Field Trial Ponderings

[mybeagles]

SR Patch,
It would seem to me Field Trials favor an individual super star. It matters little how good your average is but how your best performs.

Following your line of thinking what is the difference between breeding for the super star and breeding to improve the average? Are they synonymous?

Do you think guys breeding for superstars overshadow Kennels breeding to raise the average? Can a person do both simultaneously?

The challenge I've always faced is not keeping enough dogs to make a notable difference in the averages. With only 3-4 hounds slightly improving the average isn't nearly as fun as having a butt kicker.

[ray s]

I think testing our hunting beagles against other hunting beagles while, excluding their owners opinion of them, is good for the breed.

[mybeagles]

Ray,

I agree so long as their is no funny stuff going on. The concern I see in all associations is the lack of new participants. 80% is same guys with same group of judges that are judging the same batch of dogs most of which come from the same group of Kennels.

I dont have any brilliant solution to fix it. I would like to see the core beaglers take a newbie under their wing every couple years and get them involved. That may involve getting them one of the top prospects, showing them the ropes and ensuring their successful. Those that have finished, 10, 15, 20 dogs help someone finish their first dog. Pretty sure that would improve the sport more than finishing another. I know some do and have, but we need more. I know some are so passionate about finishing dogs they could care less if anyone else shows up. Not casting stones but if we don't get more new participants it's not going to be the objective evaluation it could be.

[CASKEY'S KENNEL]

Ray,

I agree so long as their is no funny stuff going on. The concern I see in all associations is the lack of new participants. 80% is same guys with same group of judges that are judging the same batch of dogs most of which come from the same group of Kennels.

I dont have any brilliant solution to fix it. I would like to see the core beaglers take a newbie under their wing every couple years and get them involved. That may involve getting them one of the top prospects, showing them the ropes and ensuring their successful. Those that have finished, 10, 15, 20 dogs help someone finish their first dog. Pretty sure that would improve the sport more than finishing another. I know some do and have, but we need more. I know some are so passionate about finishing dogs they could care less if anyone else shows up. Not casting stones but if we don't get more new participants it's not going to be the objective evaluation it could be . X2

[S.R.Patch]

SR Patch,
It would seem to me Field Trials favor an individual super star. It matters little how good your average is but how your best performs.

Following your line of thinking what is the difference between breeding for the super star and breeding to improve the average? Are they synonymous?

Do you think guys breeding for superstars overshadow Kennels breeding to raise the average? Can a person do both simultaneously?

The challenge I've always faced is not keeping enough dogs to make a notable difference in the averages. With only 3-4 hounds slightly improving the average isn't nearly as fun as having a butt kicker.

That's the problem Dave, your not following my line of thinking.
The super star may derive from a litter of substandard pups but yet carry their weight of substandard in his genes. The percentage of a litter and their parents percentage of at or above standard is where the strength of reproduction comes from. Long ago when I bred my grade hounds, I could expect 2 or 3 serviceable hounds out of a litter. Now, with registered hounds I can track and research how individuals and liters they were from resulted as adults.

The proof is there, look at your super star litter mates and their percentage of reproducing ability of like kind. The breeding of red letter hounds has long been a practice. We should all have super stars by now?

[Hare Chaser]

[/quote]
The super star may derive from a litter of substandard pups but yet carry their weight of substandard in his genes. The percentage of a litter and their parents percentage of at or above standard is where the strength of reproduction comes from.
[/quote]

Therein lies the chance taken when anyone buys a puppy or grown dog that comes from dogs they have never seen run multiple times under different conditions and knows nothing about the dogs behind them. Yet most of us, me included, simply don't have the time or the money to raise several generations of hounds and prove them out. The best I can do is get to know the people I'm buying a dog from well enough to get a good sense of how they think and the type of dogs they own and hunt. It's always a gamble no matter what. Field trials do have a place and just as not every FC is a worthy gun dog, likewise there are good gun dogs that are worthy of a FC title yet are never campaigned.

[mybeagles]

SR Patch,

This is my general thought on breeding....explain where I go wrong...I know it's not personal with you.

When you breed two superstars it's hard to get pups that are better because the bar is already set extremely high. Of course if you breed two average dogs the chance of getting a pup that's better is possible because the bar is lower.

I don't consider myself a breeder due to my small Kennel size so generally I can find what I'm looking for buying pups from good crosses. If I have my choice I get a pup from two exceptional dogs with consistently productive families. These normally require personal friendship with the breeder and make up a tiny percentage of breedings.

When I can't find that I look for a line bred female that's produced well outcrossed to an outstanding male of similar style.

Just to clarify outstanding dog does not need to be a FC. The best dogs I've owned were not good trial dogs. Take that for what it's worth.

I will never buy another pup out of two average dogs. I'm not looking for an average pup and it defies MY logic to think a superstar will come from that cross.

If I can't find what I'm looking for I wait it out.

Frank Reece was absolutely correct..."every breeding is a gamble". I would rather gamble with pocket A's than 7-2 off suit. When breeding dogs you get to pick your 2 pocket cards.

The breeding of red letter hounds has long been a practice. We should all have super stars by now?

Just because superstars don't consistently produce superstars doesn't imply you should start breeding consistently average linebred dogs that produce superstars at an even lower percentage does it? If line breedings were consistently bettering the breed they should consistently be producing great dogs that get greater with every cross but we know that's not true.

[Shady Grove Beagles]

Breeding Ponderings................
What are the reasons you are breeding and wanting to raise a litter? Hoping to raise that super star / butt kicker? Or are you hoping to raise a litter where the quality of ALL the pups in the litter are considered above average and represent what comes from your kennel?
If we are attempting to develop and maintain a strain of hounds then some form of line breeding will be necessary.If you are not attempting to breed up a line of your own then why line breed? You have a good chance of getting as good or better dogs by out crossing than by line breeding. However if you get that super star / butt kicker cross by out crossing then some form of line breeding will be needed to maintain and establish it's influence to future generations.
Otherwise through repeated out crossings you will lose the dominating influence of an influential dominate mating of unrelated dogs.
The principle differences between the great ones that result from line breeding and the great ones that result from out crossing is in the ability of the line bred ones to reproduce their kind with a much higher degree of regularity than can the out cross greats.
A real good mating pair from the same type of dogs that are from the same type of ancestors that have demonstrated the same type of ability on the same type of game will produce a much higher percentage of worth while pups for hunting and breeding.
I would much rather breed to a "good" hound from a family of top hounds than to breed to a "super star" from a family of poor hounds.
As always JMHO.

[S.R.Patch]

You have to ask, "line-bred to what".
Line-breeding to an individual is much different than line-breeding to individuals within a family. Like your card game(I'd rather use marbles for variables of individuals used). I don't think we could get down to that number in cards with hounds without some inbreeding.
Remember, what makes these hounds super stars they are far and above the standard you've set. The production usually doesn't go up, only down, but it is the percentage of reproduction @ or above your standard that matters from these hounds, that's where the variables in the hounds used starts to show up.
Even Randall was worried about Mike outcrossing the hounds. After 70 yrs of breeding he new what a few indiscriminate breeding could do and he expressed that concern to Ray before he died.
Again, it's all about the percentages meeting @ or above your standard. If your having fewer culls your improving and in breeding, your either going forward or backwards with the percentages just to add a dose of reality.
I know you don't like close breeding, but own first cousins don't care. If they are complete hounds, neither do I if your cards are stacked right.

[mybeagles]

How many dogs would a guy need to own to be line breeding within ones own Kennel? When you go outside your Kennel I assume you limit yourself to related dogs, hence the patch groups, black creek groups etc. Once these guys outcross out of the family do you eliminate them from breeding considerations or just quarantine that litter until they prove to produce desired results.

Apparently no Kennel has been completely successful of family breeding without major steps back. Otherwise they would produce consecutive outstanding litters. Have not seen that to be the case.

[Shady Grove Beagles]

I don't know how many dogs a guy would need.In 45 years of keeping hunting hounds I've never kept more than 4-5 grown dogs [ coon hounds or beagles] at one time.
I very seldom keep any male dogs so I have to go outside my own kennel to breed. And you are right,I do limit myself to related dogs. Although I'm not aligned with any "group" I am fortunate to have chosen a family of hounds that have achieved a very high degree of success over the past 20+ years and whose owners,like myself,have continued to keep and breed for the traits and characteristics we want in our hounds.
Several of these fellows have become good friends and we have exchanged several dogs between us.
If you've found something you like and are satisfied there is not really any reason for me to out cross unless I'm needing to ad something. AND if that is the case then I will try my hardest to find a hound that has strong ties to the family of hounds I follow with the trait I'm hoping to strengthen in a potential cross.
Remember that when you out cross you are adding another passenger on that bus and he gets on that bus hauling all his own baggage.Some of which you may have no idea what it is.I am not above breeding to an outstanding out cross hound.In the past 22 years since I bought a pup from Vic Costanza out of IFC. Maravic's Blue Ninja x Greenbrier Charity I have not had to and am now running my 6'th generation of this family of hounds.
If I felt the need to out cross to ad something then I would make sure that the stud I used was himself strongly line bred to give me a higher percentage of acquiring the traits I was looking for.
As far as other guys making an out cross outside of the "target" dogs that I'm concentrating on that is entirely up to them and I'm always curious to see their results as something out of their line bred hound crossed out may be something that I might want to breed back in to.Keeping within the family but also being able to bring in a trait or two that you feel is needed.
When line breeding you can't just line up pedigrees and say "there,see old so and so shows up 5 times in three generations". I try to see the dogs that possess the traits that make them special to me and those are the ones I want to use. All the dogs out of Ninja didn't necessarily have Ninja's traits, all the dogs Reggie produced don't necessarily run like Reggie and you can say the same for all the stud dogs out there.You can't just line up two dogs with Viagra as their grand sire and say "I have Viagra dogs".Depending on what Viagra and his son's or daughter's were bred to you might not have anything that runs anything like Viagra??
I don't believe any kennel can be completely successful with family breeding,out crossing or the old breeding "best to best" formulas as they all have their degrees of failure and success.
Outstanding consecutive litters????????? Who,where ,when???????? And will they please everyone???????????
As always JMHO.

[BMBeagles]

Passengers on the bus ! Is a good way of puttin it . But when anyone makes a cross they have to either have hunted with several generation's on the sire & dams side top & bottomTo say what the passengers are ! Or realy believe in it ! And think all the dogs in the pedigree were superior to others ! Even though they were never hunted over by the breeder .

[mybeagles]

Shady grove,

Excellent points....is there any cross you believe to be too close? Family breeding can be anything from littermates to 4th cousin.

I've known some good size kennels that started with good stock and had success initially but inbred themselves down to nothing. I believe selection and Kennel blindness were the major contributors.

Are there any deliberate steps you take to ensure your not losing vigor or essential traits.

You keep the same size Kennel I do, has there ever been a point where you didn't own a female worthy of breeding? 6 generations is a good span. Are the dogs you have now better than the pup you got from Vic?

If there was ever a lesson I was slow to learn it's that pups need to come from the best crosses possible. If I can buy a pup from a cross I think is better than a cross I can make I buy the pup. Obviously, the challenge is determining what constitutes the best cross.

The other thing I've learned is just because a Kennel puts a ton of time, family research and energy into a cross doesn't make worth a dam if they're selection process is faulty. Unfortunately so many get caught up in a bloodline that selection becomes secondary and in my view selection is everything.

[Shady Grove Beagles]

Mybeagles
You asked if I thought there were any crosses that were too close? My answer would be no.
Now,are there close crosses that I myself personally would not make? Sure.
Father x daughter,mother x son,full brother x sister matings. These are crosses I wouldn't make myself as I don't have the time or inclination to raise, start,train,evaluate and then cull out an entire litter. And I think that's imperative if you are going to in-breed.

One thing we need to remember is that relationships such as brother to sister,cousin to cousin,etc. may mean little or they may mean much depending on how much alike the mates are in the arrangement of their genes.Hounds that look and act alike and most closely resemble the family line or ideal are the ones most likely to be alike in their gene factors.And are more apt to produce off spring that are like the other hounds of that family.
True genetic relationship can be more accurately determined by the phenotype [ what you see ] and proven genotype [ what's inside ] than by family relationship as applied to the human race.A study of genetics will reveal that in some cases,distant cousins can be more closely related than can full brother and sister.
The family relationship concept such as father,son,sister,brother,etc. does not necessarily reflect the true genetic relationship of the individuals.Of two litter mates,one may inherit his traits from one ancestor and the other receive his from another.One may be outstanding as a hunter and breeder and the other may be worthless for both.
When both mates contribute the same kind of gene for a given trait in-breeding occurs regardless of the family relationship.
One of the things that is always mentioned as a concern of close breedings is a supposed loss of vigor,size and fertility.I can't really comment on this as I've never done what I would call "close" breeding.
What I would offer are some insights by one of the most successful breeders of all time. Lloyd Brackett in his booklet " Planned Breeding "
Brackett states that if the sire is the dog that the breeder is trying to preserve,breed the sire to his best daughter.If the dam is the dog to preserve than breed her to her best son
Brackett cites the advantages of close breeding to be that of holding and making the greatest use of the excellence of a single animal.In his words,preserving rather than originating greatness.
The hazard of in-breeding is that while it intensifies the traits and characteristics that you are looking for,it also intensifies the bad.
In- breeding does not create faults,it just brings them to the surface so that the breeder can more readily deal with them.
It is imperative that the breeder who in-breeds practices an intense selection program.
Brackett himself used in-breeding extensively with grand results.He earned the title "Mr. German Shepard",producing over 90 champions in 12 years through in-breeding.
In-breeding is generally considered to be the mating of individuals who are closely related ie father x daughter,mother x son,full brother x sister. Line breeding is considered to be the mating of individuals that are more remotely related.
As I mentioned I have never made an in-bred cross and doubt I ever will attempt one.I am a dedicated fan of line- breeding as I believe it gives me a higher percentage of getting the quality and consistency I want in the hounds that I've produced.

This is no magic recipe but this combination is never too close and will continue to give you dogs representative of the line you follow.
#1 Let the sire of the sire be the grand sire of the dam on the dam's side.
OR
#2 Let the dam of the sire be the grand dam of the dam on the sire's side.

As far as have I had any females that weren't worthy of breeding....... I've been very fortunate over the years as the Ninja line has always had a reputation as producers of an excellent bitch line.I've been very pleased with my own females.That being said,I definitely have had some that I was higher on than others for some particular reason or another.Because I'm a small kennel and only raise a litter every couple of years when I want one there have been some females that never got bred or I decided that the male I was using would cross better with another.
You asked if the dogs I have now are better than the one I got from Vic back in 1993.That female was Robinson's Naomi's Nola Drive and in my opinion was a heck of a nice female.Her litter mate sister F.C. Maravic's Blue Moon was an outstanding dog that can still be seen in the pedigree of MANY of the top hounds today.
Nola has been dead over 15 years now.I have a 12 week old pup out in the kennel that Nola is the great-great-great grand mother to.Don't know if these current hounds are better but I'd say they are all as good and at this point I'll settle for that !!
As always JMHO.

[warddog]

Being a rabbit hunter that has followed hounds for about 55 years I am of the opinion that most hunters I know and have known put little stock in field trials as the determining factor of what they own, hunt and breed. I am NOT a breeder but have had liters over the years when I need to replace old stock. If I am hunting it then, "I" have made the determination that the dog(s) are worth raising a litter out of OR I would not be feeding it. That then makes me the one and only judge that matters in the BIG PICTURE. I suspect that those of us who have hunted for many years need NOT look at a dog for weeks and weeks to JUDGE if we like them or not. I also suspect that also applies to judges as human nature is nearly impossible to eliminate. I do not understand all this and that HYPE about a dog bred to circle a rabbit as they either can or can not do it consistently alone or in company without me freezing to death to bag it. I do however hunt a line of dogs and have for years not because of their trial record but because of the traits that are consistent in that line and HUNT is one of them at the top.