On being Belgian

I've been noticing many battles between pretty people and functional people in many breeds the last years, and one of the battlefields was also the international Belgian forum (www.belgiansworld.com). This is a somewhat adjusted post I wrote on the forum to present my point of view:

I'm thinking of getting another Groenendael and I don't know which way to turn especially because of this kind of thinking - choosing between a working dog and a show dog. If I go to a breeder that has strictly show dogs, then I can probably choose between Fluffy, Puffy, Muffy and Tuffy, dogs with tons of coat and zero character. If I go to a breeder that has working dogs, I will most likely spend the first 15 minutes figuring which ones are dogs and to narrow my choices, which could be shepherds. If I go to a breeder that is neither, then the dogs probably kind of look like nice Groens and kind of work like them. That sucks! A BSD isn't Barbie and a BSD isn't Rambo. A Belgian is a dog that looks great and works great; of course every person has their priorities - ones emphasize more the looks, others emphasize more the working capabilities. But one thing shouldn't exclude the other! If you want a super fluffy dog, buy yourself a Bichon. If you want to do IPO with a thing that has the best bite power ever, get yourself a hyena. For the BSD is a combination of both, as the standard says - it is a combination of elegance and power, nobility and strength.

Belgians are neither just the looks nor the working skills. They are a combination of both; a nice dog that looks like a Terv, for example, but stands still when you throw a ball in front of him and stays there with a sort of 'Petit mal' absent look isn't a true Terv in my opinion; and a dog with excellent performance at IPO that is almost black, has the ear setting of a Welsh Corgi and the head of a GSD simply isn't a Malinois. I believe we should all strive to keep the breed we love as it is supposed to be - with both the looks and the ability to work. To maintain the essence of the breed as it should be, the whole package.

And to comment also on the standard (which, some argue, serves only to judge dogs on a show and is irrelevant for a 'working' breed) - if you have ever read the standard of the Belgians, you probably saw that there is a lot of descriptions about their temperament, way of behaving and moving; the standard is far from being just a list of things one should look for to evaluate a dog from a showing point of view; in it it is stated how angulated a BSD should be, how the body is constructed etc etc. This all applies to the functionality of such a dog - what this means for the working capabilities. And isn't this what matters most? Having a good looking dog with the correct physical features that enable him to excell at work? To be precise - having a true Belgian Shepherd Dog?

I hope we all overcome the dispute between looks and work and can start working together to keep this wonderful breed as it should be – 'a combination of elegance and strength.'