BigGameHoundsmen.com

Who says they are weaknesses?

I dont think there is a guy on here that would not take the perfect looking hound that is also a perfect hunting machine but if we all were waiting for that dog to come along ALL THE TIME and culling the ones that were not perfect conformation, all we would have is alot of pictures of our hounds and not so many of the game they caught or the memorys they have given us. catchaser that was her secret weapon all these years she was so ugly she spooked the bobcats up a tree

twist wrote:I dont think there is a guy on here that would not take the perfect looking hound that is also a perfect hunting machine but if we all were waiting for that dog to come along ALL THE TIME and culling the ones that were not perfect conformation, all we would have is alot of pictures of our hounds and not so many of the game they caught or the memorys they have given us. catchaser that was her secret weapon all these years she was so ugly she spooked the bobcats up a tree

thats very possible! I have to think that with a little effort a good combination of both can be obtained tho! Instead of defending imperfect dogs why not strive to improve them, instead of the all to common attitude "if it catches game its good enough for me" Maybe the dogs that everybody thinks are so rare really aren't, half the attitudes on these topics are what keeps them from being the rule instead of the exception, which they really aren't! Lots of well built hunting machines out there. Seems like everybody on here just wants to argue, stick their head in the sand and dig their heels in and justify a sloppy footed POS that is only good for one or two days of hard hunting, but the meat will be in the tree by god two to four days a month when he's not healing up ha ha!

i will take all those game catchin sloppy footed pos!!! and me and the four wheeler will correct their genetic problem. might even give ya twenty bucks for them!!

I am all for breeding for perfect looks along with hunting ability but what I am also saying is there are a plenty of not so perfect looking dogs out there that are game catching fools. I am all for culling but not culling dogs that catch game. The female (catchaser) is talking about is crow footed, flat footed and just not real pretty but was one of the toughest footed, biggest hearted no mistake bobcat catching dogs day in and day out from the West coast to Montana and now into the Dakotas I have ever seen and if she would have been culled it would have been a HUGE MISTAKE.

all of my dogs are fine examples of there breed, and they all preform as expected but if i witnessed a one eyed three legged mutt that was ugly as hell and did the job it was supposed to do, i would buy it.

Well, I hate to be in the Plott guys corner. But I pick my dogs based on looks/build as pups.... My dogs all come from proven, familiar lines, so I know they all have a good chance of turning out in the woods...

I pick a pup based on looks, build, color, mouth and attitude. If at 6 months old that pup hasn't held together conformationally, I cull it from my breeding program. If it's real bad, or has some sort of defect, I will spay/neuter and place in a hunting home.

Once they make it past that test. Then I hunt the fur off them, and weed them out further from there.

My filter goes like this: Breed, Conformation, Temperment, Brains/Handling, Natural Hunting Ability, Consistancy, and Hunting Style. If I have a dog make it past 2 years old in my yard, you can guarantee it's a damn good dog, and has made it thru the ringer!

Some people will settle for anything. Not here. Just another rigor of trying to find and reproduce top dogs. I still have to walk out to the kennels 7 days a week and look at the dogs, and I sure ain't gonna look at an ugly dog. Hell I could have a whole yard full of ugly mutts that catch game without looking to hard. Where is the fun in that?

The problem is, is people just assume things are a certian way, that it would take too much work, without putting any effort forth. Doesn't mean it isn't possible. I've always been razzed about my "showdogs" from people, that is until I'm pulling my dog off a tree, there best dog couldn't even make.

Redwood Coonhounds wrote:Well, I hate to be in the Plott guys corner. But I pick my dogs based on looks/build as pups.... My dogs all come from proven, familiar lines, so I know they all have a good chance of turning out in the woods...

I pick a pup based on looks, build, color, mouth and attitude. If at 6 months old that pup hasn't held together conformationally, I cull it from my breeding program. If it's real bad, or has some sort of defect, I will spay/neuter and place in a hunting home.

Once they make it past that test. Then I hunt the fur off them, and weed them out further from there.

My filter goes like this: Breed, Conformation, Temperment, Brains/Handling, Natural Hunting Ability, Consistancy, and Hunting Style. If I have a dog make it past 2 years old in my yard, you can guarantee it's a damn good dog, and has made it thru the ringer!

Some people will settle for anything. Not here. Just another rigor of trying to find and reproduce top dogs. I still have to walk out to the kennels 7 days a week and look at the dogs, and I sure ain't gonna look at an ugly dog. Hell I could have a whole yard full of ugly mutts that catch game without looking to hard. Where is the fun in that?

The problem is, is people just assume things are a certian way, that it would take too much work, without putting any effort forth. Doesn't mean it isn't possible. I've always been razzed about my "showdogs" from people, that is until I'm pulling my dog off a tree, there best dog couldn't even make.

sounds like some b.s. to me! I have some of the finest looking dogs arround and they do perform like they should but if i saw a dog that did not confirm to the looks i like but hunted like it should
, i would still own it and hunt it, that doesnt mean i would ever use it as breeding stock. that ugly dog can show your "showdogs" how to hunt and actually benifit your pack.

ferjr wrote: I have some of the finest looking dogs arround and they do perform like they should but if i saw a dog that did not confirm to the looks i like but hunted like it should
, i would still own it and hunt it, that doesnt mean i would ever use it as breeding stock. that ugly dog can show your "showdogs" how to hunt and actually benifit your pack.

You do ferjr? I'd hate to see the rest of the dogs "around" your neck of the woods then! would the terrible loose crow footed dog in the bottom pic on the left be one of those prime examples, or is it one that doesn't conform??? I bet that dog is hard to beat in a water race tho with those boards for feet!!!

ferjr wrote:Here is a couple of pictures of my pups, they just turned 19 weeks old and are getting huge! Jake is 52lbs and Elwood is 57lbs, they are already as big as a couple of my smaller dogs. Last sunday i brought them to a tree that my other dogs made, they got to see there first bear, both of them was standing against it bawling for all they were worth. I am very proud of them.

I have hunted in redwood coonhounds back yard and i can guarantee that that dog pictured of yours wouldn't hold up more than a day or two in her country. Now how can you look at her dogs and then yours and really think you have the blueprint of conformation in your yard??? Glad yer not breeding dogs, yet

to many culls have slid by on there looks already ! i breed for both but ability comes way before looks.

actually larry, those arnt very good pictures of those pups, they both have good feet, i guess i will have to send your retarded ass some better pictures of them. i imagine her dogs will out perform these guys, seens how they are only five months old. why dont you post some pictures of those super mutts that you like to bragg about? i would imagine they are probably just as good as that 900 yard rifle you have! LMAO.

When I read the question I wasn't thinking so much about conformation as I was I was a preference to the looks of a dog. A cow-hawked, splay-footed dog wouldn't end up in my kennel.. I don't accept a genetic deformity... But for something less important -ie: Coloration / ear length / etc.. You have to consider the other aspects of the dog. Conformation is a cull-worthy trait.. bottom line. Because while some think it is only an outward appearance issue, a poorly conformed dog is showing traits of underdeveloped & deformed joints. Breed it, and you pass it on until we're all hunting english bulldogs with a pre-disposition towards high $ vet bills.

the original question was about looks, not deformitities. color and being cat footed are human preferance. but ya all just keep breeding for it, because we need to boost the percentage of junk higher.

I think more junk dogs have been bred over their "looks" or "papers" than ability by a loooong shot. If guys only bred for dogs that got it done, we then could sort out for ones that we thought were looked good. But if that happened it would be tough for a guy to cut a track with all the game being whacked.

Everybody likes a sharp looking dog, but I've always got an empty chain for one that can get it done. If it can catch a track that my other dogs can't, it's worth it for me to keep around if it's the right track.

larry, for one thing i am not into breed dogs. i hunt dogs, if i want a pup i will just go buy one, i am not going to risk the chance of having a bunch of pups or wasting my time or money with raising pups when there are so many good dogs out there that are for sale. and i dont know what you are calling crow footed or splayed footed but i dont think this is what you are talking about.


you can talk all the shit you want about my dogs, call them culls or what ever you want, i know i can take my dogs out and put bears in the trees almost every time they leave the truck. what more could you want?