UKC Forums - Gyps identified as brood stock...

Pages (3): [1] 2 3 »
Show all 56 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)
-- Gyps identified as brood stock... (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/showthread.php?threadid=264576)

Posted by Skyward on 03-18-2009 05:51 PM:

Gyps identified as brood stock...

With all the braggadocio that goes on in these dogs, could someone explain to me what is meant when a female is identified as "brood" or "haven't done much with her, selling her as brood"? I don't really understand the advocating of breeding anything other than first class animals or maybe a gyp that is a known last link to a specific well-known producer. To say that not much is done with her so you could use her for brood seems like the thought process' are going backwards instead of forwards. To my way of thinking, my coondawgs are my brood stock and my brood stock are my coondawgs. Is it acceptable to breed an unproven gyp because a single person, or collective group of persons, have failed to put any time into one to determine the dogs strengths and weaknesses? Are there well known producers that couldn't track a locomotive or tree a hunk of bark?

Posted by Justin Smith on 03-18-2009 06:08 PM:

Folks have bred some great dogs from untested or even well bred , but cull bitches ....

.. it's not a good idea and the odds are against you but as long as folks can get it to work now and then you can't rail against it and have much .

As much as we don't like it .... an untested or even cull gyp that is breed to the hilt can throw good pups and no amount of dislike for the practice will change it .

If there weren't folks buying them things ... we wouldnt' still be seeing them for sale .

Posted by larry ross on 03-18-2009 08:14 PM:

IF THEY ARE NOT A COON DOG OR AT LEAST MAKING A GOOD DOG WE DONT USE THEM IN OUR BREEDING PROGRAM.

__________________
304-736-0344
740-532-2666
THE PRESENT HOME OF
NT.CH.PKC CH.CRAZY DAISY
CH. GR.NT.CH. PKC CH. HARDWOOD CRAZY GABE (AT STUD)
GRCH. NTCH JAMMIN CHAMP
NT.CH HARDWOOD CRAZY KALIGA 2ND PLACE WIN AND 9TH AT 2011 WALKER DAYS. 8TH 2012 SETWA MEMORIAL HUNT 10TH 2012 WALKER DAYS 1ST SHOALS RQE 2013
GR.NT.CH. JONES CRAZY COACH
NT.CH. CRAZY TRAIN (AT STUD)
CRAZY OLE BLACK BETTY 2ND &6TH&1ST PLACE WIN
CH.GRNT. SAILES SUGAR CREEK CASSY AGAIN- ALL GRAND
NTCH.SWAMPHOLLOW TIC
RIP GR.NT.CH. PKC CH HARDWOOD CRAZY NICK

Posted by Oak Ridge on 03-18-2009 10:07 PM:

I'm with you Skyward....but...and there is always a but.

The first year the performance program paid out money, the dog that won the most money came out of a cross of a stud dog that was advertised and a female that could not have possibly treed a coon in a coon zoo....a brood female.

Matter of fact, as far as anyone knows, after the litter was weaned this female fell off the face of the earth....they wanted to repeat the cross, but nobody could locate the female. She was still registered in the original owners name....

I don't understand it....but it happens every day.

__________________
Joe Newlin
UKC Cur Advocate
Home of Oak Ridge Kennels

Posted by Justin Smith on 03-18-2009 10:58 PM:

It just means that pedigree is just as important or more important than performance .... there's power in the blood !!

Posted by Mike Van Dusen on 03-19-2009 12:41 AM:

In my opinion, it is all about how the blood mixes and what is in there.I have seen young females bred and have good results, and good females bred to coondogs and get nothing close to either parent. It is all a guessing game.....

Posted by Larry Atherton on 03-19-2009 01:01 AM:

Yes, it is true some cull females produce, but my question is how well do their offspring produce?

Yes, there are elements of the unknown in breeding dogs, but that is not enough reason for breeders to not do everything in their power to make better crosses through better selection.

__________________
Larry Atherton

Aim small miss small

Posted by joseph mcdonald on 03-19-2009 01:05 AM:

I agree, the old adage " Better to breed to a good family, than to a good dog" applies here somewhat. If its in the blood its gonna come out. Just like, Does making a hound a grand nite ch. make it a reproducer? It is gonna reproduce what its gonna reproduce, no matter if it is trained, a world champ or a nobody.

Posted by Skyward on 03-19-2009 01:24 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by joseph mcdonald
I agree, the old adage " Better to breed to a good family, than to a good dog" applies here somewhat. If its in the blood its gonna come out. Just like, Does making a hound a grand nite ch. make it a reproducer? It is gonna reproduce what its gonna reproduce, no matter if it is trained, a world champ or a nobody.

Stop the presses. I tend to agree with this statement. Genetics don't change. They are what they are when they are born. Training them, hunting them, campaigning them does not change what they were born with. It simply provides us a look at what they are. Larry brings up a good point in questioning what their offspring will produce. They are what will carry the flag forward. When I used to be an active breeder, it was not uncommon to design a breeding with the next 2 generations planned based on it. Adding an unknown gyp really can turn the teeter totter upside down. The lone exception, in my opinion, would be if say someone like Joe N. would utilize one like has been described. He is well versed in genetics and what constitutes his gene pool. He has also minimized the amount of crosses in his pedigrees in the last 3-4 generations. I would think that his risk-benefit ratio would be much more minimal than others. It would be someone like this that I could comfortably take a gamble with raising a pup from a breeding like this. He has already insured that his variances will be minimal. I guess this is one of those things that seperates breeders from one another. Justin I agree that power is in the blood, but ...I gotta go cliche on ya.....the dog makes the papers, not the other way around. How cheesy was that?! lol

Posted by Steve Raleigh on 03-19-2009 01:56 AM:

Sky,
You have a couple WELL known breeders up your way....Might give them a call as they could explain to you a lot better than most of us can on here....Rob/Frank Giddings and Dave Dean.

__________________
Current Home of:
GRNITECH PKC CH CHKC CH
Raleigh's Backwater Hawk

PKC GCH CHKC CH Wipeout 3 Bee
(Z3 x Bell)

PKC CH CHKC CH Rush Run Lil
(Nuck x Lilly)

PKC SCH CHKC CH Wipeout Shorty

Past Home of:

2012 FALL SENIOR SS CH.
GRNITECH PKC PLATINUM CH
MISTER OVERDRIVE
(Drive X Missy)

GRNITECH PKC GOLD CH Kate
(Jack X Jill)

2013 IL PKC State Race Ch.
GRNITECH PKC GOLD CH Little Miss Dottie
(Mr.Jack X Bit)

GRNITECH Curlee Jane
2018 UKC Bluetick World Ch
2018 Fall Round Up Ch
2018 Winter Classic Ch
2017 Battle of The Breeds Ch

NITECH 2018 PKC YOUTH WORLD CH PKC SILVER CH Dirty South Side

GRNITECH PKC SILVER CH SKUNA RIVER QUICK
(Fred X Sue)

GRNITECH Stylish Chase
(Clyde X Patty)

GRNITECH PKC SILVER CH Foggy Mtn. Gomer

UKC GrSqCh NKC GrSqCh Dirt Dodge's Jager

Posted by Les Young on 03-19-2009 02:36 AM:

I firmly agree it's a guessing game

I do think it helps when it comes to a good family of dogs too, but believe in breeding good solid coondog crosses too & not just papers or because old so & so is in a pedigree X amount of times. Yes I have a good coondog that luckily reproduces, & only pick pups from good solid females & it hasn't let me down yet. I also think a reproducer is naturally born to reproduce & can over come many short comings that one or the other may have.I also think a SMART breeder knows when to cross to something to get what may be lacking or throwing the same strong points their linebred stock has. Some of the self proclaimed top linebreeders who talk about genetic makeup & such may not agree, but I also think that most breed to tight & bring out many faults that shouldn't be doubled up on simply because they wouldn't breed to someones dog because they don't like the owner or just to hardnosed to admit when they're lacking ability in their linebred stock .The old saying "If it aint broke don't fix it" doesn't always work in dogs. I personally think Joe House was the best there ever has been when it comes to consistent coondogs . I also think Red Eagle Dick breeding was the worst to see hip dysplasia show up in I ever saw & I steered clear of it& know he reproduced some top coondogs. Man I bet I'll get slammed for this, but oh well lol.

__________________
Home Of:
S.S. & Performance Sire
Dual Grand
06' UKC World Championship Finalist
Kings Mtn Stylish Nut

Posted by Les Young on 03-19-2009 03:03 AM:

There Truly Are Some

Very smart top linebreeders & then there are those that claim to be because old so & so is in their dogs pedigree X amount of times. I truly respect some of the linebreeders breeding programs on this board because they can back it up with proof. Than there's the average guy out in the country that claims to be because old so & so is in their dogs pedigree X amount of times with no regards to consistent coondogs or overall health in their stock at all. No pun intended to anyone on this board. My hat's off to the smart ones with proof that breed coondogs only & reproduce coondogs so consistently.

__________________
Home Of:
S.S. & Performance Sire
Dual Grand
06' UKC World Championship Finalist
Kings Mtn Stylish Nut

Posted by joseph mcdonald on 03-19-2009 03:27 AM:

Elbert Vaughn, foundation breeder of Bluetick coonhounds from 1935 to 1984 made a statement one time that said" Never double up on a mediocre dog it will come back to haunt you". I personally have doubled on mediocre and the man was right , it haunts you. I feel the same way Elbert felt, there are so few dogs really worth doubling up on that a man is better off to breed a coon treeing gyp to a coon trring male.

Alot of the people doubling and tripling up on a certain hound, never knew first hand the hounds faults, or mouth, or hunting style etc., so they are trying to make a quesstimate of what should come out of the pups. But it dont always line up. and alot of times, I feel were prolly doubling up on faults, or at least not making an informed breeding desecion.

Posted by larry ross on 03-19-2009 06:10 AM:

GUYS MR ATHERTON AND LES HAS A LOT OF GOOD POINTS YOU BREED A SORRY DOG WITH A GOOD PED AND YOU MIGHT GET A TOP DOG OR TWO BUT INTHE NEXT GENERATION IT WILL START TO HAUNT YOU.
YOU CAN BREED SORRY IN BUT IT IS HARD TO BREED IT OUT.

Posted by Larry Atherton on 03-19-2009 03:41 PM:

If we are throwing clinches out there, how about this tried and true one?

"You can't make a silk purse from a sow's ear."

__________________
Larry Atherton

Aim small miss small

Posted by wayne f on 03-19-2009 05:37 PM:

why should dog breeding be any differant than any other animal i have bred many differant animals and have used littermates and horses that were bred exactly as the best horses around in there time and produced many better than the famous full siblings the reason for this i couldn't afford the top horses but could afford the full sibligs that werent as good training has a lot to do with making or breaking an individual animal but the gene pool is the same in full siblings. a one time i bought stallion that was a full brother to 3 world champions i paid 1500 for this stallion where his siblings were bringing big money this stallion produced better than any of his siblings.
my point i'm making you never know what an animal can and will produce but you stand a better chance sticking with proven bloodlines

__________________
the rooster will crow again.. keep them english and keep them looking up
email minihorse@hotmail.com

Posted by Larry Atherton on 03-19-2009 05:49 PM:

"the gene pool is the same in full siblings" if this was in fact true then the following "this stallion produced better than any of his siblings," would not happen.

If they had the same gene pool, they should have all produced equally.

__________________
Larry Atherton

Aim small miss small

Posted by Skyward on 03-19-2009 07:10 PM:

LOL!!

Posted by Justin Smith on 03-19-2009 07:47 PM:

A cull and an ace can have the same pedigree ... but all those sayings and opinions are just words ..

.. in the real world , folks breed culls and untested stock all the time and sometimes it works.

Comparison is part of it .... 99% of the folks breeding dogs are so in the dark that in their judgement and methods that their results make our good practices look bad and the whole coondog world is just a mess .

If more folks were on the right page like with livestock and such .... the guys that were out of line would stick out like a sore thumb ... but , as it is .... they fit right in .

Posted by Ray&Luie on 03-19-2009 07:57 PM:

Gene pool

quote:
Originally posted by Larry Atherton
"the gene pool is the same in full siblings" if this was in fact true then the following "this stallion produced better than any of his siblings," would not happen.

If they had the same gene pool, they should have all produced equally.

Talk about horse sence now that hit the donkey on the tail right there lol

__________________
Well Stanley,this looks like another fine mess you've gotten us into

Ray Hudson

Posted by jaiman on 03-19-2009 08:20 PM:

My definition of "brood female" would be a female that
~female that has reproduced, or very capable of reproducing
still.
~registered
~not titled for whatever reason
~coon dog now, or was in her day

__________________
* Twin Oaks Walkers *
Home of
GrNtch Coma's Stylish Amos *tied 2nd place Saturday night 2009 Winter Classic
'pr' Twin Oaks ole Stylish Rebel

Dick Garvin 812-606-8674

Posted by duvall on 03-19-2009 09:17 PM:

dog breeding

I don't claim to be a top breeder, but I'm able to keep myself in a dog that I like to hunt and I have stayed with the same line of dogs for several years. I have 2 simple rules I try to follow, I don't believe you can build a condo on a stick foundation, and I never breed unless I would be happy if my pups acted like mother or father. I don't think alot of breedings would take place if their owner's had to hunt them. just my opinon.~~~~~Jeff

__________________
Bloodlines from the original Home Of Champions, "Where Hounds Have Stood The Test Of Time"

Posted by buckmaster on 03-19-2009 09:33 PM:

BROOD STOCK

I raised Checkered Giant show rabbits for 25 years and the same thing was done in them as our hounds as far as brood females go. I was showed and taught by a man that is in the Checkered Giant hall of fame on how to breed ,select and cull them. He was very successful at it as I was also. There was a man from iowa who was as a very well known show Judge and top breeder that was totally against the way I was taught what to keep for BROOD STOCK, he proclaimed in order to make the breed stronger you could only use marked animals that would only be able to be shown under the breed standard and be registered free of disqualifications same as our hound standards are, I in return was taught that some of the strongest genes were in the rabbit that could not be registered or shown but still was and is able to be put on the pedigree that being a SPORT or SELF being of a solid color either blue or black. Many times they grew faster were larger and had better type and color. By breeding the self to the marked rabbit it produces some or all either marked or self. And almost always produced a deeper richer color which made the markings stand out with more contrast to them. Well I proceeded to breed these selfsto my marked show rabbits and produced 5 rabbits that was judged by him at the National rabbit Convention in Columbus Ohio in 1992, I not only place but won 2 classes placed all 5 had Best Black, Best 6/8 class BOS opposite Show, Best Blue , Best Sr, Best Opposite Blue. All of these out of Brood stock that he claimed were the weak link of the breed because you could not show or register them. He than went on to buy 4 different rabbits from me over the years to breed to his animals to in his rabbit herd.He still preaches about the marked rabbits being the only ones to use but now you tell me why he bred that BLOOD back into his herd????? I have seen the same in hounds as i have raised them for 35 years I have never raised a world Champion in them but I have not pushed for it either as I do not have the money for it, but I have raised a few that money couldn't buy and they were not out the best hounds i have ever hunted with either, All dogs are different just like all people, I have 3 boys all are different all have the same BLOOD!!!!! I would not cull them!! They are now reproducing also and neither of my grandsons look alike or act alike but they come back to my BLOOD!!!! And believe me I'm not the PRETTIEST, SMARTEST , STRONGEST but I do know a good hound when I see it and I do know it is all in the BLOOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

__________________
http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u1/lockhart406/Sugar1.jpg

Posted by Oak Ridge on 03-20-2009 04:00 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Skyward
Stop the presses. I tend to agree with this statement. Genetics don't change. They are what they are when they are born. Training them, hunting them, campaigning them does not change what they were born with. It simply provides us a look at what they are. Larry brings up a good point in questioning what their offspring will produce. They are what will carry the flag forward. When I used to be an active breeder, it was not uncommon to design a breeding with the next 2 generations planned based on it. Adding an unknown gyp really can turn the teeter totter upside down. The lone exception, in my opinion, would be if say someone like Joe N. would utilize one like has been described. He is well versed in genetics and what constitutes his gene pool. He has also minimized the amount of crosses in his pedigrees in the last 3-4 generations. I would think that his risk-benefit ratio would be much more minimal than others. It would be someone like this that I could comfortably take a gamble with raising a pup from a breeding like this. He has already insured that his variances will be minimal. I guess this is one of those things that seperates breeders from one another. Justin I agree that power is in the blood, but ...I gotta go cliche on ya.....the dog makes the papers, not the other way around. How cheesy was that?! lol

Not cheesy at all...

Matter of fact....I've tested the theory a little. Had a female here that was out of a VERY good cross, but as so many of my young dogs do...she got left behind in the training department. She simply "never got a chance". Knowing what I do about her mother, father, brother, sisters, aunts, uncles...etc.....I made the conscious decision to breed her. Now I'm not saying she had "flunked out" of a training program...she never got finished.

I bred her, and she raised a few pups out of the litter. I then placed the pups in the hands of folks that I thought would give them a good chance....and those that have been hunted are turning out EXACTLY like I expected them. Now...I'm not saying that I would use them as breeding stock....cause I'm not sure that I would.

Having an intimate knowledge of the ancestors in the first three generations of the pedigree, and by this I mean understanding TRAITS....not history, not reading titles and making assumptions about a dogs ability, certainly helps make decisions.

I'll stick with breeding "the best of a family to the best of a family" of coon treeing dogs.... I will stick to my guns that we are breeding for traits, and ability is certainly linked to those traits....but ability is NOT inherited, it is developed out of traits. So if you align the traits, then ability will follow. By controlling the outside influences of outcrossing, I am just now starting to be able to say that the traits that I've been breeding for are consistently and reliably passed from generation to generation. The MOMENT I outcross, I loose that consistency.

__________________
Joe Newlin
UKC Cur Advocate
Home of Oak Ridge Kennels

Posted by Oak Ridge on 03-20-2009 04:16 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Larry Atherton
If they had the same gene pool, they should have all produced equally.

Larry,

I have a stud dog here that had some pretty dog gone famous littermates that did a LOT of winning.

I have hunted with every one of his litter mates, and I've owned, hunted, campained, judged, bred, and raised pups out of not only him, but also out of his littermates.

While it matters not if the pup was out of my dog, or one of his litter mates...I certainly can see similarities between all of them. There are indeed individual differences....but only after you've had this kind of exposure to the ENTIRE FAMILY can you make any assumptions about the true genetic potential in a dog.

I believe, of course I have no real "proof", that the traits that are shared by a dog and it's litter mates, are the "prepotent" traits. Those that will most likely be passed on in successive generations. These prepotent traits can be diminished through outcrossing, or they can be enhanced through line breeding, and after successive generations, they will indeed become "predicatable".

Those traits have no bearing on winning a competition...but they do indeed serve as an enabler for a winner....

I've rambled on long enough...

Carry on!

__________________
Joe Newlin
UKC Cur Advocate
Home of Oak Ridge Kennels

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:58 AM.

Pages (3): [1] 2 3 »
Show all 56 posts from this thread on one page