Pomeranian V.S. German Spitz

Actually, I have been around GSD's and GSD breeders all my life.  I have seen variences, and obviously very few to none are perfect to the book standard, but NEVER the degree of differences I see in some breeds.  I've never seen a St Bernard that made me say, 'what's that?'  I've never seen a Dane that was so freakishly different that I could not figure out what it was. 

I is obvious that breeders have to put in many hours, months and years toward the best of the best.  I realize the genetic predisposition of particular breeds to have specific health issues.  That HAS to be dealt with.  Of course, there are those who are shooting for that one perfect "Best in Show" pup.  I just didn't think it would take that much work for a specific breed breeder to get pups that look like the breed they are breeding.  Whoa!  That was a tounge twister.

Is this the same issue for every breed?  (Which was my point with the GSD referrence)  Or is this an issue that falls more commonly to specific breeds or breed types? 

Mdog59

Actually, I have been around GSD's and GSD breeders all my life. 

Apparently you haven't looked at any from any other lines, or from any other stock.  

That's a GSD from Czech working lines.

That's a dog from German lines

Here's a historical perspective  of the GSD from WWII era.

Here's an AKC conformation GSD.

The above shows several points that judges, breeders, and hobbyists interested in the GSD evaluate as far as "type" or physical structure.   

I pulled those pics up in a quick 2 minute google image search. 

The GSD probably has the widest variation in "type" of any breed, at least as far as I am aware of.  In fact it has gotten so bad that the "show" dogs can't work and the "working" dogs can't show. 

Mdog59

I just didn't think it would take that much work for a specific breed breeder to get pups that look like the breed they are breeding. 

It's not looking for a particular pup, it's looking for consistency in the breeding program, setting type into one's line.  In my particular breed, I can identify which of the main 3 lines each dog comes from.  Those that have been in the breed longer can tell which line the dogs are from....because of type.  Every breeder's program is a little different, but all good hobby breeders have one goal, at least from what I've seen and that goal is consistency in type. 
 

I appreciate the info.  I guess it is pretty much in the eye of the beholder and exposer.  The Czech GSD looks like a GSD to me.  Of course, not an AKC/show standard, but most assuredly a GSD.  As you have demonstrated the variations are between lines and  not vast variations within the same line and/or same litter.

Some of the arguments in this thread were that a Pom is a Pom is a Pom.  The other side of the debate is that it may be so, but some appear to have come from a very different line..... perhaps a line that could be considered something other than what we have come to know as the standard.  I am not advocating one way or the other.  I am just stating my observations.  I have seen some amazing variations in Yorkies.  Those variations could lead one to believe they were in fact Silky's, or Austrailian Terriers.  Not completely out of the question since they come from the same line and at some point in a bloodline could have innocently crossed.  AGAIN, I am not necessarily saying it would be an experienced breeder that has done this.

This is something that has been happening around the world for hundreds of years.  I know there are "American" breeds that have been taken to other countries and either by nature or selection, they have developed a distinct line that is similar, but has a different mix.  The dog in that country is given a different name from what the American source was named.

When you review many of the "mountain dogs" from various countries, the similarities are striking.  It is obvious they share a common history, yet they are considered distinct and different breeds.

Mdog59

When you review many of the "mountain dogs" from various countries, the similarities are striking.  It is obvious they share a common history, yet they are considered distinct and different breeds.

You are probably talking about LGDs.  Livestock Guardian Dogs.  And yes, they do share many similarities-based upon the needs for the job.  The dog needs to be large, powerful, brave, confrontational with strangers, and dedicated to it's pack, flock, family.  In Eastern Europe/Western Asia, you will find that they all can trace their lineage back to the Molosser types.  They are considered primitive but yes, they are very distinct.  However a Great Pyrenees is not an Ovcharka, nor an Anatolian, nor a Komondor.  They are separate and distinct because of regional separation and the amount of inbreeding that occurred in history. 

Mdog59

I know there are "American" breeds that have been taken to other countries and either by nature or selection, they have developed a distinct line that is similar,

This is not limited to American breeds nor to Euro breeds nor African breeds.  Look at similarities between feral dogs of different regions.  They will all develop similar traits:  p-rick(for some reason this word is filtered) ears, large chest, almond eyes, etc.  You will also note that they will generally not weigh more than 50lbs.  Canaan dogs, dingos, Carolina Singing dogs, Basenji, pharaoh and ibizan hounds, Podengo Canario and hundreds of other primitive breeds demonstrate this.

Notice the similarities? 

Mdog59

Some of the arguments in this thread were that a Pom is a Pom is a Pom.  The other side of the debate is that it may be so, but some appear to have come from a very different line..... perhaps a line that could be considered something other than what we have come to know as the standard.  I am not advocating one way or the other.  I am just stating my observations.  I have seen some amazing variations in Yorkies.  Those variations could lead one to believe they were in fact Silky's, or Austrailian Terriers.  Not completely out of the question since they come from the same line and at some point in a bloodline could have innocently crossed.  AGAIN, I am not necessarily saying it would be an experienced breeder that has done this.

 I'm not sure I agree with you.  You say that the arguments in this thread were that "a Pom is a Pom is a Pom" ... but, I really don't think so.  Several of us were saying that there IS a difference between a German Spitz and a Pom... and that just because a Pom looks like a Klein Spitz doesn't make it a klein spitz, particularly if it's from "pomeranian" lines (notice the quotations!).  And that often what are variances from the 'standard' pom is a giant or badly conformed dog and that comes from disreputable breeders. 

 The differences between ill bred dogs and different types within the same breed is two very different problems.  As the GSD was brought up, those (pictures Xerxes posted) are all still GSD's, yes.  But are there badly bred GSDs also?  Yes.  But, that doesn't make it a belgian mallinois even if they resemble one, which is where this WHOLE thread began. Then we morphed onto the subject that "reputable breeders" who sell "pet quality" puppies are what is causing the whole problem.  Which is, IMHO, couldn't be further from the truth. It's the BYB's/Puppymills that get that honor.

But, I guess in another aspect you're right, a pom is a pom, is a pom... regardless of what it looks like.  If that's it's breed. That's it's breed, even if it looks like a chihuahua... WHY it looks like a chihuahua is a whole different problem. 

 No one said that Pom's didn't have bad breeders who make the breed look very different from standard. But to think that Pom's are the only breed with this problem is .... (ahem)  rather idealistic.

I am aware of the similarities, and not just of the traits and/or characteristics that are needed for a breed type, but also the visual similarities.  This is very strange.  We are arguing the same point, I sort of feel there is some kind of competition as to who can say it better.

It is a very captivating topic.  As the world gets smaller and we see so much more world travel, intermingling of cultures, and living abroad, it will be interesting to see the changes yet to come.  I am always excited to see if the AKC will announce the acceptance of any new breeds from year to year.  Some breeds are so new to the AKC that only one dog is entered and easily takes best in breed.  It would be exciting to be the first to show that breed, but the win must be a bit lack luster.  Don't you think?

I suppose back yard breeding will go on and it will spark even more discussions.

Mdog59

I am not necessarily saying it would be an experienced breeder that has done this.

Well, I argue that just because a pup comes out not fitting the standard doesn't mean it isn't well bred and the breeder is not respected. 

For example, these two dogs pictured below, both from very good lines, proven in conformation and work, threw a long-coated pup, something not to standard, a DQ.  Who would have known? 

4X VA Hoss vom Hirmer Teich (2007 Canadian Sieger)
SchH3, KKL1, LBZ, ED + HD 
 

V Faye vom Kirschental
HGH  KKL1
 

Meanwhile, this dog is a product of a local puppy mill, a despicable kennel, and yet he conforms to standard and is doing quite well in the SV show ring and has gone to Germany to show.

Dogs that fit a standard are not necessarily indicative of better breeding, just as dogs that fall outside the standard are not automatically indicative of poor breeding or lines.  Some conformation standards are pretty darn arbitrary anyway.

I agree.  That is why in my original post regarding the Pom I recently acquired I stated I was hoping this breeder was breeding for temperament and not confirmation.  Pippin is so OBVIOUSLY not the accepted standard, but he has an awesome temperament.  That was a huge concern for me.  I personally had never met a Pom that was not nasty, and I had always heard bad things about them.  When this puppy came along, my first instinct was to run.

I'm with you, if a dog of any breed is not physically and mentally sound, then it is not well bred.  I don't care what it looks like.  The odds of getting that pup of perfect health, perfect temperament and flawless confirmation have to be astronomical.  My preference would be to breed for health and temperament first and then hope for the perfect packaging. 

Most of the Pom's in this area appear to be of the same type..... way off of breed standard.  I have met some very nice ones.  I knew they were of Spitz origins, but when certain owners told me they WERE  Pom's I just thought, 'hmmm. from what planet?'  And then I automatically assumed they were Pom mixes.  I didn't know there were such departures from the classic Pom.  I've never been interested in the breed and have only known the AKC standard.  If Pippin and his litter mates are all healthy and they all have the characteristics I find in Pippin, then all I can say about the breeder is "job well done".

I appreciate your post.  If you will look closely, you will see in the quote you used, I say "Some of the arguements on this thread".   I know that some had opinions regarding the German Spitz.  I had no opinions.  I have no clue.  What little research I was aware of in my own reading was very contradictory.  I have one breed book that clearly states all German Spitz types are Pom's.  In another breed book the Pom and the German Sptiz are clearly divided into two separate breeds.  I really don't know.  I know I suddenly became the stunned owner of an AKC Pom that looks only slightly like a Pom.  I didn't get him because he was a Pom, or AKC or because I had any expectations of him.  I took him because he needed a home.

To me the posted pics had very clear lines of GSD.  Maybe good, maybe bad, maybe just different from AKC or what we accept as a good GSD at this point in time.  I never thougt it was a Belgian anything.  I think greed and education are also a big problem.  Folks buy the "pet quality" dog that has papers... and their off to the races.  Thus, a whole league of dogs that look like......? 

Hey, you're right, no one did say that Pom's didn't have bad breeders.  I'm not sure anyone would make THAT claim about any breed.  I would feel sorry for the person who would think that Pom's were the only breed that would have this problem.  Having addressed that, I would restate me question.  Do specialized breeds like Pom's .... (just as a "for instance", you know,  breeds that have been purposely bred down in size strictly for companion purposes) have a greater propensity for variances within the breed overall and/or a greater degree of variances within the specific lines because they are further from the breed of origin?  Dogs like sled dogs, sight hounds, etc are virtually unchanged... some for centuries.  Breeds like Yorkies, Poms, etc have been stylized, and in comparison, these breeds have been altered in recent history.  Wouldn't that make them genetically a bit more unstable?

As a side note:  When I refer to the contadictory info between books, I do have many breed books, but some are AKC, some are UK and then some have breeds from around the world.  I am not trying to say the authorities don't know the answer.  I realize the answer could be different in different countries.  I'm just saying I am new to this topic and I don't know which side has the better agruement. 

Thanks

Okay, you said:

I didn't know there were such departures from the classic Pom.  I've never been interested in the breed and have only known the AKC standard.  If Pippin and his litter mates are all healthy and they all have the characteristics I find in Pippin, then all I can say about the breeder is "job well done".

Um.... no. Job well done would be proper temperament AND proper conformation. (If you can only have one of the two, though, temperament's definately the one to pick. :P But you really SHOULD have both, to breed, and Pippen's breeder could be doing better.)

Now, to illustrate:

Three of these dogs are mittelspitz; one is a keeshond, and one is an American Eskimo, and two are kleinspitz. Can you tell me which is which? All of these dogs (except one) are champions with prestigious wins (Best of breeds and best of specialty shows; two are best of breed winners at the FCI world show) under their belts. (One of them is a PQ agility dog and I'll tell you why I chose him after I get your guesses.) As you can see, they all have significant differences from Poms.

Yay!  A test..... gulp!  I haven't studied.  At first all the pics didn't show up.  Here we go.

I THINK..  1, 2 and 6 are mittel's....... deep breath.... 3 is grainy, but I think it's the Keeshond....  4 is the AE ... and  5, 7 are the Klein

If I win a car, I'll just die.  No seriously, thanks.  This is cool.  They are beautiful!

#1 is2003 Weltsieger (Best of breed at the FCI world dog show) Enrico aus dem Norden, a kleinspitz- one who is very, very close to perfect.

#2 is Hero- CH Llancarfan Arctik Hero, #1 mittelspitz in Australia currently

#3 is Ethan, a keeshond from Sheminee Keeshonds (I can't remember his registered name)

#4 is the 2007 BIS winner from an American Eskimo Specialty (can't remember the name at all)

#5 is Carlo von Ayres Rock, an agility dog living in Germany. He's a mittelspitz who is RIGHT at the top of the breed standard and pet quality as far as type goes. He's pet quality whether you call him a wolf, gross, or mittel.

#6 is Xerxes aus dem Norden, a mittelspitz bred by the same folks as Enrico. They breed both kleins and mittels and are known worldwide for the quality and consistancy their dogs produce.

#7 is an English-bred kleinspitz exported to Australia, Aust. Ch Wychlea Lilac Wine, a BOB winner owned by Hero's breeder.  

1, 2 and 6 are mittel's....... deep breath.... 3 is grainy, but I think it's the Keeshond....  4 is the AE ... and  5, 7 are the Klein

So you got 2, 3, 4, and 7 correct. Not too bad. :) But can you see the difference between these and the type on even incorrect Pomeranians?  It's not just about size.

Absolutely,  I do see the difference.  I realize that you can't always go by just a picture, but the one book that I referred to that showed "German Spitz" as a separate breeds did show examples of Mittel and  Klein, but the photos were not as helpful as yours.  The dogs they showed as Klein looked less like these dogs you have shown.  They looked a bit more like my Pippin, only with more feathery hair.  Kind of like a really fluffy long haired Chihuahua. Now that I know what to look for, I will veiw the photos in my book a bit differently.  I was conforming the photo in to book to the reference I had in my mind.  I can correct that now.

Thanks!  This was not only fun, but very educational.

Mdog59

I'm with you, if a dog of any breed is not physically and mentally sound, then it is not well bred.  I don't care what it looks like.  The odds of getting that pup of perfect health, perfect temperament and flawless confirmation have to be astronomical. 

I agree with the last sentence but not the first, that is not what I was trying to say.  Take my dog for example.  She has a weak temperament.  She's a perfect pet and sport/competition dog, but she does not have correct nerves as far as German Shepherds are concerned.  However, she is still very well-bred.  Her pedigree has some famous and successful working line dogs and she shares ancestry with many successful working/sport dogs all over the world.  For some reason, she is the one that won't cut it in the ring.  So you are right, the odds of getting the perfect conformation + temperament are very small, but when a dog comes out with a fault, it doesn't mean they are poorly bred or that their breeder is a bad breeder.  That is the point I was making earlier, hence posting the two very well-bred, successful dogs that threw the long coated pup and the other dog who was bred in a puppy mill by greedy people who only care about money and is doing just fine on the SV show circuit.  I do not compete in SchH so I don't care that my dog does not have the courage to charge a large man beating her with a rubber stick.  She is a fine dog and a perfect competition dog for me (rally and agility).  Obviously because of her weak nerves she will not be bred, but just because one dog came out "wrong" doesn't mean her lines are crap and the breeder didn't know what they were doing.  Her siblings are fine dogs, her cousins and half-siblings do very well in SchH and police work.

Exactly.  I understand that.  I apologize.  Once again, I was referring back to one of my original posts (may not even have been on this thread, but it would have been to the same person from another thread), again, I was too vague in my observation.   My references to temperament were in regards to specific concerns I had about seriously nasty and/or neurotic behavior like one sees in over-bred and inbred dogs.

I believe my original conversation started on Pom 101 and then carried over to this thread.  I had been posting to a particular poster there, carried over here, and of course, as the topic expands or morphs and others join in, things can get a bit muddled.  My 6yr old Yorkie is timid and stranger shy.  She does not demonstrate typical terrier bravado.  I would not say she had a bad temperament because she is obedient, gentle, loyal, playful..... all of the traits I would look for in a "pet quality dog".  Now, in her case, I believe it was nurture and not nature (I got her when she had just turned four).   I know it could happen by nature also.

I know when a dog is being judged, the judge looks at the dogs expression, interaction with the judge, the way it presents itself in the ring, etc.  They look for that inner dog as well as confirmation. 

I am sorry for the confusion I may have caused.  I kind of jumped back and forth from talking about breed standards on some levels and addressing pet quality expectations on another level.   I know it can make some conversations tedious, but I do appreciate the interaction, information and opinions.