, and thus it was determined to name the breed the Alsatian Wolf Dog, referencing the German-French border region of Alsace-Lorraine. The “Wolf Dog” label was eventually removed—again because it was considered that this could harm the breed’s reputation. For many years, we experienced the inaccurate naming of the breed caused by national conflicts. In 1977, after many efforts by breeders, the breed’s name was reverted to the German Shepherd Dog, which is recognized in the USA, Australia, and many other nations.

GSD History: Post World War I

Rin Tin Tin With World War I’s conclusion emerged a renewed admiration for the breed. The German Army effectively utilized the breed as a canine in warfare. Stories shared by U.S. soldiers returning home, some accompanied by shepherds, along with the intelligence and impressive looks of the dogs, captivated the general public. Rin-Tin-Tin and Strongheart, whose films featured different takes on the “boy and his dog” concept, skyrocketed the breed’s popularity. Puppy mills thrived to satisfy the demand, flooding the U.S. market with low-quality “German police dogs,” leading to a decline in the breed’s popularity.

Serious breeding persisted, for instance, by Mrs. Harrison Eustis of Fortunate Fields Kennels, located in Switzerland. Her method was entirely scientific, involving thorough research on breedings conducted. The most recognized purpose for which her dogs were utilized was as guide dogs for the visually impaired at the renowned Seeing Eye in Morristown, New Jersey.

Von Stephanitz had grown concerned about the movement within the breed towards excessively large square dogs. Additional issues involved inconsistency in temperament and dental imperfections. He and the breed wardens agreed that severe action was necessary. In 1922, Germany implemented a system of regular breed evaluations – an assessment of each dog, featuring a graded description and suggestions for (or against) breeding. This kind of system never gained popularity in America mainly because of the cultural distinctions present in American society. Nevertheless, quality dogs continued to be bred since German dogs were readily accessible for American dollars, which were in high demand during the inflation in Germany.

Klodo von Boxberg At the 1925 Sieger show, von Stephanitz chose Klodo von Boxberg as the world winner. This dog was strikingly distinct from the breed of dog that preceded him. He belonged to a lower class, was longer and deeper in build, short in the hips, and had a wide stride. Klodo turned out to be an effective sire, successfully introducing a “new” kind of shepherd. In that same year, A. Gilbert of Maraldene Kennels in Hamden, Connecticut, brought Klodo to America. Klodo, via several significant sons and daughters, is mainly accountable for the shortcomings and merits of contemporary North American lines.

In 1936, John Gans Pfeffer von Bern brought in Sieger Pfeffer von Bern, and in 1938, Sidney Heckert imported Odin vom Busecker Schloss. Due to their extensive inbreeding and line-breeding, these dogs shaped most of our contemporary bloodlines. Pfeffer was the German champion in 1937 and enjoyed a remarkable show career in the United States. A consistent variety in America was created through Pfeffer, yet it exhibited issues such as lengthy coats, absent dentition, improper temperament, excessively long bodies and loins, and orchidism (lack of one or both testicles).

GSD History: World War II and Beyond

The German Shepherd Dog was greatly in demand throughout World War II, utilized by both Allied and Axis forces for roles such as mine detection, sentry duties, guarding, messaging, and various other tasks. In the United States, Dogs for Defense was established, supplying thousands of dogs to the military. Even during the onset of World War II, the skilled dogs of the Allied Forces were present wherever the soldiers went, expanding the breed’s fame globally like a spreading blanket. Ironically, during this time the German Shepherd Dog breed nearly lost its name in a reaction to anti-German sentiment. For decades it became fashionable to refer to the German Shepherd Dog breed as Alsatian Shepherds. This term, Alsatian Shepherd as an alternative name for the GSD nearly replaced the original moniker. To read more on the history of German Shepherds and the history of the Alsatian Shepherd name as it relates to a German Shepherd Dog breed. Click here to read more about the term Alsatian Shepherd.

Following World War II, breeders from across the world began to enter the market as German Shepherd Dog breeders. In short order, breeders in Japan, Italy, Scandinavia, South America, France, and especially in Europe took to expanding their participation in breeding these dogs. Czechoslovakia, now the Czech Republic and Slovakia were two great contributors to developing these dogs. In time, Czech bloodline dogs gain a following of their own. The Czech military’s active involvement in developing the Czech working line German Shepherd bloodlines were a significant contributing factor to the development of the Czech line German Shepherds. Follow this link to read more about the Czech military’s involvement in developing the Czech working lines. Look at this article for the uniqueness of Czech Shepherds.

The SV developed with advancements like the “a” stamp (European hip scoring system), a system for tattoo identification, a focus on lineage production, and more stringent rules for awarding high ratings to dogs.

In America, the opposite occurred where breeders of American show line GSD breeders took center stage— status was prioritized. This status was often measured by whether dogs were AKC show champions rather than titled working dogs. With a few short decades, American show line dog radically shifted from the kind of dog that fulfilled Stephanitz’s “Function is the real measure of beauty.” Show dog breeders began to move towards an exaggerated conformation arguably crippled by a completely unnatural roach back. This is not to say that every show line dog has hip dysplasia. They do not. Many will pass their OFFA hip certification. But any reasonable person viewing these dogs can see how the shape of the excessive roach back has strayed so far from the original, “healthy” straighter back” working line German Shepherd Dog. Professional handlers took charge of the show lines. And Stephanitz’s“Function is the real measure of beauty” was lost.

The German Shepherd Dog has undergone numerous transformations over the years. Certain bloodlines have targeted the show ring, characterized by sloping backs, roach backs, a “flying trot,” excessively large dogs, and other traits. These intentional alterations have impacted the breed’s structure, temperament, and work capacity. For better or worse, these specialized focus have been a part of the history of the German Shepherd Dog breed. 

An examination of the breed’s history would not be thorough without addressing genetic diversity. This is a worry for contemporary GSD breeders and enthusiasts.With human nature being what it is, pendulum shifts have led to many experiments along the historical journey and development of this breed. leading to health and temperament issues that are acknowledged yet continue to spread. GSDs lacking the genetic bottleneck issue (once more, it’s related to bloodline) experience fewer health concerns and significantly fewer temperament issues.

Bibliography

*** Below are peer reviewed resources that deal with joint health and longevity in large breed and German Shepherd Dogs. As described in the article above, much of the shift within the breed away from the working lines have led to all manner of health issue. This is particularly true in the show line German Shepherd bloodlines. The crippling effects of the roach back and the low hindquarters has without a doubt led many breeders to embrace a direction in breeding that has taken the show lines miles from the original working line German Shepherd prospect. Here at Czech Working Line we are deeply committed to breeding that makes sense. We believe healthy GSD breeding practices that produce “dry” as opposed to “nervy” dogs is a must. Dogs must have great joint health. Below you will find some great resources on physical GSD health, if you are so inclined towards additional reading on the subject.

1. Carr, B. J., Dycus, D. L., Canapp, S. O., and Zink, C. M. “Juvenile Orthopedic Diseases in Dogs and Cats.” Today’s Veterinary Practice 6, no. 3 (2016): 40–50.
2. Fischer, M. S., Lilje, K. E., and Andrada, E. “Locomotion in Large Domestic Dogs: A Kinematic and Kinetic Analysis.” The Journal of Experimental Biology 214, no. 3 (2011): 380–391.
3. Hazewinkel, H. A. W., and Meij, B. P. “Hip Dysplasia in Dogs: The Pathogenesis and Control.” Veterinary Quarterly 23, no. 4 (2001): 194–197.
4. Jones, O. Y., Raschke, S. U., and Riches, P. E. “Inertial Properties of the German Shepherd Dog.” PLOS ONE 13, no. 10 (2018): e0206037.
5. Kirberger, R. M., and Fourie, S. L. “Elbow Dysplasia in the Dog: Pathophysiology, Diagnosis and Control.” Journal of the South African Veterinary Association 69, no. 2 (1998): 43–54.
6. Lappin, M. R. “Genetics of Skeletal Disorders in Dogs.” Veterinary Clinics of North America: Small Animal Practice 45, no. 1 (2015): 1–13.
7. Meyer-Lindenberg, A., Fehr, M., and Nolte, I. “Co-existence of Ununited Anconeal Process and Fragmented Medial Coronoid Process of the Ulna in the Dog.” Journal of Small Animal Practice 47, no. 2 (2006): 61–65.
8. Michell, A. R. “Longevity of British Breeds of Dog and Its Relationships with Sex, Size, Cardiovascular Variables and Disease.” Veterinary Record 145, no. 22 (1999): 625–629.
9. Morgan, J. P., and Stephens, M. B. “Canine Hip Dysplasia: A Study of Heritability in 2,000 German Shepherd Dogs.” Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 186, no. 7 (1985): 739–740.
10. Riser, W. H. “The Dysplastic Hip Joint: Radiologic and Histologic Development.” Veterinary Pathology 22, no. 5 (1985): 429–435.
11. Roccaro, M., Diana, A., Linta, N., Rinnovati, R., Freo, M., and Peli, A. “Limb Development in Skeletally-Immature Large-Sized Dogs: A Radiographic Study.” PLOS ONE 16, no. 7 (2021): e0254788.
12. Smith, G. K., and Gregor, T. P. “Hip Dysplasia and Osteoarthritis in Dogs.” Veterinary Clinics of North America: Small Animal Practice 29, no. 5 (1999): 1111–1129.
13. Swenson, L., Audell, L., and Hedhammar, A. “Prevalence and Inheritance of and Selection for Hip Dysplasia in Seven Breeds of Dogs in Sweden and Benefit: Cost Analysis of a Screening and Control Program.” Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 210, no. 3 (1997): 207–214.
14. Thelen, D. G., Schultz, A. B., and Ashton-Miller, J. A. “Kinematics of the Canine Hindlimb During Gait: Implications for Canine Hip Dysplasia.” Journal of Biomechanics 31, no. 2 (1998): 123–129.
15. Todhunter, R. J., and Mateescu, R. G. “Genetics of Canine Hip Dysplasia and Osteoarthritis.” Veterinary Surgery39, no. 3 (2010): 159–166.
16. Worth, A. J., Bridges, J. P., Cave, N. J., Jones, G., and Pettitt, R. A. “Canine Degenerative Lumbosacral Stenosis: Prevalence, Impact and Management Strategies.” Veterinary Medicine: Research and Reports 10 (2019): 123–134.
17. Wurster-Hill, D. H., and Bush, M. “Canid Cytogenetics: Chromosome Banding Patterns and Their Implications for Phylogenetic Relationships.” Journal of Mammalogy 63, no. 1 (1982): 1–23.
18. Zink, M. C., and Van Dyke, J. B. “Working Dog Structure: Evaluation and Relationship to Function.” Frontiers in Veterinary Science 7 (2020): 559055.
19. Kleen, J. L., and Hedhammar, A. “Developmental Orthopedic Diseases in Dogs: Causes and Preventative Strategies.” Journal of Veterinary Medicine 67, no. 4 (2019): 211–226.
20. Verhoeven, G., Fortrie, R., and Coopman, F. “Impact of Breeding Strategies on Canine Orthopedic Health.” Veterinary Journal 203, no. 3 (2015): 348–354.
21. Schmutz, S. M., and Berryere, T. G. “Dog Coat Color Genetics and Implications for Health.” Journal of Heredity98, no. 5 (2007): 517–525.
22. Brown, E. A., Dickinson, P. J., and Mansour, T. “Canine Breed-Specific Diseases and the Role of Genetics.” Veterinary Pathology 55, no. 3 (2018): 522–535.
23. Hamilton, M. J., Caldwell, J. M., and Cornelis, M. C. “Genomic Variability and Structural Health in Working Dog Breeds.” Animal Genetics 49, no. 2 (2018): 127–137.
24. Ostrander, E. A., and Wayne, R. K. “Genetics of the German Shepherd Dog: Understanding Disease Risks and Breeding Implications.” Annual Review of Animal Biosciences 6 (2018): 125–146.
25. Hedhammar, A. “Breed-Specific Risks for Developmental Orthopedic Disorders in Large and Giant Dogs.” Veterinary Clinics of North America: Small Animal Practice 44, no. 4 (2014): 655–674.
26. Lust, G. “Canine Hip Dysplasia: Etiology and Pathogenesis.” The Veterinary Journal 162, no. 3 (2001): 219–226.
27. Wind, A., and Packard, M. “Genetic Factors Influencing Skeletal Structure and Function in the Dog.” American Journal of Veterinary Research 61, no. 1 (2000): 31–37.