A general forum for the discussion of hunting with beagles, guns, clothing and other equipment and just talking dawgs! (Tall tales on hunting allowed, but remember, first liar doesn't stand a chance)
Dan your crackin me up. Its nice that you have the opprotunity to run your dogs when you like. I'm happy for ya. I am sorry if I implied that I have the formula to breed the perfect dog as I feel that will never be accomplished. The reason I am changing lines is because the line that I was running is producing (IMO) hounds that can't run their own rabbit. Its hard to find hounds in that line that pocess the traits of the early 90's which is what I liked about them. The dog that I thought could carry on the traits that I liked got killed at the ripe old age of 19 months while I was waiting to do the right thing in breeding him. MY MISTAKE. That pissed me off and I gave my 3 bitches away and started fresh. Racing horses is just like any other business, if you don't keep growing you get left behind.
Greg H wrote: Dan your crackin me up. Its nice that you have the opprotunity to run your dogs when you like. I'm happy for ya. I am sorry if I implied that I have the formula to breed the perfect dog as I feel that will never be accomplished. The reason I am changing lines is because the line that I was running is producing (IMO) hounds that can't run their own rabbit. Its hard to find hounds in that line that pocess the traits of the early 90's which is what I liked about them. The dog that I thought could carry on the traits that I liked got killed at the ripe old age of 19 months while I was waiting to do the right thing in breeding him. MY MISTAKE. That pissed me off and I gave my 3 bitches away and started fresh. Racing horses is just like any other business, if you don't keep growing you get left behind.
By the way, I enjoyed your web-site.
So does this mean we sort of agree on somthing thats a good thing I think all the best Dan.
Good note to end my paricipation on this thread. Its been good talking with you all and just remember. Breed for yourselfs and not anyone else. Thats the only way we will all come out on top. I look forward to future talks as this really is an informative board.
Greg H. This pedigree matching sounds like an interesting tool. What actual info do you have to feed into it and what actual results does it spit back out?
You are correct in saying that you can't really compare the breeding of hounds to the breeding of horses. I was just trying to get a feel for some of the common practices in other breeding circles.
You say that in most cases the horses were injured, could not race and owners are trying to recoup some of there money they have into the horse. I take that to mean they don't make it a common practice but if need be they will do it.
Back to the point of the topic, have you ever used an eight month old hound as a stud? I say eight months because that was how it was asked by Blackdirt in his original question. Do you think a hound at eight months is the finished product? Meaning he can't get better or worse.
I agree that this pedigree matching tool would be useful, but it is only as useful as the information you have or are given's accuracy. I think that this debate / discussion is a very informative and useful conversation.
If you could get fifty died in the wool, dedicated, hard nosed, HONEST, breeders in a room and asked them the question "is there such a thing as a proven stud" I bet more than half would say there was no such thing. Unless "proven stud" to you means they can get pups if bred. Proven, to me at least, should mean that the biggest percent of pups thrown by the stud would make average or above hounds regardless of what dam they were bred too. Now since it has supposedly been proven by scienticfic research that a stud can only pass on half of a pup's gene pool, the other half coming from the dam, it would be a thing to behold if every female the said proven stud was bred to passed the exact same genes as the other female and that the stud passed on the exact same geenes from his genectic makeup to each of the females. That being said, I know through some very selective breeding by dedicated breeders, there may be some studs out there that may have a record of producing at least half of pups thrown that made average or above hounds and some may call them proven but actually they are only proven through selective breeding to certain female with like genes,and not because they can breed to just any female and acquire the same results. Yes I know that any good breeder will match the gene pool of the female to the stud as close as they possibly can to get the highest percent of "good pups" out of a litter, but I'm talking about a "proven stud".
This brings up the next question of whether or not to breed a young male. The gene pool a young male has that can be passed on, is made before that pup is ever born.Those genes are his for the rest of his life and cannot be changed period. No amount of hunting or fur in the mouth will change any of his genes. Fur in mouth might help bring to light just what genes the pup has but it still won't change them. Some might say, and I might lean that way myself, that if a male or female has to be hunted three or more years to display what genes they have, they shouldn't be bred to start with. Other's might say, and I certainly wouldn't argue, that if a young male was showing all the positive genes the breeder was looking for at an early age, doesn't mean that it will pass on those desireable genes when bred and it needs more time to show the genes that most likely will be passed on. If that male continued to show the desireable genes all his life the breeder would loose out on some possibly good pups by waiting several years to breed him, if the male doesn't continue to show desireable genes all it's life then the breeder that waited won't have as many culls,maybe, and comes out ahead. Now through all this mumbo jumbo I have concluded that it could possibly be a toss up on whether or not this male had the right stuff to start with and that's why I gave up on trying to be a breeder more years ago than I care to talk about. ***
***These are just my observations and are not subject to abuse or argumentive debate, nor or they subject to any slanderous law suits.
PAPPY'S PLACE Where Friends are Cherished & Hunting is a Pleasure CHUCKWAGON KENNELS
Pete Miles
Farwest,
No I have never bred an 8 month old pup. And yes I agree that at 8 months a dog is far from finished. I do wish with all my heart that I would have bred my male last spring before he was killed. I was waiting on the females to come into heat in the fall which would have put him at 1 1/2 years old. That was a loss that I will never get back. I truely believe that a dog will produce the same pups at 8 or 10 or 13..... months that he will produce at 6 years. Now yes you will get a better picture of what those pups will be if you wait, but no amount of running time or rabbits killed or lack of either is going to change this dogs genetic blueprint. If a guy has a pup that is showing greater talent than any of his previous dogs, whats it gonna hurt, other than making him a horny little bastard, to test breed him if for no other reason than insurance.
The pedigree program is really something else. It will generate pedigrees for any horse that has been registered as a Standard bred or Thoroughbred since the beginning of time. LOL My program bought new in 99 had close to 1 million horses in its data base. Each year we can log on, at a price, and download all the horses born and registered. More importantly, it will generate a hypothetical breeding between any mare and stud, and figure the x factor score for that offspring. All the champions have a unique x factor signature. This not only consist of all of the ancesters but it will calculate where those horses fall in the pedigree and what effect they had on the breed at that time. It basically traces all standard breds back to 4 families. 4 sons of Hambletonian. Then it score a potential breeding on how many influences it gets from each family. Its is really complicated, I guess thats why they created the program so we wouldn't get so many headaches this time of the year.
Pappy Wrote
If you could get fifty died in the wool, dedicated, hard nosed, HONEST, breeders in a room and asked them the question "is there such a thing as a proven stud" I bet more than half would say there was no such thing. Unless "proven stud" to you means they can get pups if bred. Proven, to me at least, should mean that the biggest percent of pups thrown by the stud would make average or above hounds regardless of what dam they were bred too.
Ain't that the truth!
To me a proven hound or stud dog is one that Consistantly produces traits, this could be bad or good depending on what you do or do not want. I would like to see what the stud dog is producing from other matings not just with one mating and is there similarities to this stud. I think that if the line has a strong genetic factor it is passed on and will be dominant. There is many hounds you can look at thier pups and say boy that pup is the spitting image of his sire or dam and look even further back and looks just like the grand. If you see this in the majority if not in the entire litter that is what I would call a proven sire.
To me the FC and CH don't prove to much cause we all know how some folks get their FC's and CH's so to me that is not a proven hound. When you see consistancy is when you are getting to the proven. So this being said if the dog your choosing to breed to has all the desired traits you are looking for then it is up to you to do what you want. If it don't have then I would consider another route.
Greg H wrote:
I disagree with you though SR Patch. With the exception of scenting, we are breeding for the same traits in horses as we are in beagles. Speed, Stamina, Heart, ability to overcome bad conditions, motherhood, ect....
By the way, we don't get paid for beating a clock. We have to beat 10 other horses that are trying to do the same thing.
Here is the big wrench in the whole idea of trying to adapt this program for dogs. While horses only have 1 foal at a time, dogs split the genes to several pups. There in layes the rough.
As for breeding, I am going to use the term "a young dog", (rather that 8 month old pup because the dog in question is now going on 11 months and hasn't been breed yet) haven't we all had that dog that we wish we could replace. If a young dog is showing so much promise for his age then why not secure those bloodlines by test breeding him. You don't have to sell the pups, and you don't have to continue to breed him at a young age. SR Patch has one example in Linesman. It obviously didn't hurt that hound to get a little at a young age planned or not. Not only did this dog go on to be a good one but he produced from breeding at 9 months. Now did SR know this dog was going to be as good as he turned out? Probably not. But he new the potential was there by the ancesty.
Greg H,
I see why your changing hounds, your still missing necessary qualities needed in a good hound. Scenting + your horse qualities are still short of equaling a good hound. Think some more...
For Linesman, he was slow and the thought of taking him back for an exchange was strong. Solitary was a strong bitch and it was planned to breed her to proven sire, not a still awkard young pup. Linesman grew to become the greatest producing sire of all time, but wouldn't have got his first mating till a 3 year old, if things had gone to plan, for it was about that time that he came into his own and proved he was a rabbit hound. The longer he ran, the stronger he got. He created the insideout check work and passed it on the his pups. Many could tell if it was a Linesman hound by the way they worked a check, he was famous for it...
Well, be back next week. Keep this going, been a long time since we had a good barn burner...
SR Patch,
Your right trying to compare breeding horses to hounds is not a good idea.
There is far more pressure in breeding horses and its so much more complex that I really can't compare the two.
Now, if I read right, Linesman was able to change his genetic make up just by hunting. Thats amazing. As he grew older and developed the ability to work the check he morfed he genes in a way that he passed this on to his offspring. WOW. You know better than that!! He was going to produce the same style of pups if he had stayed in his pen for 3 years. All you did by running him was exposed this gene that made him the dog he was. When he started passing it on you exposed another gene that made him a great producer. If he hadn't pocessed the gene to pass on his traits we would be hearing stories about this great hound that really never took off as a stud.
I hear people talking about all these young dogs blowing up, or developing faulty running habits. I also know that a young dog that has had some serious ground time will show you what speed that it WANTS to run, when you solo it. If you take your young dog that consistently runs a 7 speed solo, and you pack it with a bunch of 9's. Than you sould expect a blow up, or developement of faulty running habits!
If a young dog exibits the running triats your after, and you know the running triats of the dogs blood, and they match up. I don't see why a breeder couldn't make a trial breeding.
A lot of ruined young dogs are created by handlers trying to get something from a young dog he does not posses the ability to offer!
I have also stated that your not just breeding to the stud, your breeding to the whole litter that he came from! I would think less of a breeder that bred to a stud that was a good dog, but had littermates that were duds! Than I would a young stud that came from a litter of outstanding pups!
Just my two cents.
Failure to prepare, is preparing to fail.
Shiawassee Bottom Beagles
Greg H, comparing horses to hounds came from your posts, not SR Patches posts. He quoted your post and then tried to explain why you shouldn't compare horses to hounds.
Also, he never implied that the genetic make up changed by hunting. The hound improved as it matured. Now that did not change the genetics but revealed the results of some of the genetic make up that is far more important in hounds then it is in horses, brains and scenting.
Anyone who has been around hunting beagles for long, would agree that brains and nose are the 2 most important aspects of a great hound. Here is where the differance between breeding horses and hounds reveals itself.
There is currently no way of quantifying brains or nose scientifically through genetics in hounds. That is why most of the breeding programs are based as much on experience as they are on genetics. That is also why most houndsmen with experience will wait and see how these important qualities develop in a hound before they breed them.
In horses you have quantifyable genetic qualities you are looking for, strength, speed, stamina can all be measured on a track with a clock and other instruments that are exacting. This information can and has been entered into databases for years and has proven capable of accurately predicting these quantifyable qualities. So, while there is more science and math invovled in breeding horses it is actually less complicated because of the exactness of the science and math as well as the wealth of information available.
So you're right, you can't compare hounds and horses nor apples and oranges.
Just curious about what you see in the Bramlett line that is making you think that is what you want instead of what you have? This would give an indication of what you think is important in a hunting beagle.
Greg H, I see you are into horses and racing them. Have you ever used an eight month old colt as your stud?
I thought that was a profound question and I answered it. I did not bring up the fact that I race horses. In this answer I mentioned a pedigree matching program which spawned other questions. SR Patch is the one that started making the comparisons between horses and hounds. Now since this is a beagle board lets talk dogs. I'll be happy to answer any questions you have concerning breeding horses via pm.
Tim, You stated that scenting ability and brains are the two most important aspects of a great hound. I agree. That is why I am making the change to the Bramlett Bloodlines. Now in an earlier post I said I was abandoning my bloodlines to start over, that was not an accurate statement. The Bramlett breed female that I bought actually has 5 crosses to Anna's Ann thru her maternal Grandsire. (FC Smoke Creek Syrus Mcgee). If she poccesses the traits I want she will be my new anchor. So I guess that I am not abandoning those bloodlines altogether.
No indications needed to what I think is important in a hunting beagle, I tell ya flat out. In this order. Brains, hunt, conformation, desire, heart, jump, line control, mouth, speed.
A producer will produce. Too young for my liking though. Ive seen them start out like barn burners then spin out within a year. I wouldnt breed any of my own males that early. Id want to make sure they had there minds only on cottontail....
I think swing bring up a good point with his question on the other post "Since Pee Wee Griz has been such a good reproducer why not go directly to him and bypass all this confusion" This makes the most scence to me. Griz has "proven" himself as a producer why not try him while he is still alive? I can see the need to go outside your "own line" every now and again to try to get something it is lacking but to try to get this from an eight month old pups has me scratching my head.
Dan your crackin me up. Its nice that you have the opprotunity to run your dogs when you like. I'm happy for ya. I am sorry if I implied that I have the formula to breed the perfect dog as I feel that will never be accomplished. The reason I am changing lines is because the line that I was running is producing (IMO) hounds that can't run their own rabbit. Its hard to find hounds in that line that pocess the traits of the early 90's which is what I liked about them. The dog that I thought could carry on the traits that I liked got killed at the ripe old age of 19 months while I was waiting to do the right thing in breeding him. MY MISTAKE. That pissed me off and I gave my 3 bitches away and started fresh. Racing horses is just like any other business, if you don't keep growing you get left behind.
thats a good thing I think 
all the best Dan.
