Over on Chris's board (http://www.rabbithuntingonline.com) there have been a lot of discussions on registries and the need for them to keep pedigrees. This brings up a question; how far back in the pedigree do you look to expect any influence on your hound or pups? Would the hound that appears twice in a 4th, 5th, or 6th generation really have any influence on the dog you have now?
Also, there's been some back and forth on AKC registered vs. non-AKC registered dogs. The big argument for AKC dogs is that the pups bring more money - and that may be the case, but another arguement used is that breeders want to know what's in the dog's background in order to make intelligent breeding decisions. Well here is where this ties in with my question:
If you don't feel like the hounds past 3rd or 4th generation play much of a part in the scheme of things - in other words if you feel like 3 generations back is all you can really look to, then why wouldn't or couldn't you register a dog with UKC or NKC and start your pedigree rolling? Or, why not keep track yourself - many "grade" dog breeders have done this for years anyway. Their dogs are not AKC, but they can tell you about every ancestor as far back as you'd need to know. This wouldn't be so hard to do. If you have a 6-year-old bitch in your kennel that you raised from a pup, you could easily have built a 3-generation pedigree yourself and would know all the dogs that have influenced your present line.
This may sound like an anit-AKC post, but it's not. It's designed to get people thinking about breeding a better dog and not relying on the papers of dogs you never owned, never saw run for yourself. Those of us new to beagling and new to breeding breed a lot of dogs based on hearsay, wouldn't you agree? I have a lot of AKC dogs. (They are also registered UKC and some of them NKC). I never saw Jack Of All Trades run, but he's in their pedigrees a lot. I won't dispute that he was a good dog and producer, but I can't personally verify that either. Perhaps he was bred to some 4-star bitches. The Elm's Jiggs Maggies Mate is also in there. I never saw that hound run, once again I have to rely on hearsay to make my breeding decisions based on the pedigrees I have in front of me. How many of you out there breeding from certain lines actually witnessed those dogs' performance for yourself? This method may be fine if a person wants to continue or improve on a line that's already established, but what if you're a person who looks around at everything running today and says "It's close, but not quite what I want in a hound" and you decide to start your own line from hand-picked dogs.....like the ones in your own back yard - the ones you love enough to feed 365 days a year?
What if you like the hounds in your yard and they are a mixture of AKC and non-AKC registered dogs? Would you not breed them based soley on that? If you had a mixture like that and felt they would really compliment each other, couldn't you breed them and take advantage of one of the open registries to record the breedings. A person would want to keep his/her own records too, because the paper pedigree alone won't tell you if a hound in there was mouthy or a trash-runner, or occasionally confused north with south.
What are your thoughts? Couldn't this also be an effective way to breed a better beagle?
Pedigrees - How to use them and how far back?
Moderators: Pike Ridge Beagles, Aaron Bartlett
Hi, bev. I think as a new commer again to the beagle breed that I find the pedigrees an invaluabel tool in my deciding to breed or even buy a puppy from a certain type of breeding. And also trials have been a great help in aquiring the type of dog I want to take hunting. First I attend as manny trials as I can I found the type of trial format that promoted the type of hound I was looking for and then wathched allot of dogs run. I then inquired as to the breeding of those dogs and set out to aquire the same breeding.
Where I believ the pedigrees back farther than 3 generatiosn become verry important is when you are looking at the reproducing power of the line you have choosen and how they produce when crossed to certain blood lines. And then there is the linebreeding /inbreeding thing as well. and then thee is also the conformation angle.
As to the grade dog breeder etc. most often they are hunters and don't particularly careif a dog is 13" 15" or even 17" as long as they can run a rabbit. SO it all comes down to what you are trying to acomplish with your dogs, As far as looks and abilities on running the rabbit. I have often been told that when you breed two dogs you are actualy breeding the grand parents of those two dogs but have yet to see it as a fact at least in the breedings I have made. I am very interested in hearing what some of the more experienced beaglers have to say on this subject. Good one Bev. John
Where I believ the pedigrees back farther than 3 generatiosn become verry important is when you are looking at the reproducing power of the line you have choosen and how they produce when crossed to certain blood lines. And then there is the linebreeding /inbreeding thing as well. and then thee is also the conformation angle.
As to the grade dog breeder etc. most often they are hunters and don't particularly careif a dog is 13" 15" or even 17" as long as they can run a rabbit. SO it all comes down to what you are trying to acomplish with your dogs, As far as looks and abilities on running the rabbit. I have often been told that when you breed two dogs you are actualy breeding the grand parents of those two dogs but have yet to see it as a fact at least in the breedings I have made. I am very interested in hearing what some of the more experienced beaglers have to say on this subject. Good one Bev. John
The only problem with grade dogs is people just don't keep records like the should. If you go around here and ask someone who has grade hounds and ask about a certain dog in their kennel they ALWAYS say it's mommy and/or daddy was/is the toughest dog to ever hit the ground. Now that really tells me alot!!!! Not to say some people who raises grade hounds don't keep records it's that I just haven't found one who does! Now as far as breeding let say a AKC male to a grade gyp I myself have spent many hours thinking about wether or not to do it. This was last year when I thought about making a cross of my best grade female and AKC male but in the end I didn't do it. Bev didn't we have this dicussions about breeding AKC to grade dogs on the BU site about year and a half to to years ago? Tom Gross
-
back40
Good post Bev, we could go on about this for days.
I think people place too much emphasis on registration papers(AKC especially). One of the most respected men in Beagling once told me that one of the two biggest fallacies of Beagling is the belief that grade hounds are inferior to registered hounds. I think it all comes down to what the goals are of the breeder. Does the breeder want to produce top quality hounds or does the breeder want to produce top quality registered hounds? If the breeder wants to produce top quality registered hounds, why is that? Is it because he would rather have someone else keep track of his pedigrees for him? If so, he probably won't be very successful anyways if he can't keep track of his own hounds' pedigrees. Most likely it is because he wants to sell a few dogs along the way and he knows that a registered dog will sell better. Nothing wrong with that, as long as you admit it up front. I smile when I hear people say they won't own anything but an AKC registered dog. My first question would be - Why? I hear different reasons, from the fact that they sell better to the reason being "that some of those ARHA and UKC hounds don't even look like a Beagle". Well all I can say is that I've seen more than a few AKC Beagles that look more like Basset Hounds than Beagles. At least the people citing the fact that they sell better are being honest. I've also heard the reason that "you just don't know what's behind those grade dogs". There may be some truth in that but even though you can be fairly sure of what's behind a registered dog on paper, it doesn't mean a whole lot unless you've actually seen those ancestors perform in the field, and most people haven't. Even though most of my dogs today are AKC registered, if I were to find a grade dog that is a top performer and is also a proven producer of the same, I would not hesitate to breed to him. Why? Because my goal is to produce top quality hounds, not top quality registered hounds.
You've heard the saying "If you build it, they will come"? Well, if you build a high quality bloodline that outperforms and outproduces all others, people will come whether the dogs are registered or not. Even though there will always be some that choose to ignore it, performance and reproducing ability will speak louder than any registry's papers. It just depends what your goals are. The ultimate goal of performance should never be sacrificed for registration papers.
I think people place too much emphasis on registration papers(AKC especially). One of the most respected men in Beagling once told me that one of the two biggest fallacies of Beagling is the belief that grade hounds are inferior to registered hounds. I think it all comes down to what the goals are of the breeder. Does the breeder want to produce top quality hounds or does the breeder want to produce top quality registered hounds? If the breeder wants to produce top quality registered hounds, why is that? Is it because he would rather have someone else keep track of his pedigrees for him? If so, he probably won't be very successful anyways if he can't keep track of his own hounds' pedigrees. Most likely it is because he wants to sell a few dogs along the way and he knows that a registered dog will sell better. Nothing wrong with that, as long as you admit it up front. I smile when I hear people say they won't own anything but an AKC registered dog. My first question would be - Why? I hear different reasons, from the fact that they sell better to the reason being "that some of those ARHA and UKC hounds don't even look like a Beagle". Well all I can say is that I've seen more than a few AKC Beagles that look more like Basset Hounds than Beagles. At least the people citing the fact that they sell better are being honest. I've also heard the reason that "you just don't know what's behind those grade dogs". There may be some truth in that but even though you can be fairly sure of what's behind a registered dog on paper, it doesn't mean a whole lot unless you've actually seen those ancestors perform in the field, and most people haven't. Even though most of my dogs today are AKC registered, if I were to find a grade dog that is a top performer and is also a proven producer of the same, I would not hesitate to breed to him. Why? Because my goal is to produce top quality hounds, not top quality registered hounds.
You've heard the saying "If you build it, they will come"? Well, if you build a high quality bloodline that outperforms and outproduces all others, people will come whether the dogs are registered or not. Even though there will always be some that choose to ignore it, performance and reproducing ability will speak louder than any registry's papers. It just depends what your goals are. The ultimate goal of performance should never be sacrificed for registration papers.
-
Guest
My friend has the best dog I have ever seen run, but the dog isn't registered. I live in Canada and like the AKC the CKC will not register the litter if I bred my registered male to his female. This disapointed me, although, I do see where the AKC and CKC are coming from. If there were a registry that would register the pups in Canada, I would run that circuit. I don't think people should think that becuase dogs are from a certain kennel club they are any better, or any worse. Maybe in the showring, but not in the field.
You hear a lot about linebreeding to dogs that are 5 or 6 generations back in the pedigree. I don't think most people realize just how hard it is to keep one dogs influence alive in future generations. I have tried it with coonhounds by linebreeding and inbreeding and so far I haven't been able to do it.
I think once you get more than 3 generations away from a dog it won't have much of an impact on your dogs no matter how many times it shows up in the pedigree. You may get a pup that looks just like old so and so but I promise you there will be very very few that will hunt, sound and look just like any dog that is not close up in the pedigree.
I think once you get more than 3 generations away from a dog it won't have much of an impact on your dogs no matter how many times it shows up in the pedigree. You may get a pup that looks just like old so and so but I promise you there will be very very few that will hunt, sound and look just like any dog that is not close up in the pedigree.
-
AlabamaSwamper
- Posts: 810
- Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2003 7:06 pm
- Location: Florence, AL
- Contact:
That was a good post Bev and here is my input on it. I have both grade and AKC hounds. I however, hunt rabbits, not trophies. I love to attend trials but not for glory or whatever else some folks do it for. That is their choice and I respect it. I grew up hunting deer with dogs and never, ever, had a registered dog to my knowledge. I can say that one of those "deer dogs" was the best darn beagle I ever saw, even on rabbits. I have yet to see, even the AKC and ARHA champs I have seen, one that could have even been on his butt and he had line control, speed (and I mean run AND catch speed) and good gears. I messed up by not breeding him before he passed away last winter. He was grade and I never needed papers on him. He was the best I ever saw and that is no lie either. I doubt I ever have one again like him.
I posted a topic some time ago on RHO with pretty much this same question. I would need to go back but I think by the 4th or 5th reply it was nothing but a bashing match between certain individuals. I may be wrong but I believe thats how it ended up.
To me, its all a guessing match when you breed two dogs, no matter if they are AKC, UKC or NKC. I have dogs with some fine hounds in their 3 gen. pedigrees (Robs Diamond II, Bucks Branch Kalagha, B and W's Hardluck Playboy) well you get the picture. Maybe not Little Pack style dogs but some of the best SPO dogs in the last decade. They are all close to my dogs, either sire's or grandsires. This does not however mean that my dogs will throw great pups. It does not make my dogs worth anymore than my grade dogs with me but if I wanted to sell them, thats a different story. I dont, so its no big deal with me.
I have thought, thought, thought, thought and thought on this some more several times. I have seen, like the dog I earlier spoke of, some great grade dogs in my short life. I just cant decide if I want to breed out of AKC or not. When I breed a litter, I breed for me first and then sell the rest to anyone who is looking for a well bred dog that can and will run a rabbit. All I want to do is break even and maybe pay for a little feed. I cant do that with grade dogs for this reason, at best around here, all I can get is $35-$50 for grade pups and when I say grade I mean non-AKC. I dont consider my ARHA register dog grade but for the sake of explaining that every time I just call him grade. For those same pups, I can get at minimum $150 if they are AKC.
I think to answer your question (since I have rambled) I will say this. When someone comes to my house to look at a hound or calls me, they want to know what dogs are in their pedigrees. ITs like a car, would you pay as much for a car that dont have a list of parts (motor, stereo, ext) as you would one that has all the paper work with it. I dont think its right but it is.
Now redtick brought up a good question on RHO. If a dog is only in a pedigree one or two times in lets say 4 gen, does that dog really have an influence. Well, if it is the sire, then yes but if your hound is a double great grandson, then only to a certain degree. Remember, in a 4 gen, you have 32 hounds if I am correct so at best that dog makes up only 1/16 of your hound. I am not ready to breed another litter as this time. I just dont have a female that I want to. I do have one but she is to young. I will have to make the "breed within my AKC dogs" decision by then and it will be tough. I may and I may not. I want to see more ARHA and a few UKC clubs around here and would help start a UKC club here if the interest was there. We'll just have to wait and see. Maybe then, I can rid myself of AKC forever and become a respected breeder of top notch hounds without someone saying, "his dogs arent AKC so they cant be very good."
I posted a topic some time ago on RHO with pretty much this same question. I would need to go back but I think by the 4th or 5th reply it was nothing but a bashing match between certain individuals. I may be wrong but I believe thats how it ended up.
To me, its all a guessing match when you breed two dogs, no matter if they are AKC, UKC or NKC. I have dogs with some fine hounds in their 3 gen. pedigrees (Robs Diamond II, Bucks Branch Kalagha, B and W's Hardluck Playboy) well you get the picture. Maybe not Little Pack style dogs but some of the best SPO dogs in the last decade. They are all close to my dogs, either sire's or grandsires. This does not however mean that my dogs will throw great pups. It does not make my dogs worth anymore than my grade dogs with me but if I wanted to sell them, thats a different story. I dont, so its no big deal with me.
I have thought, thought, thought, thought and thought on this some more several times. I have seen, like the dog I earlier spoke of, some great grade dogs in my short life. I just cant decide if I want to breed out of AKC or not. When I breed a litter, I breed for me first and then sell the rest to anyone who is looking for a well bred dog that can and will run a rabbit. All I want to do is break even and maybe pay for a little feed. I cant do that with grade dogs for this reason, at best around here, all I can get is $35-$50 for grade pups and when I say grade I mean non-AKC. I dont consider my ARHA register dog grade but for the sake of explaining that every time I just call him grade. For those same pups, I can get at minimum $150 if they are AKC.
I think to answer your question (since I have rambled) I will say this. When someone comes to my house to look at a hound or calls me, they want to know what dogs are in their pedigrees. ITs like a car, would you pay as much for a car that dont have a list of parts (motor, stereo, ext) as you would one that has all the paper work with it. I dont think its right but it is.
Now redtick brought up a good question on RHO. If a dog is only in a pedigree one or two times in lets say 4 gen, does that dog really have an influence. Well, if it is the sire, then yes but if your hound is a double great grandson, then only to a certain degree. Remember, in a 4 gen, you have 32 hounds if I am correct so at best that dog makes up only 1/16 of your hound. I am not ready to breed another litter as this time. I just dont have a female that I want to. I do have one but she is to young. I will have to make the "breed within my AKC dogs" decision by then and it will be tough. I may and I may not. I want to see more ARHA and a few UKC clubs around here and would help start a UKC club here if the interest was there. We'll just have to wait and see. Maybe then, I can rid myself of AKC forever and become a respected breeder of top notch hounds without someone saying, "his dogs arent AKC so they cant be very good."
"No stronger bond exist than that between a man and his dog."
Link to RabbitDawg board. (Old Southernbeagles board)
http://www.excoboard.com/exco/index.php?boardid=6643
Link to RabbitDawg board. (Old Southernbeagles board)
http://www.excoboard.com/exco/index.php?boardid=6643
-
Christine
Bev you brought up a lot of good points in your post. Tho I'm very new to beagling I'd like to add in my two cents worth. About the pedigrees, I think a dog in the 5th and 6th generation can influence what sort of hound you have got now, hunting, looks, and healthwise. Especially if both sides are linebred on a particular dog in that pedigree.
The blue tick I have now greatly resembles dogs that far back in his pedigree, and distant cousins that I've seen pictures of. Its more than just a breed resemblance, they have the same exact physical faults and attributes. I've found out the health problem I have with my dog runs back six or more generations.
About the AKC... I like what they have done with their frequently used sire program. It seriously deters puppy mills from falsifying papers, and you do see now that most pet store dogs are not reg'd with the AKC nowadays. Not that the AKC is the only reputable one, any all breed regestried such as the Continental Kennel Club or Americas Pet Registry were created to make it as easy as possible for people to breed pet dogs, puppy mill dogs and makes it easy to falsify records since they do not require the frequently used sire program.
Americas Pet registry and some others also do not use the limited registration program, something I do not like at all. Most beagle breeders who hunt will not sell a dog on limited registration, they want their kennel name to get out there and want "their" dogs to breed and continue the bloodline. BUT, for the show breeders, its important that a pet quality pup isn't bred, limited registration is a way to keep quality of conformation, health in their lines. I like the option of limited reg, am leery of those that don't at least offer it.
Not saying everyone who chooses to use some of these less reputable regestries are breeding poor quality dogs. The UKC is well known for being an advocate of working dogs, so is ARHA. You just have to be very careful when getting a dog from ANY registry, even more so when using the lesser known ones.
The blue tick I have now greatly resembles dogs that far back in his pedigree, and distant cousins that I've seen pictures of. Its more than just a breed resemblance, they have the same exact physical faults and attributes. I've found out the health problem I have with my dog runs back six or more generations.
About the AKC... I like what they have done with their frequently used sire program. It seriously deters puppy mills from falsifying papers, and you do see now that most pet store dogs are not reg'd with the AKC nowadays. Not that the AKC is the only reputable one, any all breed regestried such as the Continental Kennel Club or Americas Pet Registry were created to make it as easy as possible for people to breed pet dogs, puppy mill dogs and makes it easy to falsify records since they do not require the frequently used sire program.
Americas Pet registry and some others also do not use the limited registration program, something I do not like at all. Most beagle breeders who hunt will not sell a dog on limited registration, they want their kennel name to get out there and want "their" dogs to breed and continue the bloodline. BUT, for the show breeders, its important that a pet quality pup isn't bred, limited registration is a way to keep quality of conformation, health in their lines. I like the option of limited reg, am leery of those that don't at least offer it.
Not saying everyone who chooses to use some of these less reputable regestries are breeding poor quality dogs. The UKC is well known for being an advocate of working dogs, so is ARHA. You just have to be very careful when getting a dog from ANY registry, even more so when using the lesser known ones.
-
beaglebill
- Posts: 184
- Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 8:58 am
- Location: IND
I think those that buy beagles for pets like to see the AKC papers so they think they have a full blooded dog. If you sell some of this type you probably will get more money..correct. I have sold started dogs over the years to hunters that said they did not need the papers. I have always felt that this is probably where most of our so called grade dogs came from. Most of the fellows i run with run ARHA merely for the fact you can hit one about every weekend in our area. Also i think they like the little pack style of running. I have watched the AKC dogs run at a local club but i do not currently have anything that would run in that format. I go back to watching walki talkis run at that club. It was nice for the older men for they could stay up with the dogs. I think this was part of the reason they was breeding the way they did. I do think people forget that most UKC NKC dogs our also AKC bred. Sure i would like for my dogs to be bred AKC just in case one may fit that particular running style but for no other reason. Whithin the last year however i bred to a dog that was NCK only the pups im tickled to death with an i think if i bred back to him i could sell the litter very quick. Regardless of what registry we use i think it has been great for the industry that we have so many formats to attend..
-
Robert W. Mccoy Jr
- Posts: 420
- Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2003 1:57 pm
- Location: Canton Michigan
I agree with you Bev
I'm really not into pedigrees.
I only run AKC dog's.
I like the pedegrees to tell me about what kinda dog's the hound is out of. Thats it.
I like a certain type of dog.
A dog that is hard to find right now.
One that is on the high side of medium with good line controll and quick accurate check work with a big noise. Honest mouth and a good jump dog.
I have a buddy who likes the same kinda dog's.
Togeather we have been able to mix and match some Hair breed dog's back to some cottontail breed dog's and we are starting to slowly produce the kinda dog's we like to hunt with.
But I will not breed one of my bitches to a male that I have not gunned over.
To many stories and too many differant tastes out there.
I mostly hunt so I breed dog's that I can kill rabbits with when it's 5 degrees outside. And that perfer to run rabbit and not Deer.
Whether they ever win a field trial doesn't matter to me.
But we killed alot of rabbits last year.
I only run AKC dog's.
I like the pedegrees to tell me about what kinda dog's the hound is out of. Thats it.
I like a certain type of dog.
A dog that is hard to find right now.
One that is on the high side of medium with good line controll and quick accurate check work with a big noise. Honest mouth and a good jump dog.
I have a buddy who likes the same kinda dog's.
Togeather we have been able to mix and match some Hair breed dog's back to some cottontail breed dog's and we are starting to slowly produce the kinda dog's we like to hunt with.
But I will not breed one of my bitches to a male that I have not gunned over.
To many stories and too many differant tastes out there.
I mostly hunt so I breed dog's that I can kill rabbits with when it's 5 degrees outside. And that perfer to run rabbit and not Deer.
Whether they ever win a field trial doesn't matter to me.
But we killed alot of rabbits last year.
-
Guest
What a post!!!!! The question is as good as the asnswers!!! Bev your question is about a dynamic that is the basic heart of the matter. Even better than papers on the dogs, would be papers on the breeders themselves. What have they done, what are they doing and how are they doing it. This of course involves honest, unbiased assesment of the their genetics in performance and a way to record these assesments. Therein lies the task. I believe that recorded pedigrees are one small step in that direction. To make informed decisions, you need accurate information. Since recorded pedigrees are all the recorded information most people have about a family of dogs, they tend to put more weight on them in the beginning than they desreve. One small step but none the less a good one.
I feel that somehow that dogs 5 or 6 generations back can indeed influence future pups, especially if the pups-to-be are line bred!
Ever notice how certain lines of dogs, coming from common ancestors several generations back, all seem to have some, often alot, of similiar qualities? I dont believe thats coinsidence!
As the article in the May issue stated, papers don't run a rabbit, but by golly they certainly can determine HOW that rabbit gets run!
Ever notice how certain lines of dogs, coming from common ancestors several generations back, all seem to have some, often alot, of similiar qualities? I dont believe thats coinsidence!
As the article in the May issue stated, papers don't run a rabbit, but by golly they certainly can determine HOW that rabbit gets run!
+++
He's coming....are you ready?
He's coming....are you ready?
I think most may have looked past one paragraph I really wanted some input on. If you have excellent-performing grade dogs, what's stopping a person from breeding them and keeping his/her own pedigrees and progress and/or utilizing an open registry to start that pedigree somewhere and then build within your own kennel? All pedigrees had to start somewhere. In six years you can easily have 3 generations documented. No one knows your hounds better than you. If someone owns an exceptional grade beagle like AlabamaSwamper did and he/she lets the opportunity to pass his genes down go by in favor of a "papered" dog that may not have that same "something extra", would it have cheated the beagle breed?
What if the "big registry" closed its door tomorrow? What if it gets so expensive you have to quit breeding because it just costs too much to register a litter, transfer papers, etc. After a few generations, the documented hounds would have little influence at all anyway. Then what would you do? What if there were no registries? Would I/you be capable of starting and documenting a lineage, all of it's nicks and failures, and still emerge with a better beagle?
I've been told that years ago, (and some folks still do) work privately on their quest to come up with the "hunting beagle supreme". They started with grade dogs - good performers, exhibiting very few or no obvious faults. If those hounds reproduced like kind or better, word traveled quickly in the hunting community, and soon another kennel would annex so the bloodline could be further developed, studied and improved upon. Breeding stock could be borrowed and traded so it wasn't so much for one person to do. I bet there are rabbit hunters/breeders out there right now that could whip out a 10+ generation handwritten pedigree on a bloodline of hounds that they started from scratch. They could point to each dog's name in that pedigree and tell you how every dog either sucked or succeeded and which one of the bitches could have been bred to a cocker spaniel and still produce good rabbit dogs. They could tell you which male always threw more foot than he had himself, and which dog threw thight-mouthed pups.
It just seems like we don't (the majority of us) do the hard work anymore. We look around for a bloodline(s) that someone else basically built and we keep crossing the same stuff to the same stuff and expect to get predictable results. You may get fewer culls per litter that way, but have you really improved what's there? How do we ever improve if we don't bring new blood in? This seems to ring true in any format regardless of different degrees of speed and line. Some hang on to the old lines trying to keep them alive and pure, but have we actually improved the line since its origin by doing so? Say we have 3 kennels in the back yard. In kennels 1 and 2 are hounds from a certain pedigreed bloodline that seems to be at a stalemate. The offspring from the breedings are fairly consistent, but not necessarily better than their parents. In kennel 3 is that grade hound of AlabamaSwamper's. Dogs in kennels 1 and 2 desperately need that shot of vigor, the boost or catalyst to move ahead that the dog in kennel 3 could provide. Would we not be remiss in passing up that hound on the grounds that he's not "papered"? How many superstars die without progeny because no one wanted to do the hard work of starting a pedigree? How many true-blue rabbit dogs die without offspring because breeder didn't want to get only $50 per pup instead of $150? Are we improving the breed or trying to work it so that the sale of pups funds our hobby? What are our goals when we make a cross? To pay for another year's worth of entry fees or make a solid contribution for the future of beagling?
I feel like mprovement comes at great risk. As with any situation in life, if we are to truly better ourselves (or our hounds), we must be bold, go with our gut and do something remarkable. Think outside the box. If we want to be seen in a parking lot full of grey Tauruses, we'd best not buy a grey Taurus.
This may be a question for the long-timers out there - the folks that were hunting and beagling before brace. Most everybody looks back on the brace period and agrees that the beagle has made a remarkable come-back, but go back farther than that. Go back to when beagles were always hunting hounds - meat dogs. Large Pack hounds were never hurt by the brace movement. They existed before that and they just kept on keepin on. Fifty years later, can we say we have a better beagle now then those old-timers did? If your answer is no, not really - if anything worse, then why is that? Could it be that we're too chicken to break a mould, (or metaphorically) "step outside naked just once"?
What if the "big registry" closed its door tomorrow? What if it gets so expensive you have to quit breeding because it just costs too much to register a litter, transfer papers, etc. After a few generations, the documented hounds would have little influence at all anyway. Then what would you do? What if there were no registries? Would I/you be capable of starting and documenting a lineage, all of it's nicks and failures, and still emerge with a better beagle?
I've been told that years ago, (and some folks still do) work privately on their quest to come up with the "hunting beagle supreme". They started with grade dogs - good performers, exhibiting very few or no obvious faults. If those hounds reproduced like kind or better, word traveled quickly in the hunting community, and soon another kennel would annex so the bloodline could be further developed, studied and improved upon. Breeding stock could be borrowed and traded so it wasn't so much for one person to do. I bet there are rabbit hunters/breeders out there right now that could whip out a 10+ generation handwritten pedigree on a bloodline of hounds that they started from scratch. They could point to each dog's name in that pedigree and tell you how every dog either sucked or succeeded and which one of the bitches could have been bred to a cocker spaniel and still produce good rabbit dogs. They could tell you which male always threw more foot than he had himself, and which dog threw thight-mouthed pups.
It just seems like we don't (the majority of us) do the hard work anymore. We look around for a bloodline(s) that someone else basically built and we keep crossing the same stuff to the same stuff and expect to get predictable results. You may get fewer culls per litter that way, but have you really improved what's there? How do we ever improve if we don't bring new blood in? This seems to ring true in any format regardless of different degrees of speed and line. Some hang on to the old lines trying to keep them alive and pure, but have we actually improved the line since its origin by doing so? Say we have 3 kennels in the back yard. In kennels 1 and 2 are hounds from a certain pedigreed bloodline that seems to be at a stalemate. The offspring from the breedings are fairly consistent, but not necessarily better than their parents. In kennel 3 is that grade hound of AlabamaSwamper's. Dogs in kennels 1 and 2 desperately need that shot of vigor, the boost or catalyst to move ahead that the dog in kennel 3 could provide. Would we not be remiss in passing up that hound on the grounds that he's not "papered"? How many superstars die without progeny because no one wanted to do the hard work of starting a pedigree? How many true-blue rabbit dogs die without offspring because breeder didn't want to get only $50 per pup instead of $150? Are we improving the breed or trying to work it so that the sale of pups funds our hobby? What are our goals when we make a cross? To pay for another year's worth of entry fees or make a solid contribution for the future of beagling?
I feel like mprovement comes at great risk. As with any situation in life, if we are to truly better ourselves (or our hounds), we must be bold, go with our gut and do something remarkable. Think outside the box. If we want to be seen in a parking lot full of grey Tauruses, we'd best not buy a grey Taurus.
This may be a question for the long-timers out there - the folks that were hunting and beagling before brace. Most everybody looks back on the brace period and agrees that the beagle has made a remarkable come-back, but go back farther than that. Go back to when beagles were always hunting hounds - meat dogs. Large Pack hounds were never hurt by the brace movement. They existed before that and they just kept on keepin on. Fifty years later, can we say we have a better beagle now then those old-timers did? If your answer is no, not really - if anything worse, then why is that? Could it be that we're too chicken to break a mould, (or metaphorically) "step outside naked just once"?