NBC 2005 BOB Ch. Windkist A Walk In The Park

Beagle Huntsman · Post by **Beagle Huntsman** » Sat Sep 16, 2006 7:52 am

FC. Bee Lick Cobra goes back to FC. Dunlap's Benson, FC. Cabin Creek Propagator and FC. Omena Ink Spot. All were big brace producers in the 70s and 80s. I couldn't find anything on any of the other hounds, except that TRAKARAB are some hounds from Roy Rice in Michigan. He used a lot of LPH (hare hound) bloodlines, so that influence may be offsetting the brace influence in your hounds.

Larry: I fully agree with your statement that you cannot get much improvement in conformation from today's field bred hounds. In fact, the straight field crosses I have made over the past 25 years have almost always set me back in conformation. I have learned to try to always breed to hounds with some percentage of show blood in the pedigree. Too much field or too much show and the quality of the hounds being produced has started to suffer, so better to keep astride the fence as much as possible.

A possible exception to the above statement about field hounds could be the English pack beagles, who have been bred for a "function" that requires top conformation. I hope to try some of them in my pack someday soon, just to see how they can handle a cottontail in America. I know the conformation will be there, if the better lines are used.

The problem with using drastically un-related bloodlines to try to reach your goal is that no matter how well your first generation puppies turn out, it's difficult to know where to go to sustain what you have. Normally, breeding wisdom is to breed back to one of the families after an outcross to try to "set" the characteristics gained. Instead of going back to brace or show in the next generation, your best bet would be to cross onto a dual-purpose family, but then you likely are making another total outcross.

Larry G · Post by **Larry G** » Sat Sep 16, 2006 5:04 pm

Beagle Huntsman wrote:

The problem with using drastically un-related bloodlines to try to reach your goal is that no matter how well your first generation puppies turn out, it's difficult to know where to go to sustain what you have. Normally, breeding wisdom is to breed back to one of the families after an outcross to try to "set" the characteristics gained. Instead of going back to brace or show in the next generation, your best bet would be to cross onto a dual-purpose family, but then you likely are making another total outcross.

I agree completely, and have said as much in an earlier post in this thread... that the pups likely will not reproduce themselves (and this would be regardless of what I breed to). Pigeon racers (and I dabbled in that a little) like to keep 2 separate linebred strains that have proven themselves over time. They cross them and race what they get. The crosses can outfly either strain, but are not likely to produce good flying birds.

Too bad my field bitch had to have a C section and was spayed on the advice of my vet. I would love to have bred her back again. I'm looking for a male to breed to my female pups. If it's a show dog it would have to be able to do a little more than trot around and look pretty, and if it's a field dog it will have to look like a Beagle, not a mutt. I have some that look like mutts already.

TC · Post by TC » Sat Sep 16, 2006 8:35 pm

How about this Guy?
CH CCH Rosies Just by Chance
http://home.earthlink.net/~tjcrewse/id18.html

Larry G · Post by **Larry G** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 6:54 am

Perfect, if he lived in NC. I don't like to ship dogs to be bred or for any other reason if I can help it. As I have mentioned before, my show male is available for stud for a pup or a very nominal fee if anyone wants to use him. He was never shown because of a tail injury, but the man I got him from says Joe would have made a champion if not for that. He has sired several litters and I hear they are beauties. We have placed him with a family as a pet but with the right to breed as needed.

http://www.pawvillage.com/pedigree/pedi ... S4RYAWUR0M[/img][/url]

TouchstoneBeagles · Post by **TouchstoneBeagles** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 11:05 am

If both form and function are not equally important in your breeding program to produce the Total dog your program will likely be hindered.
Based on what I have seen bench judging in multiple registries staying strictly within hunt bloodlines would likely take longer than is feasable unless your children and grandchildren...continue the endeavor.
Show lines that have kept strong hunt instinct or dogs from other countries will likely be your key to success.
Gaining knowledge about genetics, strengths and weaknesses in different bloodlines, etc will intensify the process.
With the scientific knowledge and the process of artificial insemination set no geographic constrictions on your breeding program.
Good luck in your race to the finish line. Dan M

sav · Post by **sav** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 11:39 am

Tom I have to disagree with you, I feel to be true to the roots of any breed they must be bred and raised to do what they where intended to do. I bet that most cattlemen would rather have a dog that can handle a herd of cattle, and could care less if they won a conformation show. I understand that conformation and structure dictate the length of time that any canine can perform a function, and is something that we should all strive for. I would rather see a dog display extreme hunt for his/her hunting career regardless of conformation, than see a dog who has lost all hunting instincts but can win any conformation show it enters. JMHO

I don't think the old farts who discovered that there mutts could chase rabbits centuries ago, cared if they looked great they just knew they filled a niche wonderfully and that niche was to hunt and put meat on the table.

Larry G · Post by **Larry G** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 12:10 pm

I've already owned dogs, and bred to dogs, produced from frozen semen and I very much prefer not to do that again. Their immune system seems not to be up to par.

Incahoots · Post by **Incahoots** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 5:26 pm

So, a beagle with better structure will out last the one with lesser in the field if conditioned the same? I want to make sure I have this right.

Windkist · Post by **Windkist** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 6:32 pm

Incahoots wrote:So, a beagle with better structure will out last the one with lesser in the field if conditioned the same? I want to make sure I have this right.

Kinda makes sense doesn't it? If you have bad feet, down in the pasturns, poorly constructed rear etc.. but drive to hunt wouldn't a dog who was constructed well with the same drive last longer and be better conditioned? I'm not talking looks here but, basic structure. By all means lets not get Looks confused with good conformation or skeletal structure.

Leah

TC · Post by TC » Mon Sep 18, 2006 6:44 pm

I don't think the old farts who discovered that there mutts could chase rabbits centuries ago, cared if they looked great they just knew they filled a niche wonderfully and that niche was to hunt and put meat on the table.

Sav, this is where you are very wrong, if you will go back and look at hounds of 1949 which there is photos available, Hounds & Hunting, old stud books, they are all loaded with pictures of hounds with the build that looks very much like show dogs, almost everyone of the dogs in those pictures which by the way are FC's and Some were FC's and CH's and they all looked very much like show dogs. I don't know when the idea of a good hunting dog needed not to have the build of an athelete as long as it ran a rabbit. That is like sayin that it don't matter what the build of a long distance runner is like, as long as they can run and win, well how many can they run consistantly and still function the day after if not in shape to do the job. And for how many years can this continue?

If your body is not built to with stand the stress of a trial/countless hours of hunting, eventually it will break down and won't be functionable. Yes there is many a beagler out there that thinks their dog is a tool to do a job, but those dogs give their all and it is a shame that many break down early in life from over exertion stemming from not having the proper build and or over doing it and some think that the dog just lost his hunt so get rid of him when that dog gave his all to ya... That dog probably gave that hunter the best years of his life and the thanks he gets is he lost his hunt so I'm gettin rid of him attitude takes over.

blunder · Post by **blunder** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 7:08 pm

sav wrote:Tom I have to disagree with you, I feel to be true to the roots of any breed they must be bred and raised to do what they where intended to do. I bet that most cattlemen would rather have a dog that can handle a herd of cattle, and could care less if they won a conformation show. I understand that conformation and structure dictate the length of time that any canine can perform a function, and is something that we should all strive for. I would rather see a dog display extreme hunt for his/her hunting career regardless of conformation, than see a dog who has lost all hunting instincts but can win any conformation show it enters. JMHO

I don't think the old farts who discovered that there mutts could chase rabbits centuries ago, cared if they looked great they just knew they filled a niche wonderfully and that niche was to hunt and put meat on the table.

You must know a bunch of different cattlemen than I do. Around here the ranchers would sonner be caught without their pickuptruck than their "Heeler",,, And you had better believe they care about what they look like, and how they perform. Think any of us are picky!!!!!

Western outcross Blue Heeler (crossed between Corgy & Queensland heeler)
Dog owned by R. Deradanno
http://www.hunt101.com/img/394787.bmp
The ranchers out here have been breeding these dogs for so long that they are actually divided by color like the Austrailian Cattle Dogs are. Only differences are size and many do not have a tail like their Corgy ansesters.

Those "old farts" (darn ,,,,, I think I'm becomming one of those) are the ones that defined the breed and set the standard, theirs are the dogs that we all want to imulate.

Incahoots · Post by **Incahoots** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 7:34 pm

Kinda makes sense doesn't it? If you have bad feet, down in the pasturns, poorly constructed rear etc.. but drive to hunt wouldn't a dog who was constructed well with the same drive last longer and be better conditioned? I'm not talking looks here but, basic structure. By all means lets not get Looks confused with good conformation or skeletal structure.

Cool, I have total dogs then. They can run day after day and look better and better as other dogs hit the wall.

However, to leave stamina out as a trait and place it all on structure would be short sighted.

blunder · Post by **blunder** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 7:43 pm

However, to leave stamina out as a trait

Stanima is the product of conditioning not breeding

I don't care what breeding a dog comes from, if it isn't run,,,, it can't run for long.

Wanna see a dog run??
This one can

and this one can't

tom

Post by **Bev** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 8:19 pm

LMAO. I raised 2 flashy brindle boxers to the age of 13. That looks about right. Loved them both (my grandson is named after one, lol) but even if they would run, they couldn't find their way home 2 houses away.

TC · Post by TC » Mon Sep 18, 2006 8:25 pm

LMAO @ Blunder those are great photos! LOL