You are good Bob!! Now I'm on your side I don't know about 90 10 but I am way off Joe's 50 50 deal!!
Joe we need your thinking on 50 50
Gentics-Gun Dog Beagle
Moderators: Pike Ridge Beagles, Aaron Bartlett
You are good Bob!! Now I'm on your side. I don't know about 90 10 but I am way off Joe's 50 50 deal!! -
Truman
-
bob huffman
OK Joe, my tooth is better and I am ready and willing to hear your side of our little discussion. Its only respectful for you to be able to discuss your views without me ribbing you. Sometimes I get a little impatient. I think the most important thing a person can do when hunting rabbits, is to go hunting for the good dogs first and the rest is easy. I do think it is important for a dog to have it in him when he is born, but others might disagree and as Stuart Smalley would say--THATS OK!
-
bob huffman
Started with old Handy and Ready. There is a little of everything in here. About 1/8 came from hare and 1/4 pearson creek and the rest were dogs I found local in years back. Not so important where they came from, but what they produce, although it does play a role somewhat. I also use several slick and smart show dogs in years past that were great little dogs and were all around type dogs that could burn a rabbit. It was a special little family that had been accidently inbred by a family that had 8 kids and loved Beagles. They just weren't too smart about breeding dogs but as luck would have it, it turned out good. I aquired all their dogs when they moved to S Carolina. I have tried and culled many many dogs from all kinds of families and some no one has ever heard of or seen. If there was ever a Beagle available in my area, he might end up at my house, but not for long if he wasn't good. Yes I inbreed and outcross as needed.
-
bob huffman
One thing is for sure and that is if a person doesn't have a good dog, it is no reflection on the person. Doing what I say might not get you a good dog either. A lot of it has to do with luck. You may have a good dog come your way and take advantage of it but it is luck. I am talking about that perfect dog that doesn't exist. I believe he does exist and there are a few out there somewhere. The real problem is that Beagles are always trying to regrees away from the traits we are trying to breed into them. Mother Nature wants them to regress back to a dog that looks like a semi-long haired shepard looking dog with semi-erect ears. If all dogs were allowed to run wild, this is what they would revert to because this is the highest gene frequancy in the domestic canine gene pool. We are constantly having to prevent that by selecting the genes we want perpetuated. A lot of this is luck because of the tremendous number of gene combinations possible, and a lot of them are not fit for our purpose of tracking rabbits. A person may know all there is to know about training and breeding, but Mother Nature just won't cooperate and allow them to reach the standard they are trying to achieve in their family of dogs. It is a constant struggle and difficult. Darwin said that all species struggle to survive. The Beagle is no differant.
-
bob huffman
Wow Bob! where'd that come from? Never let it be said Joe West backed down from a good fight, you picked the wrong one to start with. 
Actually the 50% heredity 50% environment thing isn't something I came up with, it's scientific fact. But don't take my word for it look it up yourself. I beleive you might find it somewhere in the book by the father and son geneticists, Kyle and Philip Onstott, "The new art of breeding better dogs." You will not find any MODERN geneticists who disagree with that. I have whitneys books but I also don't know if he makes referance to that FACT in his books. Many strides have been made in genetics since whitney wrote his last book but he wrote some good ones.
Hounds inherit their potential. That is, they have inherited the genes that will dictate how good they MIGHT eventually become and they cannot ever become any better then the gifts they have inherited. Now if they have inherited crap they will always be crap but if they have inherited the genes to become a top hound they MIGHT become top hounds if handled correctly.
Think of all the experiance a young hound looses being cooped up in a kennel during his formative months when he could be out in the fields learning. If a hound has the gifts to start by 3 months of age but never goes to the field till he's 8 or 9 months of age he has lost a whole lot of experiance during his important development age. He cannot develop if not given the oppertunity to do so. Now some hounds won't start that early and some might not start till after 9 months old even though they are taken to the filed regularly, but, giving them the oppertunity to develop as their gifts allow is what handleing is all about.
Incidentally BOB your ideas of heredity versus environment is probably why we are at opposite ends of the spectrum on the shock collar as well. If one dosen't beleive a hound is the product of both heredity AND environment I can understand why they would have a difficult time understanding the concept behind how a shock collar might damage a hound.
Actually the 50% heredity 50% environment thing isn't something I came up with, it's scientific fact. But don't take my word for it look it up yourself. I beleive you might find it somewhere in the book by the father and son geneticists, Kyle and Philip Onstott, "The new art of breeding better dogs." You will not find any MODERN geneticists who disagree with that. I have whitneys books but I also don't know if he makes referance to that FACT in his books. Many strides have been made in genetics since whitney wrote his last book but he wrote some good ones.
Hounds inherit their potential. That is, they have inherited the genes that will dictate how good they MIGHT eventually become and they cannot ever become any better then the gifts they have inherited. Now if they have inherited crap they will always be crap but if they have inherited the genes to become a top hound they MIGHT become top hounds if handled correctly.
Think of all the experiance a young hound looses being cooped up in a kennel during his formative months when he could be out in the fields learning. If a hound has the gifts to start by 3 months of age but never goes to the field till he's 8 or 9 months of age he has lost a whole lot of experiance during his important development age. He cannot develop if not given the oppertunity to do so. Now some hounds won't start that early and some might not start till after 9 months old even though they are taken to the filed regularly, but, giving them the oppertunity to develop as their gifts allow is what handleing is all about.
Incidentally BOB your ideas of heredity versus environment is probably why we are at opposite ends of the spectrum on the shock collar as well. If one dosen't beleive a hound is the product of both heredity AND environment I can understand why they would have a difficult time understanding the concept behind how a shock collar might damage a hound.
-
Truman
Mr. hoffman, I can see you have done your home work.
Genetic research is very complex, there are unseen genetic mutaions to deal with. Genes even contained in a single cell are highly valatol to contamanation. To control or contain any gene is impossible. there are millions of combanations in one single gene.
Mr. west I am a professor at the University of Oregon . I have on hand 1000s of books on Genetic research & breeding Seeing that is what i do. Did you mis spell the names Kyle & Philip [ ONSTOTT ] We do not have that book Writen bye ONSTOTT ?. What is the date of copyrite..
There & your colculation on A 50% \ 50% is complete nonsence
Dr. David Truman.. O.S. U.
Genetic research is very complex, there are unseen genetic mutaions to deal with. Genes even contained in a single cell are highly valatol to contamanation. To control or contain any gene is impossible. there are millions of combanations in one single gene.
Mr. west I am a professor at the University of Oregon . I have on hand 1000s of books on Genetic research & breeding Seeing that is what i do. Did you mis spell the names Kyle & Philip [ ONSTOTT ] We do not have that book Writen bye ONSTOTT ?. What is the date of copyrite..
There & your colculation on A 50% \ 50% is complete nonsence
Dr. David Truman.. O.S. U.
-
snowshoehareguide
- Posts: 393
- Joined: Thu Nov 14, 2002 7:52 pm
- Location: brownington vermont
laal big nose dogs that dont open on cold trail.. i had this argument before... with joe.. i prefer them to bark if they have a track they can move.. thats where i draw the line. i hate a dog thats barking and going nowhere. i hate a dog thats going somewhere on a track and not barking.. if i hunted cottontails i wouldnt want a dog to bark on cold trail. for hare its an advantage to me.. ive had silent trailing hounds. coon dogs... they didnt open till coon was treed... they didnt even bark on a hot track.. call them meat dogs. very efficient but not much fun.. have had coyote hounds. they didnt open on cold trail but they did cold trail... would take a track many hours old. not open till it was jumped... again this is more efficient but not as much fun.. these same dogs wouldnt quite bark enough as race went on.. i have hounds cause i want to hear them bark... i prefer a hound a little mouthy over one thats a little tite mouth... bob makes some real good points here .. id love to see his hounds go... i guess ill vote somewhere in between the 90/10 and 50-50 .. ill vote 75-25 -- there are guys that are great trainers and will change this % i say breeding is more important than training... i cant say i ever trained a dog to do anything except handle.. i teach them what i dont want . keep up the good work you guys.
-
Truman
Roygu
Thank you very much, That answers why we do not have there book. Back in those days geneticist science was fairly new study. You would be amazed at some of there thoughts in those days. Some geneticist thought that big rats had more genes than little ones. There have been great strives made in the science just in the last ten to fifteen years. They have done great research in space that could not have been done on earth. If all of the theoryies were correct that have been on this board. cancer and several other health problems that plauge man would be no more.
Dr. David Truman O.S.U.
Thank you very much, That answers why we do not have there book. Back in those days geneticist science was fairly new study. You would be amazed at some of there thoughts in those days. Some geneticist thought that big rats had more genes than little ones. There have been great strives made in the science just in the last ten to fifteen years. They have done great research in space that could not have been done on earth. If all of the theoryies were correct that have been on this board. cancer and several other health problems that plauge man would be no more.
Dr. David Truman O.S.U.
-
bob huffman
Joe we are not opposite about shock collars. I don't use them, but they are a good tool if used CORRECTLY. That is a differant subject but suffice to say that dogs are not humans and can take more severe events without screwing them up. I have 2 degrees in Psychology and assure you that if used correctly, they are a benifit to the dog. Too many people try to project human feelings into animals and it doesn't work. As for proper handling of a dog being 50% of what he is, It is like I said before, don't screw them up. I am not sure what a pup learns at 2 and 3 months of age in the field. With me he is learning how to handle but that is all. He don't need to learn nothing if he has it bred into him. When he is ready, he will run rabbits and that ain't rocket science. If Onstott wrote his book in the 30s then it is outdated also. You make blanket statement such as " You won't find any modern genetisist that disagree with that." I have studied the genetic theories of major researchers and what you say is not true, but I admit you make it sound good. Talking about human genetics is also differnat than animals. You say 50-50 is scientific fact. I don't think you understand the laws of science and what it takes to call something fact. You throw the term around loosely and science is not that simple. A human takes 25 to 30 years to mature and there is much to be learned from a social and economic point. They are much more the product of environment than a dog. A dog takes 2 years to mature and has much less to learn in comparison, and also operates much more from an instinct that he is born with. I might agree that humans are 50-50 but not animals.
-
bob huffman
Dr Truman, the board really appreciates your comments. it helps us keep our scientific FACTS in order. Not sure if you know Dr James Bagget from the U of Or, but he has made a genetic breakthrough that has been nothing lees than outstanding. He has bred a parthenocarpic tomato that I have grown for the last 6 years with great success. Since it doesn't need pollination, it matures at least 3 weeks ahead of any other slicing tomato and is seedless. Every year for the last 6 I have hauled 100s of pounds of them to the market and sold them for 1.00 a pound just as fast as I can produce them. They will beat any slicing tomato to maturity by 3 weeks because they will set fruit when night temps are below 55, where as a regular tomato won't. This allows them to come in at least 3 weeks ahead. When you are the only dealer at the market with fresh homegrown tomatoes, it is like being a movie star. People flog me and literally fight trying to get the produce first before it runs out. Many thanks to Dr Bagget and Oregon U for their contribution to genetic research. Joe West I also enjoy your comments and all others who are interested in genetics.
-
roygu
Dr. Truman?
Just curious Doctor, what is the significance of the letters O.S.U, behind your name?