The American Beagler Forum

I personally would not want a pup from a "good producing" average brood female. I see a few folks that will buy a female just to breed even though she is an average hound.

I want pups out of well above average females and not "good producing" females. This being said, I know some females can be average and still produce, but just breeding for a line traits and not the hound at hand to me seems like way too much of a gamble. I want pups out of the ones you can't leave home whether under the gun or being competitive in trials.

Opinions and feedback welcomed. Just a thought that crossed my mind after seeing several "brood" females on the for sale section. Not bashing anyones choices just wanting feedback on where others stand on this???

I also see this popping back up in litters down the line, average leads to average. I KNOW all pups don't make top hounds, but I feel when breeding the best to the best(for your liking) you get a chance of getting the best again. Again, thoughts on this???

I totally agree! I see alot where people are already planning on breeding a female before its even born lol. I truly believe that breeding should be the last thing on your list and before you breed a female you need to evaluate it from a pup to adult hood and make total sure its an above average hound. If your breeding just to breed your spinning your wheels.

Well I agree with breeding the best to the best but some peoples idea of what is the best is way off .If you havent noticed the super gyps are hard to get hold of thus you have people breeding what they percieve as the best .I have a nice collection of gyps here now at the Ridge have purchased a few and raised a few they arent perfect but when ran in they can compete and are line bred well so I am looking forward to breeding them later on.

Noone or nobody has "breeding" down to a science. It's a roll of the dice as I've seen great dogs come from accidental breedings and horrible dogs come from 2 outstanding FC's and everything in between. It is not recommended to breed faulty hounds and I wouldn't do it myself, but some dogs are just good reproducers reguardless of their own abiilities. From what I have seen over the decades is that those who have success are generally lucky, or have the ability to raise several litters a year and merely use the numbers to find the best.

Pine Lakes wrote:Noone or nobody has "breeding" down to a science. It's a roll of the dice as I've seen great dogs come from accidental breedings and horrible dogs come from 2 outstanding FC's and everything in between. It is not recommended to breed faulty hounds and I wouldn't do it myself, but some dogs are just good reproducers reguardless of their own abiilities. From what I have seen over the decades is that those who have success are generally lucky, or have the ability to raise several litters a year and merely use the numbers to find the best.

+1

Why take a chance on a hound that doesn't really perform at a high level?? That is my question. I agree, some can produce, why not stack the odds in your favor and breed two hounds that you would be perfectly happy if the pups turned out like either parent? Just my opinion. Thanks for looking.

Like Pine Lakes said its all a gamble, but I know I would take a chance on the brood bitch that has produced some quality dogs. Sounds like to me this brood bitch will take out some of the guess work. IMO

But who is the guy who says, "this average female will be the foundation for my hounds for years to come??" What "true" breeder does that?

I AM NOT A TRUE BREEDER by any stretch. Just asking what prompts folks to do this?

I would say track record. Now I get where you're coming from as far as why would you ever breed an average or below female to begin with but if you have and she consistently produces superior off spring that far exceed her own abilities then why wouldn't you breed her again. Like I said I don't know why anyone would to begin with but if a sorry, cold nosed, loose mouthed, trashy female throws world beater pups why wouldn't you have a few litters? I know my example is an extreme but just to illustrate a point ya know.

They breed average because they dont know what a rabbit dog is or do not want to get better .

I'm no breeder I only buy pups . But when I want a pup I only look to the best breeder to get a pup . Sometime it works out great .

Great topic... People breed for one reason only... "hope". By way of what they see out of a female, her pedigree or by "hear say" or advice.

There are many variables involved. A sorry bred female with horrible DNA can be trained by a great houndsman and ran with and influenced by excellent dogs to make her appear better than she is, but she will rarely produce what she has become... or... a great bred female with superior DNA could have been trained by knuckle heads and ran and influenced "from a pup on" by trashy dogs, causing her to appear worse than what her real potential could and should be, but she may produce stellar dogs. Then there are the females that are started and only run once a month and are setup for failure by their owners, again their true potential hidden.

DNA is the only true way to judge any dog {male or female}, knowing all there is to know about the 8 great grandparents, the 4 grandparents and the 2 parents.

And even then, it is a gamble. The traits, characteristics and how they are wired between the ears within their DNA must match up, blend, mesh and complement each other "perfectly" between the Sire & Dam to get the once in a life time dogs that we are hoping to get.

Jim, a mutual friend "Larry" had a male "Jake" and a female "Blaze". They both were stellar dogs and both had superior DNA. Back in the 90's when he went to breed them we thought those pups would walk on water. He made the cross more than once with the same results, all the pups were just average dogs, good dogs but nothing to write home about. Now Jake with other females produce stellar pups and Blaze with other males produced stellar pups, but together... nothing more than average.

Anna's Ann was just an average dog and some say below average, but she had superior DNA and was wisely bred to males that "clicked" with her, when bred to Boomerang she produced Branko's Conman, when bred to Levi she produced Brankos Dutch Wiefke and when bred to Dingus Macrae she produced Manitoba Man, City Streaker, Close-Call Girl and White Blizzard.

Out of thousands of breeders over the years, only a hand full did it with great success "consistently". The rest of us keep on "hoping" with every cross and gamble with the odds and %'s.

Good post. Thanks for the insight!

Take care!

just my 2 cents is that alot of times i think you have to look at the overall family behind the dog and not just the dog itself. i have seen many times when you have 2 littermates and the decent one of the 2 produces way better than the outstanding one of the 2. hey, i try to breed the best that i can find but i don't want to breed and outstanding female if i know that her 3 littermate sisters were all duds. so i guess i am looking for a good one from a good family. i think laneline hit on a good point that how good a dog turns out has alot to do with the person behind the dog. i am a big bloodline/family guy but they still must have a good trainer behind them.

Agreed Harehound.

Major factors to consider. I guess I would always try breeding the best one first, from a strong family, then go from there.