BigGameHoundsmen.com

what are u guys talking about ?? u lost me at UKC ???

"Not that is would be a seperate registry just would not be considered coonhounds."

Spanky, I think they will still be considered coonhounds, and registered as such, they will just be evaluated based on their target game , not coons.

spanky- i guess that i agree with you --sorta , slightly-

-for example -i dont want to see a half blutick half walker -- registered as a walker-or as a blutick either
i dont want somebody to pick up a pound hound and make up a pedigree for it--

if people want to cheat lot simpler for them to swap papers -
that isnt a new thing -

i have no problem with anybody registering a 7/8 walker as a walker -- as long as the other 1/8 is hound- i dont think thats much different than what we have now -- like todd said ---labs are 80% lab-- lol

they should have to show that this dog is a product of a few generations of good dogs -that met breed standards--
-lets see some pictures of his parents-- grandparents - make it tough-- let the best in -- if one grandparent is of another breed , state that on pedigree- --this could be done without much risk of contaminating anything-- hard to tell the difference between english , walker s or blues---papered or not-- whats a light bluetick , a ticked up walker- or a tan and white dog --- how bout a calico or white eared bozo dog-- my point is -- we aint so pure now-- and this isnt going to change that one way or the other -


the HOW to do it--to make sure only good dogs are let in is the hard part -- cattle breeds had a program--- certified grade??-- after several generations they get full registration - never hurt a thing because grade cattle were selected and culled harder-
dogs no different -

we already have something llike that now with single registration , then pr dogs - then all grand- lol

i can remember when pr wasnt so common-

todd said breeds werent pure till some point in time and i asked him when that time was--

im not so sure we have reached that time--

breeds have changed -- because the majority have been bred for nitehunts -- dogs bred for big game-- probably havent changed as much-

have seen some great big game dogs --come from competition lines--
they are not all just hot nose , pop up , slick treeing etc-- some of them have some real fire and thats why they win- and also why they can make big game dogs
i think it would be a mistake to seperate breeds any farther -- let the breeders and hunters seperate them - not the registry -

ok


heres my big card

The main stay of any successful kennel is a solid foundation and pedigree. Groom Creek Kennels has tried to stay within the old bloodlines of the late great hounds like Hardwood Bozo, River Bend Flag, Finley River Chief, House's Chief, Waltz's Fancy, and Sis. These hounds have helped shape the walker breed 25+ years ago and will show in most of the great walkers of today.....

chief was out of johnsons banjo that was outa 2 single registered mutts- lol - THE FOUNDATION OF OUR BREED IS SINGLE REGISTERED DOGS -or dogs with them very close

whats changed - all we got now--- is what was let in then-- breed only changes thru selection and culling -- right now , nite hunts are it-- as far as the majority -- but big game guys selecting for something just a little different - we may have to let some in--in self defence lol

this is walker country round here - - a big reason is a dog john proud bought that was out of houses chief- (sophie)-- i know thats dinosaur days but it really isnt a long time -walkers blues english really are a brand new breed as far as breeds go

purebred is kind of a relative term - i can still tell my dogs apart-- so i dont think they are purebred-- lol

like bearhunter said-- i disagree with ya-- dont mean i disrespect ya-- i just think this is fairly important issue- i know you do too- -

when u asked people to vote on coonhound board-- the gloves are off-

your turn lol

Fix the system first and then you will get my outspoken support


ill try --- lol let me at em--