Breeding emphasis

[lawdawgharris]

I was wondering where everyone places the most emphasis in their breeding program? Myself, I place it on the female and the grandparents. Not saying that the male isn't important, but I believe the female is more so. I was raised with this thinking. If you breed a average female to a great male, unless he's dominate and special, out of let's say 7 or 8 pups you're going to get a couple below average dogs and the rest average as rule of thumb. But if you breed a great female to an average male, your likely going to get average to better than average dogs. Puppies more times than not, throw back to the grandparents. So if the mom or dad was real good but the grand parents were average or less, likely you're going to get what the grandparents were. I also place the most emphasis on the female because most people like hunting males. For that reason good males are usually easier to find to breed to. If you own the sire and not the dam of a litter, you may get a pup or 2 but you don't control the litter. If the female is yours, you are in control of what she is bred to and what happens with the pups. The second point of emphasis is concentration and consistency. If the dogs being considered for breeding aren't from a concentrated gene pool but rather a scatter bred gene pool then that's a huge strike. They also have to be from consistent litters themselves. Consistent in type and performance. Too many sub par relatives will disqualify one for me too. People say oh just breed good to good and go on. It works sometimes but not as consistently as line breeding with standards. If it didn't matter how we bred, we could just hunt any old dog off the street and they would all work effectively. We all know that isn't the case and you can't just take any ole dog and out class or out shine dogs that were bred for specific tasks. Of course there are exceptions but they are few and far between if it were that easy, we would all have world class dogs because it would be so easy to find a good one.

Sent from my SM-G892U using Tapatalk

[macedonia mule man]

Law, around 1959 I started messing with registered dogs. Never before had I thought of breeding dogs according to pedigree. I joined up with a few older men( I was 20 at the time) and they were studying pedigrees for breeding purposes. Being young I figured these old sages were on to something. These old boys were all running the same bloodlines and winning a majority of the trials. As I look back today(hindsight) the breed of dog that was winning was the one being hunted the most. There wasn’t but about 4 different family of dogs in the USA at that time so the dogs in those families had to be winning. Every now and again some one would show up at a trial that was outside the group and have a dog that rain game out ahead of the usual winners and clearly was the best dog. But he was picked up for running too much game ??
Dogs were being bred then to fit the rules. And the right judge could make a dog fit the rules if he wasn’t too far out of line. I think a person can breed his family of dogs forever if he is sadisfied with the outcome, but they may not fit his neighbors liking at all. I’ve have noticed over the years that a well known breeder of a certain family will buy an outstanding dog that has a couple of their dog in a three generation pedigree and I automatically becomes a member of that close nit family. I personally don’t think you breed to get good dogs, I believe you have to hunt dogs Into being good and what you want. Breed good to good and keep them in the woods.

[macedonia mule man]

Importance of sire and dam should average 50/50. Out of a litter some may show sire traits and looks and some likewise on dam. If you only raise one out of the litter it might show more of one parent trait than the other. I think out of the entire litter it would be 50/50.

[scrubrunner]

I do not breed a dam unless I would be happy with pups just like her. I like to breed within family lines but never never breed inferior dogs because they are off ol so and so. You've got to breed the best to the best if you want to maintain or improve what you got. Lawdawg I mostly agree about the litter mates of dogs considering to be bred but not whole heartedly. I'll give an example, I raised a litter, all made useable hounds but didn't meet my expectations, except one male, he was twice the size (a lot bigger than I like), twice as strong, better cold trail dog than any in 3 generations of his pedigree, and was a machine, if he ever got tired I never saw it. He got something none of his littermates got. He was a freak, but it is unknown if he will pass on his exceptional traits (thus improving his family line and breed overall) without breeding him. I believe many of traits we enjoy today in our hounds came from breeding to freaks that exhibit improved traits.
Fox hounds have been bred for a couple hundred years, it has been observed many times also that a certain family of dogs will produce very well when crossed with another certain family of dogs.
I my have gotten off on a rabbit with all I just said, to answer what I think your asking, I put more emphasis on the dam but want to breed her to the best male I personally or trusted hunter I know has seen in the woods.

[raisinriver]

I am of the belief of the better the female the better the pups the male has to be good also you have to breed the best to the best and we breed very tight also some say to tight but it has worked for us over the years


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[macedonia mule man]

Scrub, as I think back, I have seen just as many good dogs come off dogs that weren’t really good as I have dogs that were proven. I’m not talking about what people call a freak turn up. I’ve only seen one that I would call a freak and it was a squirrel dog. You couldn’t describe what she could and did do from 5 month old till 2 yrs. you would have to be there to witness it. As far as the running dogs go, I can’t see much difference in the dogs from ones man kennel to another. I do know the ones hauled to the woods the most can make a race sound better. I’ve hunted with some highly sought after bloodlines that weren’t any better than anything else. Kinda disappointing.

[1whitedog]

The standard that we strive for is that we only breed dogs that have the ability and desire to consistently catch and hold game on their own. We perfer these dogs to themselves be born to top notch parents and come from strong litters. We stick pretty tight to this when breeding for our selves, we dont breed to sell pups but will occasionally breed a real good outside male/female that we don't know as much about. We only average 1 litter a year, my opinion, just not that many dogs that deserve to be bread. For most crosses we have hunted with most the siblings, grandparents etc. of the dogs that we are crossing or have good knowledge of them. I have seen really good results and not so good results when just breeding to good dogs that we lacked the background on. We had 2 crosses planned for this year. 1 happened and 1 is yet to come in heat. The 4 dogs are owned by 4 different people, 3 are related (half brother/sister and a niece) and 1 is an outsider that we know alot about and the individual has similar standards as ours. All 4 of these dogs would fall well within the top 10% of dogs out there. To each their own and im not saying this is the answer but has served us well.

[lawdawgharris]

I'm not suggesting at all that a good dog bred to a non related good dog can't produce good dogs. The hybrid vigor created when two good but very tight bred families are crossed can create some great results. When genes are scattered because there has been no goal or standard placed on the breedings, or none of the dos are related, then you can't say what is going to be produced because you don't know. If you have a litter of 6 out of non related, non line bred dogs, you stand a chance of getting 6 different types of puppies. They may be different in build, desire, ability, intelligence, etc. If the parents are good dogs but 3 or 4 of their siblings were culls then odds are your pouring time and money into a litter of the average which is very poor. No matter how a dog is bred, he may possess more or less ability than the next. It's no different than people. How many young men play high school football every year. Many of them are just going through the motions because it's the cool thing or their buddies are doing it. For the ones that have enough skills, they move on to college where many of them find out that maybe they aren't as tough as they thought or don't enjoy it as much as they thought. Then from there, the creame of that crop goes pro where once again it's a gut check. Now you find out who really has the goods. The great ones continue to supersede the average. Of all these athletes there are those stories about the underdog that defied the odds and just wouldn't quit. I feel like those represent the scatter bred, non goal bred dogs. There are some that make it, not consistently though. Yes if some of those other underdogs had been worked with more (fed tracks) they may have over came to perform at a higher level as well. But if that same amount of tracks were fed to the purpose bred dog, they may be super dogs. Most coaches and hunters don't have the time or patience to put into an iffy project when there is one out there that has a higher percentage of turning out. To me that is common sense. Why take the old sway back to make a pony express horse out of when you could take the Kentucky derby winner in the next stall? You can ride them both, you can get there on both, but it isn't going to be in the same fashion. I line breed with purpose. I evaluate the gyp and decide which male to use with the consideration of what is the weakness or weaker points of the female and try to breed her to a male that is most similar to her but stronger where she is weaker in hopes that they will compliment each other and one improve on the others short comings. There is no right or wrong, just what works for the person buying the feed. I hog hunted with a man many years ago that had an eskimo Spitz cross. He loved old Casper as much as I hated him. He would find a hog, bay a hog, etc but he was counterfeit. I couldn't and wouldn't have put up that dog but he fed him and hunted him so if he was ok with it I figured I was. I just never counted the dog if he said he was bringing him because he may or may not make an impact. He saw more a few hog tracks, he couldn't use that for his excuse.

Sent from my SM-G892U using Tapatalk

[macedonia mule man]

I have ran across a dog from time to time I just didn’t like. Don’t know why because the dog did a pretty good job at whatever he was good for. I have owned some but was always looking for a reason to let someone else enjoy it. I wouldn’t call them counterfeit, I think They have a way of letting you know they don’t like you either. Most go on to satisfy the new owner.

[Nolte]

We all like to think we're smarter than we are or have all the answers. Best you can do is work whatever strategy gets workable dogs for your area that have a personality you like or at least can handle. Have had some hard driving round heads that are stubborn SOBs that you cuss out all the time except when you're on a bad critter or tough track. Have had others that a pleasure to have and handle but dont quite catch like the others. Wish I could have it all but after looking for 25 years haven't seen it very much and when I do find it seems to throw pups that dont measure up. Had a cross a few years back that was out of two super nice dogs, from pretty close families and numerous generations of game catchers. Pups turned out so so with one that measures up to parents, 2 duds and 3 ok dogs. Should have been a slam dunk given being closely related but it just wasn't. Seen that happen numerous times. Not sure if it was a line petering out or what.

Best advice I give is just keep going to a line or dogs that is working for you with and eye out for something else too try. because you never know when the well runs dry. If you find a female that throws good pups keep breeding her, same with a male. And if its a male, have him collected to be safe until you find a suitable female to try.

It's all a gamble and usually someone who tells you every pup is a rock star is trying to get their hand in your wallet.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[macedonia mule man]

Nolte, I think you and I have had paralleling dog hunting and breeding experiences.

[scrubrunner]

Nolte, i agree and have had parallel experiences also. I may look at it a little differently though, you got one that equaled its parents so it wasn't unsuccessful just not what you hoped it would be, but instead of having 2 super nice dogs, now you have 3, so you improved your pack by making the breeding.
Lawdawg, I just went back and read your original post again, it's just the opposite here, most hunters like females, it is really hard to find a male around here worthy to breed to.
I agree with you on a good dog tightly bred using performance standards will produce like get more consistently than a good dog with a scattered gene pool, even using the same performance standards.

[lawdawgharris]

Do y'all keep your entire litters? I don't myself. Usually, there are plenty of hunters that want pups and I try to place them where I think they Will stand the best chance of getting a fair shake at making it. This way I get to evaluate with my own eyes how they turn out and I have access to them breeding wise or if they should make a breeding that I could use I can get puppies back. 9 out of 10 times they are gonna take my breeding advice into strong consideration. This helps them and me.

Sent from my SM-G892U using Tapatalk

[macedonia mule man]

Family breeding is like eating homade ice cream at a family reunion. All you ever had was vanilla Then some weird uncle comes up with a freezer full of strawberry, blueberry, overripe banana and a few over ripe peaches. He talks you into trying some and man it is unusually good but you kinda shrug your shoulders and tell him it sure not as good as grandmas vanilla.

[macedonia mule man]

Law, I don’t know about hog hunting or what it takes to make a hog dog but I know from experience the running walker that I kept the entire litter made far better pack of dogs than any I ever had. They stayed together in one pen till 3 month old. Split them up in pairs at three months and would alternate littermstes about every 2 weeks. Started all together in front of truck at 6 months. They were all packed up and running together in a month hunting about 3 times a week. Never had a fighting problem of any kind, they seem to like each others company and really enjoy hunting together. Unless they have a split race they will all be loading in the box at the same time. Really enjoyable to hunt. They all look alike ,hunt alike, sound mostly alike. They are going into their fourth season and I still can’t tell but 2 barksout of the litter. The only reason I tell now is I’ve lost three malesout of the bunch.