What still constitutes a bloodline

[Bev]

I don't think so, Pt Mtn. I think it was the fall of 2000 when I bought Oz. He was 2.

[mybeagles]

Bev, sounds like my style of hound. I love a cold nosed, hard hunting jump dog. He might be just the sire to outcross a gyp too.......he he heee

How old is he now? 10

Why wait so long to breed him. If he's a dream dog, it certainly didnt take you 8 years to find that out. By age 10 the quality of the genes start to break down and he may never produce like he could have at age 5 or 6.

[Bev]

He will be 11 in June. He's not really what you'd call "cold-nosed", so if that's what you're wanting, he wouldn't be your dog. He's only a minute or so to open ahead of other dogs at times. He won't fool with an old line. If he barks, the rabbit's up.

[swing]

Mybeagles,
What is your dogs and their pedigrees, would be interesting to see.

[Pike Ridge Beagles]

This is for informational purposes only.For many years I've heard many people carry on about Dingus McRae.I am aware of some of the good dogs that were out of him.
Most all the people that write 100's and 100's of words about him never saw Dingus run and that's a fact.
Within the past year there was a thread on Better Beaglings Q & A board that contained comments in regards to Dingus by three very well respected gentlemen all now in their late 60's or early 70's who not only competed their hounds head to head against Dingus but also had the opportunity to judge him on numerous occasions.These three A.K.C. judges are Dick Doyle,Butch Keene and Joe Hanlon.You might find their comments enlightening but be advised ,they didn't appear to have found Dingus McRae the same quality of competitor that many of today's beaglers think he was.

I ran with an older gentleman from Newark , Ohio back in the late 80's that had seen Dingus run and he had nothing but great things to say about him. This mans name was John Bland and is now deceased. John knew what a good dog was and I respected his opinion greatly.

[mybeagles]

Trent,

Im stationed in Korea right now anticipating my return home, and was in Iraq before here. Had to sell out before I left.

I have owned dogs from a number of different lines, and started pups out of many others. The best dogs I have owned were off of two different sires. Ranger Dan X Back River Hanover Kate and Holdsworths Magnum Force(Grandpappy) X Colby Hill. I worked with some pups out of JR's Top Gun Tyke(Ranger Dan)that were awful solid. Just before I left I sold a powerful 15" male out of FC Klacking CreeK Smoke(Heli-Prop) X FC Hard Road Roudy Rudy that was as good as I have owned. Bought three male pups off the breeder. 2 were culls, the third had legitamate FC potential. Was stolen shortly after I left. Worked with many different lines that I wont mention to save face that were horrible. I stand by my earlier post that 90% of beagles are culls. The majority of the 10% left are not very good, but its that super star that motivates me to keep trying.

The first 15 years I owned beagles they were all grade dogs. Practiced the Best to Best breeding method in limited breedings for years with decent success considering my lack of understanding of what I was trying to accomplish. The last 10 years I have really expanded my understanding of breeding for success. I have bred 6 litters with the vast majority getting culled. Have made a few guys happy, but that was by selling a finished product for a puppy price. Through judging and attending Field trials I have learned what a beagle should be doing in theory. Matching that to personal preference is challenging at times.

I have learned what I am looking for and how to describe it. I have learned the faults and how to spot the smaller ones. I am on the list for pups out of a couple different litters and feel I have enough information now to be dangerous. I hope to continue to learn about breeding and increase my chances for success. From what I have learned thus far the biggest mistake being made with breeding seems to be the inferior breeding stock. Great crosses rarely have pups for sale, so Im left trying to raise a dog thats capable of producing the great cross. I must admit, thats more challenging than I thought it would be when I started out.

Hope that covers what you were looking for.....

mybeagles

[Pike Ridge Beagles]

Good thing all the other breeders were looking at pedigrees and doing their homework instead of ONLY breeding the best to the best or many would not have a "best to best" to make a cross with.

[swing]

good enough answer for me, thanks for serving the country.

[mybeagles]

Pine Ridge,

I think we are all safe. There seems to be plenty that will stick to outcrossing and plenty that are trying to recreate a legend. Could it be possible that the varying techniques are better for the whole of the breed? If more guys had a clue what they were linebreeding I think some improvements would be seen. Unfortunately, all the line/inbreeding being done in complete ignorance is likely doing more harm than good.

I dont know if any of you would agree, but I tend to believe an inexperienced breeder would be better served outcrossing. There has to be loosers at the trials for there to be winners......

[swing]

Mybeagles,
With all the studying on breeding ( linebreeding, inbreeding, and out crossing ) What two beagles (if you had your choice) would you like to see bred, to come up with what you are trying to accomplish ?

[Tim H]

I posted this on the other thread about linebreeding, so if you read it there you can skip this and save some time.

I think there is a huge misconception that linebreeding or inbreeding is done to create a "superhound". That misconception is generally forwarded by people who don't understand linebreeding or inbreeding so they have to come up with a reason why it is not working, thus their way of breeding must be better.

Let's eliminate this foolish concept. Linebreeding/inbreeding is not going to suddenly produce a "superdog", that is not what successful linebreeders/inbreeders have tried to do. That is more consistent with the concepts of the people who don't linebreed/inbreed. Those who don't linebreed/inbreed tend to try to find those two outstanding hounds that when bred will create the "superhound". This method is used far more often than linebreeding/inbreeding. Why? Because it's alot easier to do and it seems like a good shortcut when compared to linebreeding/inbreeding. People also breed for the "superhound" because they have a different philosophy than the linebreeder/inbreeder.

The philosophy of many linebreeders/inbreeders is they want consistency in their hounds. It makes no sense to linebreed/inbreed if all you expect to get is one "superhound". Think of all the time, money and dogs involved when you breed 3 generations of dogs. Would it really be worth it if your only reward was one 'superdog"? Believe me, if that were all they were looking for, they would all go buy that one "superdog" from someone else. That is not what most linebreeders/inbreeders are trying to accomplish. They may get that one "superdog" but it's not the goal. The goal of most linebreeders/inbreeders is to consistently produce litters that are better than their parents. The reason they want to do that will vary. Some want to have dogs that succeed at trials. They may not have the "superdog" everyone is talking about but they have many dogs winning consistently. Some linebreed/inbreed because they want a pack of dogs they can hunt with that with each litter get better and have similar traits so they are a tighter pack. I fall more in line with this philosophy. I can replace older hounds with younger hounds, without having to go back to the drawing board each time to try and find something that will work with my pack.

I would challenge anyone to look back in the history of any "superhound" you want and you will find that linebreeding/inbreeding has occurred, so you can't logically then suggest that linbreeding/inbreeding has not produced "superhounds".

However, I don't believe in "superhounds" so you will not convince me that any breeding method will consistently produce "superhounds". I use linebreeding/inbreeding because it has proven to be consistent in producing quality hounds. When it is working well you can see incremental improvements in each litter. No method is always going to work but linebreeding/inbreeding has proven to increase the odds of success if the breeder is willing to accept the time, money and work that it takes to do it right.

[Bev]

Excellent post, Tim.

[RiverBottom]

Good post Tim.

"The goal of most linebreeders/inbreeders is to consistently produce litters that are better than their parents."

In my experience, linebreeding seldom produces offspring better than their parents and inbreeding almost never does. However, dogs that are bred close, then outcrossed sometimes produce pups better than themselves.

I have linebred, inbred and outcrossed, with good and bad results from each method. I found the biggest factor between the good and the bad in either method is selection. Selective pressure. The old burning pedigrees thing What ever you want to call it.

A sucessful breeder is one that consistently has outstanding dogs, generation after generation. He may have one "superstar" that everyone knows, but if you look in his kennel you will see a few more just as good or better. Come back in ten years and he will still have a kennel full just as good or better.

Linebreeding and inbreeding are very good tools to get to this point, but a few do it strictly by outcrossing. That's the hard way in my book, takes a much higher number of dogs if you don't linebreed, but it can be and has been done.

[Tim H]

However, dogs that are bred close, then outcrossed sometimes produce pups better than themselves.

Explain to me the difference between "bred close" and linebred.

a few do it strictly by outcrossing

Show me one dog that is strictly outcrossed and then show me a pup out of that same dog that is strictly outcrossed. Maybe after seeing the futility of trying to accomplish this, you will see why "strictly outcrossing" is an exercise in futility.

When all a breeder does is try to outcross only, he passes on recessive genes that are not exposed. All the pups of the outcrosses that he does subsequently carry those genes. They are then randomly passed around. They will eventually show up and the breeder doesn't know when nor where they will show up because he hasn't identified them in his breeding program. They may not show up for generations, so the breeder may not even know that they were passed through his breeding program, thus he spreads the bad genetic trait on to others, how is that bettering the breed?

[RiverBottom]

Tim, bred close, close bred, inbred and linebred all mean about the same thing to me.

A very good example of breeders that do not believe in inbreeding are the large packs of english foxhounds. Do some research on the Belvoir hounds. They will NOT have the same dog show up in the first 5 generations on the pedigree more than once. After that they want certain dogs in there as much as possible.

Common practice for the last 200 or more years for the Belvoir (or Quorn, or any of several other english packs) was to send about 200 puppies out to walk each year. When the pups came back from walk they culled about half on the spot, then hunted the rest and culled some more until only a few were left. I'm pretty sure those few were almost carbon copies of their pack mates.

I don't know if they are still doing this now with the ban and all. If they are I'm sure they keep it quiet.