Pedigrees - How to use them and how far back?

[bob huffman]

Gee! Why didn't I say that! You are putting some awful big ideas in my head Bev! My buddy has a Border Terrier that looks like a hairy loaf of bread with legs that can catch a rabbit if he gets on a real hot track unless he runs through a cockle burr patch. If he gets in the cockle burrs patch, you have to take the weed eater to get him loose. Lets see, long haired Beagles? Naw!!!!

[Chris]

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?

It's a tough one, because raising these dogs is a lot of work, and I imagine someone would be very hesitant to base a lot of work on a dog that 'might' not be purebred (even if only a perception). It could mean a lot of unnecessary work in future generations. And, yes, I realize that there's also a chance that any given AKC dog isn't purebred. I might not agree with or like the answer, but that's the reason behind it, I think. As far as cheating the Beagle breed goes... I think that's an individual decision that folks have to make. I wouldn't think that skipping a breeding or two could really be cheating anything.

It's quite a complex discussion with no one having the patent on good ideas. It's nice that it can be talked about, back and forth by so many different folks from all around the country, so much easier now that it could have been even 15 years ago. Let's hope that that alone might lead to some future answers in regards to registries and similar things.

[thornie]

Here's my reply on Bevs subject. We just started running beagles within the last 4 years. The first 2 dogs we started with where grade dogs. We
registered them UKC and ARHA. I hunted them hard and the male quailified for the UKC world and championed out. The female is CH on the bench and needs 1st in the field in UKC. My son then bought some registered dogs and has also had good luck with them. But lets go rabbit hunting, you can't get a rabbit up, snow on the ground, go back and grab old so & so, and he digs them out. Would I breed him to a female, you bet as soon as I find the right female. I can register them UKC, ARHA and probably a few more, but not AKC. I have had people ask his breeding and I tell them, he's out of Amish Country by Horse And Buggy. But he's still my favorite dog. Yes we should keep some kind of registration, so how do we do it? Give me some ideas and I would be glad to volunteer
my time.

[Cooks Hilltop Kennel]

As to the generations of influence , 75% of genetic influence comes through the combination of parents and grandparents. Genetic influence past that is greatly reduced. I think this substantiates the method of careful linebreeding.
As to the recording of pedigrees, anyone can do that very easily anymore with the computer. However I think a formal registry such as AKC can provide some assurance of integrity even though we all know false papers have been a problem. DNA testing could eventually change that I suppose.
There was a gentleman in my area that raised beagles (grade) for years and had many generations both recorded and in his head. He always had some good dogs but when he passed the knowledge went with him unfortunately.
Good question Bev. Lots of different views which is usual in the world of breeding hounds.

[AlabamaSwamper]

Bev, you are right on when you say that I messed up with not breeding him but here is the main reasons.

1) He was a born deer dog, raised a deer dog, and had many deer killed in front of him.

2) He was probably 16 to 16.5 inches tall. I assume he was out of some old Hare hound blood which seems to be a big player in the bigger deer beagles of the south.

3) I did not have a female that I wanted to breed to him and he passed away at about 9 years old which was a surprise.

I would have bred him eventually for myself but I never got the chance to because of his sudden passing. He developed some sort of never disorder that was irreversible so I had him put down for his own sake and trust me, he is dearly missed. I still have his collar and pictures to remind me of all the great runs that I had with him. Ten to twelve solid hours was common with this dog on deer and I have seen him run rabbits in the summer all night with very few breakdowns and usually would catch it.

I have to say that in the last few days, since all these post have come about, I have thought on this subject even more. I am about to the point where I am going to breed the best dogs I can find, AKC or not, and build the best pack that I can. I do believe that NKC-ARHA has almost a strong enough influence in the south now that when I say that a dog is NKC-ARHA that most folks will reconize them. Maybe I'm wrong but maybe not. If and when I do this, I will keep AKC papers on the pups I breed from AKC dogs but eventually, that will take care of itself. At some point, I will have to scrap all of my AKC stuff because I will run out of AKC dogs to breed and then it will be nothing but NKC-ARHA. Now if UKC can get some clubs down here and become more known, then I may go with UKC also. However, at this time, that would not be very cost effective for me because nobody cares about UKC papers around "this" part of the country.

Maybe in ten years, someone will speak of me, as a well respected breeder of good, solid gundogs like folks speak of some people on the boards. I dont care about making money on dogs so breeding a bunch of liiters is out of the question but when I do breed a litter, maybe, just maybe, they will be very good. Maybe by that time, I will have my own pedigrees, that I started and the heck with paying $35 for one. Have all the dogs in my kennels for everyone to see and run if they want. Now, that would be ideal. Have every dog within two generations or more in the kennels for a buyer to see run.

[Jamie Rice]

Bev,

Every person has a different opinion on how far to look back in a pedigree and how far back a dog can affect modern day beagling. I have a friend who knows a heck a lot more than I do about breeding that hestitates even when dogs have brace hounds back in the 6 and 7th generation. He believes that hounds of brace nature back that far can effect how the current hound turns out. Whether that's to be true or not, I don't know. Therefore I can't necessarily say that Jack and Jiggs back that far effects todays hounds either. However I will state the fact it's a producing line, meaning those two produced champions, their pups produced champions, their grandpups produced champions, and their great grandpups are producing champions should say something. The same can be said for a producing bitch line as well. I think that's what some of us forget to pay credit to. Like my mom says, "Behind every good man is a good woman." LOL. Anyhow one thing I'm definitely for certain on is that I believe that dogs as far back as the fourth can effect the actions and mannerisms of today's hounds. My cousin is on the fourth generation out of an foundation brood dog of his. He and I pretty much have the same bloodlines. And I know it may sound weird, but I can see some of the similar actions in her great-grand pups as I do in her. For the most part they possess the same diehard desire and search, overwhelming hunt, and chop mouths. But that's not really what showed me she could affect them. It's the fact of those little quirky actions I've witnessed of the pups in each generation around the same ages. It' the way they hold their tail, the way they act when you go to feed them, and the way they run when they're playing, etc. as well. I know you know what I mean therefore I won't go in to detail listing any great little quirks. Perhaps I'm weird in paying attention to the little things like that, but some of those simple things like that catches my attention. I think their great-grand mother has just as much play in that as do their sires and dam or their grand-sires and grand-dams.

This is not a downgrade of anyone's hounds, but I don't think you can say that for all dogs. I know that there's some dogs in their pedigrees that far back that probably doesn't play a roll. However I think for the most part it comes down to genetics that causes that. A hound that can put a stamp on pups that far down the family tree definitely has strong genetics. And a strong genetically made up hound back beyond the 4th generation can effect current hound, however on the flipside a less-strong one can't. Even some sire and dams don't effect their pups in any way. On some pups it would seem that they get every single trait just from one hound instead of both sire and dam let alone a dog 4 or 5 generations back. I know it's not that simple to say such, but I don't know how to put it any simplier words.

As for breeding an AKC dog to a non AKC dog(ARHA, UKC, CKC, or plain jane grade hound). I think it would come down to what I intend to do with the pups. If I'm just a hunter, I see no problem whatsoever breeding AKC to a dog from some other registry or just a non registered hound. However if I trial as well, which we both do, it would depend on what registry I primarily trial in as well. Like you stated if I wanted to trial in one of the open registries I don't think it would matter. However I'm primarly an AKC trialer, but I do partake in some of the others every now and then. However AKC is what I trial in 90% of the them. Therefore really the only registry I can see that I would cross to would be a CKC. And so that we are on the right page, I mean the real CKC, the Canadian Kennel Club. That's not to say dogs in ARHA or UKC aren't just as good or their owners integerity isn't just as great. It's just that what it all comes down to the fact I can trial AKC and CKC bred hounds in any registry I wish. You have to go through a tad difficult process to dual register them, but in the long run AKC will register CKC hounds and vice-versa. However the same can't be said when it comes to ARHA, UKC, or just grade hounds. I know AKC won't register ARHA and UKC only hounds and I'd have to bet CKC won't either. I could care less whether a hound is trialed in AKC or UKC. I know many guys that won't even breed to AKC dogs that are ran in UKC or AKC ones ran in ARHA. To me that's stupid. Just because they're ran in those registries doesn't make them a bad dogs. For the most part it comes down to what rules and types of trials we like more. I see no problem with myself breeding to a dog ran in UKC and ARHA however it must be AKC registered as well. I want my pups to have the chance to run in whatever registry I choose.

Like many others I do think of the biggest reasons that ARHA and UKC hounds are picked at is the fact they have an open registry. I also think that's one of the biggest reasons AKC won't recognize their breedings as well. Sure many of today's ARHA and UKC hounds probably could show a 3 to 4 generation pedigree. The reason I'm saying that is because that's one of the things AKC requires of CKC and vice versa, not the only thing, but is one of the things. However in ARHA or UKC hounds, eventually when you get back far enough you see "unknown". Yeah I know in AKC when you get back far enough you can probably see the same. But I'm not talking about hounds back in the 1900's, I'm talking about hounds back in the 1980's. Sure in a 40 generation pedigree you may see some unknowns, but I have yet to see an official AKC pedigree that's 7 to 8 generation that's showed unknown. I don't necessarily think I could say that for some UKC and ARHA dogs. I take that "unknown" as a plain jane grade hound or in other words one that the breeder hasn't the foggiest idea of what it's sire and dam was out of. I know some people that's bred grade hounds for 20 years, but I doubt very few of them kept pedigrees or kept records. I'm not 100% sure on how long UKC and ARHA has had beagling programs, I would have to say at least 15 to 20 years or more. Like someone else stated I think that their doors has been open far too long. Shut the doors to registering everything that comes along and you'll open up yourselves up to more respect for your establishment. Sure you'll always have someone say people is cheating on papers. But what gets me some people think only guys in AKC have cheated on their papers and then some think every single dog in UKC and ARHA are part fiest and rat terrier. Jesus Christ are we that simple minded? Cheating and dishonesty has went on since the beginning of man let alone beaging and fact is it'll never change. You'll always have some dishonest person out there and it's not restricted to one bloodline or one registry either. Why? Because anything with man/woman involved in open to a tad dishonesty hear and there. You'd think we as human's would wise up, but respect isn't what some people want. All they want is a blue ribbon and a reason to brag on their hounds. Therefore they'll take any chance they can to get a tad closer towards that. Even it it means lying, cheating, stealing, etc! I feel pity for people like that. I really do...

[Bev]

Jamie, you took some of the words out of my mouth when you talk of selfish breeders.

Now Bob, you know I didn't mean bring terrier into the the line, lol! But hey guess what folks - all those bassety-looking AKC brace beagles (and some of the early imports)? I've been told that the key to getting them long, low and slow was not to put basset in them but dachshund. Bassets would make them too large - they would be way too large and heavy. Plus, they would still have houndy heads. Nah, if you want short little legs and an anteater's nose, you gotta put some dachshund in there.

All any registry can do is record information given them, store it in their databases, then puke it back up when you ask for it. As Cooks Hilltop pointed out, one can do that easily with his computer, or, a person can simply write it down and keep good notes. I think whether we are breeding registered hounds or grade hounds, the maintaining integrity part still falls on the breeder. It would be ideal if breeders would keep notes on both registered and grade beagles and not proliferate lines that don't give us the desired results - regardless of whose name is on them. The problem I see with that is once again, we have too many short-term goals and no patience to see the long-term goal involved. We want that glory quickly. It seems to me that with a review of history, and the apparent bound/rebound of the beagle breed, failures came about from the lack of integrity within breeders, due to greed, chasing ribbons or just plain carelessness, and there isn't a registry in the world that can assure us otherwise.

I found the following picture to be very interesting. It's a picture of a FC stud dog and, well, you can see the date for yourselves. I didn't use photoshop on it - it's not retouched. Say what you will of the questionability of the grade dog, but........

http://www.americanbeagler.net/display2.html

[Chris]

Wow, that's quite a picture.

A guy from IL, that raises Redticks, I think, keeps saying that AKC folks fake papers every day. Maybe you're both right -- everyone's dishonest anyhow, so registration doesn't mean much.

[DarrinG]

I have noticed this thread has a , well...a bit of negativity towards AKC dogs to it.

I for one would never disregard a good dog just because it was not AKC, but I get the "feel" that some think all AKC dogs are slow, basset crosses and have no desire to put a rabbit on the move, and do it right.

I am NOT a big AKC fan. I do most of my trialing in the ARHA Progressive Pack format, but I prefer AKC dogs. Why? The integrity of the lineages. yeah paper swapping may happen some, but I would be willing to say that there are more honest breeders/beaglers out there than those who are sneaks and crooks.

That picture Bev provided was awful! Have mercy! A dog built such as that should have been culled long before it got that old. Flip side is I have also seen some grade dogs at trials that looked just as bad, maybe not the same charachteristics, but just as bad in other ways. It falls back to breeder responsibility, regardless of registry!

[Bev]

I'd like to separate the element of field trials from the subject of building a better beagle when I make my posts. Certainly if one competes in a certain registry, then he needs hounds that will be accepted in that registry. That's not what my question is about. It's about breeding dogs and keeping records of it. I reiterate that this thread is not intended to create negativity on AKC. It was brought up to point out the fallibility of AKC and gather folks' thoughts on viable alternatives. In any registry, AKC included, it's easy to let a mouse in the house and one single mouse can leave tracks everywhere. If someone slipped papers on a dog one time - even way back, it can render a pedigree basically worthless to a degree. Certainly the integrity was compromised. In that respect AKC is no better or worse than any other registry.

The responsibility of integrity still lies with us - the registries can't do it, they are record-keepers. We have 15 grown dogs and 6 puppies in the kennel right now. All but 3 of the grown hounds are AKC registered. Most are triple registered, so it would be hypocritical of me to say "don't utilize the registries". But I also feel like any registry that claims it can preserve the integrity of your hounds, or guarantee the hounds in their pedigrees are who they say they are is wrong. IMHO, any person who feels their hounds are of better quality or somehow worth more than others' based soley on how they are registered are just full of beans.......or disillusioned.

How about this? When we make a breeding, we put ultimate quality first and registry second. Weed out those culls - even if they are right out of the great S0-N-So, regardless of whose name is in front of it. If the hounds are grade, but worth perpetuating, register them in an open registry and get the pedigree ball rolling. Then continue to develope and improve the line. After all, in the matter of the "biggest and bestest registry for beagles", the pendulum may one day swing the other way.

Here are some thoughts on integrity and independence to ponder - written by some philosophers some may recognize:

"If we value independence, if we are disturbed by the growing conformity of knowledge, of values, of attitudes, which our present system induces, then we may wish to set up conditions of learning which make for uniqueness, for self-direction, and for self-initiated learning." – Carl Rogers

"Responsibility does not only lie with the leaders of our countries or with those who have been appointed or elected to do a particular job. It lies with each of us individually." – The Dalai Lama

"Believe nothing just because a so-called wise person said it. Believe nothing just because a belief is generally held. Believe nothing just because it is said in ancient books. Believe nothing just because it is said to be of divine origin. Believe nothing just because someone else believes it. Believe only what you yourself test and judge to be true." – Buddha

"A man can't make a place for himself in the sun if he keeps taking refuge under the family tree." – Helen Keller

"Insist on yourself; never imitate. Your own gift you can present every moment with the cumulative force of a whole life's cultivation; but of the adopted talent of another you have only an extemporaneous, half possession.' – Ralph Waldo Emerson

"Through pride we are ever deceiving ourselves. But deep down below the surface of the average conscience a still, small voice says to us, 'Something is out of tune.' "- Carl Jung

"To go against the dominant thinking of your friends, of most of the people you see every day, is perhaps the most difficult act of heroism you can perform." - Theodore H. White

"Moral cowardice that keeps us from speaking our minds is as dangerous to this country as irresponsible talk. The right way is not always the popular and easy way. Standing for right when it is unpopular is a true test of moral character.' – Margaret Chase Smith

"There is no squabbling so violent as that between people who accepted an idea yesterday and those who will accept the same idea tomorrow." – Christopher Morley

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

If a man offers me a good hound or a pup and I am in need of one, if he is willing to stake his reputation on it, claim the work, show me the results, I will pay his price. I won't discredit his efforts by chiseling him down on price based on the type pedigree he kept. What's important to me is that he kept one and I'll know who I have in the field with me.

[S.R.Patch]

Bev.

I believe your hound is an example of "form following function". All that was required of the hound an tested for, is the maxium of what it is, no more.

Surely there are good hounds in all registeries but to discredit one in the attempt to promote the other gains nothing. Time is but a fleeting moment, whatever registery strikes your fancy go with it, the main thing is to get on with it.

With the computer age we live in now and the available programs, record keeping should not be the chore it once was, so there is no reason for the lack of record, if you build it.

You know I am an advocate of working from the wheel that has been provided, that best suites our need. I had wasted to much time on hounds that lacked the work of prior breeding and selection to reproduce in type. My advice to anyone is to find a line of hounds that suit you, the longer they've been bred as a family for type, the better.

The Best to All...Patch

[Chris]

Surely there are good hounds in all registeries but to discredit one in the attempt to promote the other gains nothing.

I agree Patch. You can't take offense to someone saying that hounds from a certain registry are worth more, on average, when sale facts speak for themselves. I think some are taking it to heart as to mean that other registries dogs aren't as good. That's not the case. Public perception impacts prices; nothing more. If a new registry wants to forge ahead and make an impact on public perception, then good for them. None of us has to like it, but promoting negativity toward any registry, just because they're the biggest and viewed as elitist, or whatever, is no more healthy than a guy discrediting an open registry on the grounds that he thinks they'll register anything with four legs and a tail. I also find it scary that any of the other registries would have registered that dog in the photo just because it may have had AKC papers. Someone's going to have to stand up and do something innovative and capture folk's attention and trust if the AKC is ever going to be toppled (I'd really like to see AKC get a little of the aggravation that they've given us).

[Hunt6]

Jeeze and I thought Redtick was the only - biggest AKC basher.Aka AKC breeders are liars and forge papers.Big ='s corrupt yada yada.Wanna breed grade dogs do it and reg them in the registries that allow it.

As stated I have no bias against single reg dogs with one small request.One that only allows the books to be open for short periods of time.

Question for you'll wanting to breed grade dogs with NO pedigree to start with and register them UKC - whatever....I assume you'll be willing to cull any grade matings made hard enough for three - five generatios to see what you produced - had to start with before you pawn any pups off on an un suspecting public for big bucks??
Hunt6 (David P.)

[Hunt6]

Chris wrote
Someone's going to have to stand up and do something innovative and capture folk's attention and trust if the AKC is ever going to be toppled (I'd really like to see AKC get a little of the aggravation that they've given us). snip

It's called DNA testing.Every registry should have - use it.
Hunt6 (David P.)

[Bev]

Hunt6 wrote: "Question for you'll wanting to breed grade dogs with NO pedigree to start with and register them UKC - whatever....I assume you'll be willing to cull any grade matings made hard enough for three - five generatios to see what you produced - had to start with before you pawn any pups off on an un suspecting public for big bucks??"

Well yes, David, that's pretty much the whole point about doing the hard work. More than likely that's what the breeders did before AKC came about. I also believe there are dogs out there already pedigreed that should have been culled and not sold to the public for big bucks. Did you not look at the picture of the hound in the link I provided? That wasn't a slam of AKC - that was a tool to maybe to humble those that say AKC is the only registry that can guarantee you a purebred dog and that all else are curs and culls.

The AKC was founded in 1884 and it wasn't until 1888 that they decided they needed a reliable stud book. Until then, what did they do? I'm assuming they had an open registry until they felt they had enough worthy foundation stock of the original (approximately 15 breeds) to close it. I believe Dr. N. Rowe personally kept stud records for ten years - several volumes worth and donated them to AKC for it's intitial stud book. They said 'thank you" and took it from there. AKC is not a closed registry in the truest sense of the word. They are I guess you'd say, mostly closed. New breeds are accepted and recognized all the time and formerly closed-registry breeds are re-opened upon occasion as in the case of the Japanese Akitas in 1992. Of these new breeds recognized, how do they ascertain these new breeds to be purebred? Surely they started out as mixed breeds until they became reliably reproduceable in type and standard. I'm assuming AKC relies on the hand-kept breeding records of the owners, and allows a period of open registry until they feel they have enough to close. There's certainly nothing wrong with that.

There's nothing wrong with UKC, NKC, PKC, etc. leaving their registries open until such time they feel they've gleaned enough of the of the best for foundation stock and decide to close. It may happen one day and the time for the grade hound breeder to contribute his/her handiwork may be now. If you can breed a better all-around beagle using superior quality grade hounds, registered hounds, or a combination of both, now would be the time to do it.

As far as DNA testing, UKC offered it first and made it mandatory for the Select Sire program. AKC followed in their footsteps and made it mandatory for their Frequently Used Sires program. Neither require it for every breeding. You can breed two litters a year for 3 years, register every pup and not have to DNA any of them. Nothing will be conclusive until they demand that all sires and dams be DNA profiled before they are bred. Can you imagine how many folks will bail out of breeding given that added expense?

Once again, my point is not to criticize any registry, but to give them ALL due consideration, and recognize that the credibility and integrity of any of them lies with the breeder. The breeders make the registries what they are - not the other way around. If one person decides to slip a little Jack Russell Terrier in their bloodline to give them a little boost, or continue to breed and register dogs that have questionable type standard and justify it by the fact that it already has a pedigree, then we do the breed a disservice. We do each other a disservice.


The idea is to breed a better beagle. It can be done.