UKC Forums - Breeding Question: What's most important?

Show all 18 posts from this thread on one page

UKC Forums (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/index.php)
- UKC Coonhounds (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/forumdisplay.php?forumid=4)
-- Breeding Question: What's most important? (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/showthread.php?threadid=223429)

Posted by Oak Ridge on 08-15-2008 04:58 PM:

Breeding Question: What's most important?

I've been doing some pedigree research recently and a question comes to mind....

I see lot's of folks that like to list pedigrees of dogs for sale, and they always point out the sires that are on the reproducers list....and seldom if EVER mention the females.

I'm not going to go down the path of which is more important the male or the female in reproduction...that's been beaten to death.

What I would like to know is what attracts you most.

A dog that has four male "top reproducers" in the pedigree...when he has sired 3228 pups, and 12.7% of those receive a title

OR

A female that has 35 pups of which 64.86% of those go on to be titled...???

__________________
Joe Newlin
UKC Cur Advocate
Home of Oak Ridge Kennels

Posted by smokey7 on 08-15-2008 05:04 PM:

i think the male is more important and here's why Joe. A female has only got a few chances in her lifetime. YOu know as well as i do that so many times the male is a coondog and the female is a coondog but the blood just don't "mix" right. A female don't have the opportunity to have 500 pups before she dies. However, a male has all the opportunity in the world to show what he's really got in him to reproduce. He's got way, way, way more chances to really show. In other words, i just feel like the male results are a truer showing of what he is producing. What the female "puts in" is just as important as what the male puts in. However, i just feel like when looking at the results you can go by the male results more. Just my opinion.

Posted by Majestic Tree H on 08-15-2008 05:22 PM:

You can't beat a Female that has been bred to X Studs and Still produces high %s of Good Pups. It just boils down to which Stud she produced best with and keep going back to that Stud untill you have something to start line breeding on .

The Female all the Way .. Plus She is the one that the Pups will Imprint off of.. If you have a nasty Bitch , Well expect that the pups Imprint off that..

__________________
Steve Morrow "Saltlick Majestic's"
"Never Have Hounds Or Kids And You Won't Get Your Heart Broke"!!

540-421-2875

PR, Saltlick's Blue Misty Linga "Bluetick Coonhound"

French X American Hounds

Posted by on 08-15-2008 05:31 PM:

A high percentage for either one tells me the breeder knew the right coonhunters to get his pups to. If I had owned Balls Abby bitch and made those very same crosses on Harry, does anyone believe she would have produced all those AllGrand litters? No way!

All these stats are completely washed out by the human factor in raising, training and pushing pups in the hunts.

Posted by John D on 08-15-2008 05:31 PM:

I look at both. I look at both parents of a potential stud dog the same way. If his mother was nothing more t han a brood female, then even if that stud is throwing some good pups, I'm going to bet he will have some cull grandpups based on their great grandmother and her shortcomings. Holes in a pedigree cause inconsistency.

When high percentage males with 2 good parents are bred to high percentage females with 2 good parents you'll start to get some consistency in a litter. THEN, and only then, you have something you can start thinking about linebreeding on.

jmho.

__________________

Click here to visit The B&T Coonhunters Message Forum for news, views, open discussion, ads, and event winners in the B&T Breed (Registration, with your full name, required)

Click here to see my Dog List

Posted by Larry Atherton on 08-15-2008 06:14 PM:

"What I would like to know is what attracts you most."

Geeze, Joe, getting a little personal now.

Are you asking with regards to buying puppies? Or are you asking with regards to choose a stud for a female?

The first thing that usually gets my attention is a pedigree that shows a line that I may expect crosses well. Second, and most important are good pup reports. Third, how much info I can dig up on the family of dogs on both sides. I believe both parents are equally important as well as their families behind them.

I whole heartedily believe that good crosses are easier to make when the breeder has a goal; is breeding for specific traits through a strict selection process; has progeny tested at a minimum 1 parent; has extensive family knowledge.

__________________
Larry Atherton

Aim small miss small

Posted by Oak Ridge on 08-15-2008 06:21 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by JiM
A high percentage for either one tells me the breeder knew the right coonhunters to get his pups to. If I had owned Balls Abby bitch and made those very same crosses on Harry, does anyone believe she would have produced all those AllGrand litters? No way!

All these stats are completely washed out by the human factor in raising, training and pushing pups in the hunts.

JiM,

I'm usually pretty reticent about disagreeing with you, and for the most part...I don't disagree with you.

HOWEVER, your viewpoint does not hold up under some careful scrutiny.

Example....

We all know that Logan's Wild Clover who has been dead over the "permitted" age for historical reproducers....he had 185 pups, and produced a VERY high percentage of titled dogs....out of his title dogs, Stylish Clover, and Schmersal's Stylish Anna are still on the reproducers list. Out of Stylish Clover, Stylish Molly is on the current reproducers list.

Now I know that Logan's Wild Clover was out of Logan's Wild Julie...I also know that Creek Ridge Sky...another well known reproducer of coon dogs was out of Julie and River Bend Flag....

I could show you multiple links to a lot of the dogs on both the current, and historical reproducers list that trace back to one of two females....Logan's Wild Julie, and Schmersal's Stylish Queen....

I just can't make the same linkages to males....I'm sure someone can....but not me.

__________________
Joe Newlin
UKC Cur Advocate
Home of Oak Ridge Kennels

Posted by Oak Ridge on 08-15-2008 06:26 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Larry Atherton
"What I would like to know is what attracts you most."

Geeze, Joe, getting a little personal now.

Are you asking with regards to buying puppies? Or are you asking with regards to choose a stud for a female?

The first thing that usually gets my attention is a pedigree that shows a line that I may expect crosses well. Second, and most important are good pup reports. Third, how much info I can dig up on the family of dogs on both sides. I believe both parents are equally important as well as their families behind them.

I whole heartedily believe that good crosses are easier to make when the breeder has a goal; is breeding for specific traits through a strict selection process; has progeny tested at a minimum 1 parent; has extensive family knowledge.

Larry,

I've just been thinking for the past few months on reproduction. Many of us don't look past the first generation of production.....meaning...we are looking for "results" out of a litter of pups. Nothing wrong with that at all, and that should be ONE OF our goals as breeders.

My fascination is becoming...how can I, or is it possible to, plan for REPRODUCTION OF REPRODUCERS? With males, there are too many "variables"...or the number of pups vs. titled dogs makes the percentage so low that I would not hang my hat on just about any of them as reproducers. However, if 65% of a females pups go on to earn a title, that's a pretty easy call for me....

I'm thinking again Larry...that's all.

__________________
Joe Newlin
UKC Cur Advocate
Home of Oak Ridge Kennels

Posted by jackbob42 on 08-15-2008 06:50 PM:

Joe ,
I think maybe the biggest factor in your find isn't the dogs themselves , it's us. LOL
I believe the guys with the females tend to be a little more precise on what they breed their females to. Whereas the guys with the studs , will breed to anything. As long as the owner has the money in hand.
I think that most stud dogs get bred to very few top females. And that's why their percentages are lower than the females.

I believe that if a guy had the money to come up with 5 top producing females and one producing male , and bred those dogs only , he could put that stud on top of the list with a record that could possibly never be broken. And probably a couple of the females also.

__________________
Bob Brooks /
Jordan Tyler (grandson)

BackWoods River Walkers/Beagles
Just all 'round , meat gettin' hounds.

Posted by Oak Ridge on 08-15-2008 06:57 PM:

Bob,

But would the winners then go on to be top reproducers as well?

I may not be stating myself well.... I'm wondering about the linkages between reproducing families of dogs....can you reproduce a line of reproducers....???

__________________
Joe Newlin
UKC Cur Advocate
Home of Oak Ridge Kennels

Posted by John D on 08-15-2008 07:38 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Oak Ridge
can you reproduce a line of reproducers....???

Yes. Many of the dogs on the TRL are out of Top Reproducers or at least high percentage producers. But I believe a "reproducing" line of coondogs can trace that trait back more generations than 1 or 2.

I'm hunting what I'm hunting now partly because of how well they reproduce their likeness, or better. I started out wanting to raise my own coondogs and still do. You can't raise your own if 6 pups out of a litter of 9 are culls, 2 will tree a coon, and 1 is a world beater. I don't care how famous the world beater becomes, if you are trying to do something with one of the culls, you are wasting your time in the woods and in breeding coondogs.

I've noticed that in pedigrees of my dogs, that most of the males and females have pretty decent percentages, even those that didn't meet the requirements for the TRL. I don't think thats a coincidence. It speaks for the reproducing ability of the bloodline, long before I got involved with it.

Posted by Ron Brickles on 08-15-2008 07:42 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by JiM
A high percentage for either one tells me the breeder knew the right coonhunters to get his pups to. If I had owned Balls Abby bitch and made those very same crosses on Harry, does anyone believe she would have produced all those AllGrand litters? No way!

All these stats are completely washed out by the human factor in raising, training and pushing pups in the hunts.

I AGREE WITH YOU FOR ONCE JIM.LOL, BUT I LOOK AT THE FEMALE A LITTLE MORE

__________________
Home of

CH PR TREE TALKIN PORK CHOP (2ND, 2- 3RDS,4TH) UKC
PR SERAS TREE TALKIN DELILAH
PR VIPERS DEADLY BLACK MAGIC (B&T)

Posted by Philip on 08-15-2008 08:05 PM:

male because he still has to reproduce with every sorry female brought to him, the guy with the female has more control over what she is bred to.

Posted by Larry Atherton on 08-15-2008 08:20 PM:

Based on everything I have read and seen I believe it is possible. Will it be easy? No!

I truly believe the only way we can start getting better quality dogs is by increasing our selection process. The more selective we get we should increase the potential of our offspring.

The thing that keeps working breeds mediocre is the lack of selection.

Yes, Joe, the Leader Dogs for the Blind did it. So, it has already been proven that it can be done.

__________________
Larry Atherton

Aim small miss small

Posted by roughcreek on 08-15-2008 08:24 PM:

my idea is to stack a pedegree with as many top reproducers male & female as possible dont have to make the list but a good percentage of what they have produced. my idea is where ever the genes in your puppies come from your odds are better to reproduce a winner !! but there are some lines of dogs in my breed that i dont want at all even if they made the list. just not my style dog. thats not all i look at but the most important thing. you ask for opinions so there it is.

Posted by ohme on 08-15-2008 10:37 PM:

females are the ticket. generations of quality females out weigh the "big name" studs in the pedigree. females are the foundation of any good breeding program, its worked well for me.

Posted by jackbob42 on 08-15-2008 11:28 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Oak Ridge
Bob,
....can you reproduce a line of reproducers....???

It depends ! LOL

You can get high percentage litters for several generations if your the one making the right decisions on what crosses to make. That's how you get a name like Lester Nance , Dave Dean , Del Cameron , The Lee Bros. , Joe House , Leo Dollins , Everett Weems , etc.

BUT , when someone takes your pups and starts breeding them to culls , there goes your reproducers ! It's been happening to different lines forever. ( refer to lines above )

__________________
Bob Brooks /
Jordan Tyler (grandson)

BackWoods River Walkers/Beagles
Just all 'round , meat gettin' hounds.

Posted by elvis on 08-15-2008 11:31 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Larry Atherton

I truly believe the only way we can start getting better quality dogs is by increasing our selection process. The more selective we get we should increase the potential of our offspring.

The thing that keeps working breeds mediocre is the lack of selection.

Amen.

I would like to add that im fairly certain breeding dogs based on how many grand nites are in their pedigree, is NOT the type of selection Larry is talking about.

All times are GMT. The time now is 07:30 PM.

Show all 18 posts from this thread on one page