to all the linebreeders and inbreeders

lee ga · Post by **lee ga** » Mon Jun 14, 2004 2:30 pm

i think linebreeding benefits the houndsman, but let me ask this question. what if you breed two hounds together that are totally unrelated, but are very similar in every other way? both hounds are linebred from different families, but are very similar in there hunt, conformation, brains, running etc. why wouldn't this type breeding work to produce a high percentage of quality offspring? thanks

Chris · Post by **Chris** » Mon Jun 14, 2004 2:55 pm

I suspect it would.

You hear a lot of lip service and theory in regards to linebreeding, but it's rarely practiced. I've never seen a litter of solidly linebred hounds that didn't have its share of culls. Where are all the solidly linebred dogs that are so consistent in producing good dogs? Seems like the best dogs I've ever seen go come from outcrossing. Seems like finding crosses of best-to-best that 'knick' is the way to the best dogs. Go look at pedigrees of successful dogs for yourself. I'd much rather breed two good, solid, proven gundogs that have similar traits to what I'm looking for than select something of similiar blood just to keep it more 'in the family' -- seems like that leads to a bit more consistent mediocrety, maybe.

I'm going to go duck for cover now, because I'm sure to hear from linebred enthusiasts about how wrong I am.

On a side note: I hope everyone is enjoying the good weather and constantly good running conditions, that this time of year brings, as much as I am.

Steve C. · Post by **Steve C.** » Mon Jun 14, 2004 3:46 pm

Too many variables in any breeding to ever say anyone is right or wrong but when you have 11 consecutive generations of champions on the top of a pedigree or 7 consecutive generations of International champions in the bitch line, that sure wasn't the result of jumping from bloodline to bloodline. The real problem is that very, very few breeders are ruthless enough to stick to a program in which only the very best are used as breeding stock. Few ever are able to acquire even one such hound that is genetically programmed to produce. Linebreeding is certainly no guarantee of success but if the stock is sound to begin with, I believe you'll cull fewer individuals in the long term. Chris, a quick look at the pedigree of your foundation bitches shows solid linebreeding and this was a very calculated cross. Both sire and dam share many common ancestors and their strengths and weaknesses compliment each other. Had there been any 13" hounds in the litter, the next generation had already been planned at the time they were conceived. Once another breeder acquires such stock however, breeding philosophies change and the line is altered forever, whether for better or worse only time will tell.

woodbrier kennels · Post by **woodbrier kennels** » Mon Jun 14, 2004 4:12 pm

I am a firm beleiver of line breeding but i am not afraid to go out if you are breeding top notch hounds with very few and minor problems.But even in line breeding you need to breed top quity hounds together to raise your percentage of quilty pups you will have, it's not just about breeding to dogs that have simiular ancestors.

MY 2 CENTS

Kelly

bob huffman · Post by **bob huffman** » Mon Jun 14, 2004 4:27 pm

Linebreeding is a tool and is no better or worse than the selection process behind it. People that outcross all the time never blame their culls on outcrossing but when there are culls from linebreeding they are quick to blame the linebreeding. To be pro or con for one or the other is foolish and short sighted. My friend was telling me the other day that he made a cross with one of the males I sold him and bred him to a average dog and only one of the pups will move fast enough on the track to keep it going. He says they stand in one spot and bawl about 4 times on each track. Was this an outcross or linebreeding? Count all the dogs you have gotten rid of in the last 10 years becuase they were no good for hunting. Were they outcrossed or linebred? There are many good producers that are linebred and there are many good producers that are outcrossed. The best outcrosses come from stock that has been close bred back in the pedigree. It is not an exact science and you must know something about what you are doing to be successful. Both methods have their place and on average I would say you should outcross more than you linebreed, but both are needed to keep a breed together. Lots of times you are linebreeding and don't know it because it doesn't show in a pedigree but the genes are still the same because all beagles are related and technically it is impossible to outcross completely. If you breed 2 dogs with brown eyes, you have inbred for that trait even though it doesn't show on paper. The genes that cause brown eyes in Beagles are identical to each other. If you expand that to include other traits that are the same in each parent, you have inbred for those traits even though the parents weren't closely related on paper. If this weren't true, you would never be able to create a breed of type. From a practical view, it is less risky when you try to outcross and I do it all the time when I have 2 dogs that will click. Your averages will be higher as to healthy dogs. If I have a dog with an outstanding trait that he won't produce in the pups to high degree, it tells me he needs another shot of that trait and the most likely place to find it is a dog that is related. Once you get a pup like him, your chances of producing the trait you want becomes greater. The cross to the family member doesn't have to produce a whole litter of good ones to get the dog you want to use for breeding purposes. 2 differant goals and 2 differant methods. In olden times it didn't have the stigma it does now. Look in the book of Genisis and you will see that Tarah had children by his grandaughters and the line includes Isaac and Jacob etc. Success or failure is caused by your selection of parents and luck because you can't see all the traits they are carrying or will produce.

lee ga · Post by **lee ga** » Mon Jun 14, 2004 8:35 pm

hound A(female) is linebred for several generations. she has all the qualities that you are looking for in a gundog and doesn't have health problems. all the hounds behind her are the same.hound B(male) is also linebred for several generations. he has all the qualities that you are looking for in a gundog and doesn't have health problems. all the hounds behind him are the same. hound A and B hunt the same, run the same, both hounds are free of major faults,etc., but they are from different families. i just can't see anything wrong with breeding two hounds like this with each other. looks like to me, that however the genes come together in the offspring it should have positive results a high percentage of time. however i'm not very educated when it comes to genetics. like i said i'm not speaking against linebreeding. you should certainly be able to breed hound A or B back into there own family and acheive good results. i am just curiuos why you couldn't get the same results by breeding A and B together. steve, this is off the subject, but wanted to tell you that pete done a pretty nice job of keeping a rabbit moving this morning. the rabbit was less than half grown and twisted and turn like you wouldn't believe. pete only got to full speed one time where the rabbit ran straight for a short distance. he had to walk him most of the time. nice job for a hare hound way down in south ga. wink

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Mon Jun 14, 2004 9:31 pm

Thats how I started,I found a male with the same running style and brains as my gyp. Worked out real good. I have 2- 4 month old pups that circled there 1st rabbit today. What a rush.

beaglehandler · Post by **beaglehandler** » Tue Jun 15, 2004 12:12 am

I read that a Branko dog was the best rabbit dog ever to run a rabbit. The owner of the dog didn't like field trials and never enter this dog in one. What I read was from four different people, but all said it was the best hound ever. Now, this dog could be a great producer or maybe not. However this dog was not a grand or anything else but what was said about it made me think it would be a good dog to breed to. I feel that to much emphasis is placed on titles instead of actual hunt. The old man down the road here has a great little female that would rather hunt than eat, has never ran in a field trial. If she was crossed with the right stud what would you get. I am not knocking field trials but for myself I would rather have a dog that would rather hunt than eat. The name of the Branko dog was Leroy Brown, I think.

Steve C. · Post by **Steve C.** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 9:31 am

Beaglehandler, Leroy Brown was a good hound and may have been able to finish had he been trialed (he was entered in 3 trials) but I sure wouldn't rate him as high as a lot of other hounds I've seen. I bred a good bitch to him and got an average litter- one outstanding dog, one poor dog and the rest in between. Lee, I see nothing wrong with your thinking about the cross you propose, the only thing I'd want to know is more info on the ancestors of each individual- their strengths and weaknesses. I believe a cross is likely to produce an average of the families rather than favor one or two individuals.

bob huffman · Post by **bob huffman** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 11:27 am

Steve C is a scientist. Knowing the acsestry is one of the key elements in a quality selection process. Each parent is only one act of the play and you must see the whole show. The family creates the dog--the dog does not create the family. Most times, but not all, the dog is a mosaic of the family. Kepp inh mind the family carries hidden traits.

S.R.Patch · Post by **S.R.Patch** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 5:06 pm

lee ga,
You have struck upon the "ideal". It is why Randall found favour with Dad Powell and his Blue Caps. Two families with like type, really it was bring the families back together, as each sprang from the early English imports, Blue Cap, Blue Belle, Ch Lonely & Ch Ringwood...Patch

lee ga · Post by **lee ga** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 7:51 pm

i think linebreeding will keep things consistent especially when it comes to the finer details that one likes about his/her hounds such as color etc. while i do favor certain colored hounds, i'm more into the core qualities of a hound. details such as squall, chop, or bawl mouth doesn't concern me as long as its a honest mouth. hunt hard, good nose, good conformation, intelligence, honest mouth and line control is what concerns me most, everything else is secondary .i use linebreeding and will continue to do so, but i wouldn't hesitate to breed to an exceptional hound from a exceptional family if i had the oppurtunity. i wouldn't be to concerned that i would have to cull very many. i was just wondering if im wrong. could you produce good hounds with a lot of outcrossing if there were plenty of sound families out there(of like type)? i will say that steve and bob said a mouthful when they spoke about culling ruthlessly and only using/keeping the best breeding stock. patch, reading about willet is interesting. i remember reading an article about a houndsman that achieved consistent results from his breeding program by using a lot of outcrossing of like type, it went on to say that he was one of the few that achieved such success with outcrossing. was this willet or am i thinking about someone else?

bob huffman · Post by **bob huffman** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 9:01 pm

You have an excellent understanding on what tales place in a breed. Your thought about outcrossing a lot if there are good families of like type out there says it all. To outcross well you need families. What and how are families created? BY LINEBREEDING! A breed has genetic boundries. That is what makes it a breed and not a mutt. Genetic boundries are created by linebreeding either on paper or at a strictly genetic level which may or may not show a relationship in the immediate family tree. The term you are looking for when you breed unrelated type to type is family breeding. You see lots of common ancestors in the pedigree but they are not in recent generations. They are back in the 8th, 9th or 10th generation. All things being equal, this is the best way to breed dogs. It is only possible if you have the right families. In order to put yourself in that position, someone somewhere had to do some of the dirty work of linebreeding and careful selection. It is easy to say you will only outcross if someone has already created a breed with several families for you. For all the non believers of linebreeding, we could do an experiment. Let me select the dogs that you are to continue your line with and I am betting you would have to linebreed to get anything good that also produced good. I would select very poor dogs for you to start with and see if you could create something good. I would make sure all the traits you needed were present in the dogs but they would be diluted and spread around over a large population of, lets say, 100 dogs. You would quickly find out that continual outcrossing would get you where you wanted to be but it would take about 10 times longer to do than a program that used some linebreeding. Don't misunderstand me, outcrossing is very good and I do it all the time. It is because I have 2 families of like type that compliment each other. Those 2 families were created by linebreeding.

S.R.Patch · Post by **S.R.Patch** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 9:32 pm

First thing we need to do is define, "What is a family of hounds"?

lee,
I can't find where Randall used many outcrosses other than the Blue Caps. I believe after the work of breeding a family, a breeder becomes somewhat fearful of outcrossing, unless he knows another breeder and many of the hounds in his line personally. Few people will stick to their plan and resist breeding to the "hot hound" of the day.
As Bob said, it is the family and their established qualities that we judge the young enteries by, to select and carry on from.
Line/inbreeding does not create superior animals but narrows the variables of what may be produced in their offspring.
Randall said, after breeding the Patches for 70 yrs., "I can't say their a whole lot better than when we started but, there are many fewer poor ones...Patch

Robert W. Mccoy Jr · Post by **Robert W. Mccoy Jr** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 9:36 pm

S.R. Patch?

How do your dogs run that you had imported?

Which style or format would you say they would fit into.