Registered: Sep 2004
Location: Moncks Corner, South Carolina
Posts: 1814

In order for a sire to show on the top reproducers list they have to sire 100 pups. For all the off colored breeds and probably some walkers it takes a long time to get 100 pups. Most males will be way past their prime when the 100 pup mark is achieved. Who thinks this # should be reduced? And what would be a good number?

__________________
Kenny's Allnite Black and Tans
Moncks Corner, SC
843-697-5889
ChNtCh Allnite Gypsy Girl

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Los Angeles, MN
Posts: 4236

I agree....

But at the same time I dont put much stock in the reproducers list anyway....IMO it is too often manipulated, lowering the # of pups would probably make it worse.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2007
Location: N.C.
Posts: 305

I really dont see a need to lower the number of pups required I would really like to change the Historical from less than 25 years old to unlimited I want to know who was the best all time not just the last 25 years. JMO

__________________
Marshall Tarlton
Cell:704-695-2351
Home:704-694-5659

HUNTER'S PRIDE KENNELS

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2003
Location: CANADA
Posts: 1903

I agree with the historical, and the current as well. With stored and frozen semen as readily available as it is it just dont seem fair. For example if the father to Grit dog was alive he would be on the list. He can still sire pups, but cant be recognized, because he has been dead for nearly that long.

__________________
Dave Rude
Tru-Blu English
Home of Gr.Nt.Ch. Tru-Blu-Spike
Nt.Ch.ChKizmo's Tru-Blu Grit (MIA)
rudedogs99@hotmail.com
www.angelfire.com/oh5/trublu/trublu.html
http://www.acorn-creek.com/signatures/Grit.jpg

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2003
Location: Jackson, MO
Posts: 784

Lowering the number to less than 100 would cause more sires to get on the list from one good cross that was made several times. That sire may not be able to cross on several different bloodlines so it shouldn't be in the top producers list.


Knowing the top sires prior to 25 years ago would be interesting but probably not helpful in breeding good dogs because those sires would be too far back in most pedigrees to help much.

__________________
Travis Brown
brownt@capetigers.com
573-579-3853
Home of :
Gr. Nt. Ch. Browns Peggy 4/1991-1/2002
Gr. Nt. Ch. Browns Little Peg 6/1998-3/2008
Gr. Nt. Ch. Browns Haley 8/2002-11/2013
Gr. Nt. Ch. Browns Taylor 3/2005-11/2017
Gr. Nt. Ch. Browns Rotten 10/2008-2/2013
Gr. Nt. Ch. Browns Midge 12/2010-1/2021
Gr. Nt. Ch. Browns Jessie 4/1/14-3/5/2024
Gr. Nt. Ch. Browns Lilly 5/2019-

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2007
Location: N.C.
Posts: 305

I also think that the historical should also go by percentage and not total number of Ntch and Grntch. If a dog sires 100 pups and a total of 25 Ntch and Grntch and another dog sires 500 pups and a total of 100 ntchs and grntch whos the better reproducer? The one who had the 25 ntch and Grntch he had the better percentage.

__________________
Marshall Tarlton
Cell:704-695-2351
Home:704-694-5659

HUNTER'S PRIDE KENNELS

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2003
Location: east tenn
Posts: 127

I think that the number of perm. registered pups is what it should be based. If you use 100 or whatever it should be perm. reg. dogs not just pup papered dogs. Only perm. reg. dogs can hunt in a hunt.

I also think that the dogs that win performance points at events should be dna 'd before or after the hunt.

JMO

__________________
JESUS DIED FOR YOU THAT YOU CAN LIVE FOR HIM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 2410

Three or four different females is enough to tell if a dog is going to reproduce well or not ..

..but that isn't the point of the Producers List ... it is to promote participation in the hunts and increase registration fees .


.. I'm sure they figured 100 pups was the highest minumum they could set and still get a real high % of stud owners to go after.


UKC does a real good job of balancing their business goals with what is good for coonhunters .. but let's not expect them to sacrifice their sales in order to make a good program just a little better

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2003
Location: North Alabama
Posts: 197

I see the rationale behind this question. The Current Reproducers List is a tool for the breeder in my opinion. By the time the B&T, Bltk., Eng., Plt., and Red breeds top reproducers can reach 100 pups the stud is already, just a guess but I would say close to 8 years old maybe older.

What if the potential of this stud had been realized years earlier, what kind of impact could he have made to his breed?

I don't know what the right number is, but what I do know is that Walker studs will reach their 100 pups by 3-4 I would say on average, not the other breeds.

__________________
Shoal Creek Black and Tans

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2003
Location: east tenn
Posts: 127

I Think thier is a reason for the walkers reaching the 100 pups so fast. thru the years walker people have tried to breed for performance(not trying to get an argument started). So you get faster starting pups. Now the trouble is they sometimes are Quick treeing-babbling idiots (I know I have had plenty of them) but a lot of them get out of that. The other breeds just now seam to be starting or at least in the last 10 years catching up. Mostly with the (I can't believe I am about to say it)Blueticks then English & Black n Tans the Redbone and Plotts bringing up the rear for different reason the Redbone being breed for color and the Plott for big game. Now I am not saying that any of these breeds don't have real coon dogs in each breed but the overwhelming amount comes from the Walker dogs.

__________________
JESUS DIED FOR YOU THAT YOU CAN LIVE FOR HIM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2003
Location: mid-michigan
Posts: 4437

Maybe if they put out a list with the top ten " not on the list " , it might get them to their 100 pups faster.

__________________
Bob Brooks /
Jordan Tyler (grandson)

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

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2008
Location:
Posts: 3550

quote:

---

Originally posted by M.TARLTON
I also think that the historical should also go by percentage and not total number of Ntch and Grntch. If a dog sires 100 pups and a total of 25 Ntch and Grntch and another dog sires 500 pups and a total of 100 ntchs and grntch whos the better reproducer? The one who had the 25 ntch and Grntch he had the better percentage.

---

__________________
MANIAC MY NAME HUNTING MY GAME!!
MANIAC BLOOD ROCKS!! WHERE THE TRACK POWER IS!!

http://i774.photobucket.com/albums/yy24/maniacjr4/SAM_0522.jpg

http://www.hunt101.com/data/500/1619.jpg

IF YOU WANT TO PACK HUNT
BUY YOU A PAIR BEAGLES!


GR NITE CH. HARWOODMANIAC JR 4 # 2 TOP 100 UKC WORLD 2013 OWNER JAY HYDE & DAVID DEPEW




GRNITE CH Hoghill Harwood Kasper
owners Hyde Warlick Leatherman
Qualified for 2013 world Hhunt
OWNER HYDE & WARLICK LEATHERMAN. MY PH 574 306 8438
K-LIGHTS ph.936 767 4965
http://i774.photobucket.com/albums/yy24/maniacjr4/SAM_0734.jpg

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Sylva, North Carolina (the far Western Tip of the State)
Posts: 10272

I'VE SAID IT BEFORE AND I'LL SAY IT AGAIN.

WHEN FIGURING CURRENT REPRODUCTION, THE PERCENTAGE SHOULD NOT BE BASED ON TOTAL NUMBER OF PUPS PRODUCED.

REASON BEING ONLY A UKC PERMANENTLY REGISTERED DOG CAN BE ENTERED INTO A HUNT TO EARN A TITLE.

A DOG CAN HAVE 100 PUPS PRODUCED, BUT ONLY 30 OR SO PERMANENTLY REGISTERED.

IF IT'S NOT PERMANENTLY REGISTERED IT SHOULDNT BE FIGURED INTO THE PERCENTAGE.

__________________
HOME OF TEAM SID!!!-now on Facebook!!
"WHERE PLEASURE HUNTERS WIN!!!"-Christy Clayton
GO TEAM SID!!!

*GRCH NTCH'PR'RB'S Rock River Sid-R.I.P.

*CH'PR'Jet's Tember Shakin Sadie (UKC 2ND)
*Banjo

Independent Consultant for Jamberry Nails!! Check them out!!

Quincy-828-269-8768
OR Christy-828-269-4678---If we dont answer, please leave a message!!!

EVERYTHING happens for a reason.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Missouri
Posts: 4321

quote:

---

Originally posted by josh
I agree....

But at the same time I dont put much stock in the reproducers list anyway....IMO it is too often manipulated, lowering the # of pups would probably make it worse.

---

__________________

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

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2004
Location: Moncks Corner, South Carolina
Posts: 1814

I only watch the B&T list and what I have seen over the last few years is an 8 or 9 year old dog pop up on the list with barely 100 pups and that dog not be able to breed females 6 months after his name showed up. I'm afraid we may miss that diamond in the rough, if he is owned by someone that doesn't have the means to promote him. Who knows, we may have already missed him.

__________________
Kenny's Allnite Black and Tans
Moncks Corner, SC
843-697-5889
ChNtCh Allnite Gypsy Girl

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2005
Location: Prince Edward Island,Canada
Posts: 4589

quote:

---

Originally posted by mike bryant
I think that the number of perm. registered pups is what it should be based. If you use 100 or whatever it should be perm. reg. dogs not just pup papered dogs. Only perm. reg. dogs can hunt in a hunt.

---

__________________
Autumn Clements

'PR'LEAD'S MIDNITE SASSY
CFC CH Canadian GCH Multi Group Placing MBPIG BBPIG LEGACYK STANNYFIELD PRIME TIME (AKC & UKC Pointed)
BPIG MBBPIG WINDAMIRS RED LIGHT DISTRICT V AMBERLANE
LEGACYK DARE TO DREAM V CBLUES
LEGACYK WHITE AS A GHOST V CBLUES

Gone but not forgotten
GRNITECH GRCH PKC CH'PR'CLEMENTS' BLUE PRANCER
GRNITECH GRCH'PR'SPIKE'S TWILITE HOOKER
'PR'PRANCER'S GETTIN DOWN N DIRTY (PrancerxHooker)
NITECH CH’PR’BUELL’S BLUE ROCKY(Whitey x Spice)
CKC BBPIG MARIES BABY BREEZE

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2008
Location:
Posts: 86

I dont think a dog should be on the list with less than 300 pups. Look at the dog at the top of the list now he has around 150 pups. This dog could have one good cross put him in the top. He shows 4 grands. I know of crosses that have that many grands out of one litter. When you start putting dogs that have his kind of age on the list with only 150 pups that shows me that people are NOT breeding to him for one reason or another. I dont know the dog but I do know he has been around for a while and to only have 150 at his age is not that great. You look at the other dogs on the list that have 934,501,1163,997,1290 with number like this you can tell what the dog can reproduce and not what just 2 or 3 litters have done. Now if the dog is only 2 or 3 that is one thing to have 150 pups but if they are 8 that is another.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Iowa
Posts: 441

Cornell just turned three and the last set of papers said he has 84 pups on the ground and I know he has 5 since that. So I guess the Walkers do reach it quicker I didn't realize that!!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2006
Location: Platteville, Wi
Posts: 5676

quote:

---

Originally posted by Travis Brown
Lowering the number to less than 100 would cause more sires to get on the list from one good cross that was made several times. That sire may not be able to cross on several different bloodlines so it shouldn't be in the top producers list.


Knowing the top sires prior to 25 years ago would be interesting but probably not helpful in breeding good dogs because those sires would be too far back in most pedigrees to help much.

---

__________________
Home of:
- Gr. Nite Ch. Iowa County Crybabe
- Nite Ch. Hickory Nut Dan
- Gr. CH Nite Ch. Hickory Nut Dan II
- CH. Gr. Nite Ch. Hickory Nut Dan III 2008 Performance Sire
- CH. Gr.Nite Ch. Hickory Nut Dan IV 2004 ukc world hunt finalist
- Ch. Gr.Nite Ch. Mounds Creek Sassy II
- Nite Ch. Hickory Nut Bucky HTX 3 wins towards grnite
- GrCh.GrNtCh Hickory Nut Bawlie HTX
-Nite ch. PR Iowa County CryBaby II 2013 Badger State Hunt Champion
qualified for 2013 UKC World Hunt
CH Nitech She Hate Me (scar) HTX Iowa County Kennels

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2006
Location: MO
Posts: 775

Can you find the list on the internet or only in the bloodlines?

__________________
if you're gonna do it, do it in style!
If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with BS.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2003
Location: Chattanooga, TN
Posts: 214

I forget stats class, but one reason that they have a minimum of 100 is because anything less may be statistically insignificant.

Without getting the book out and figuring the exact number it works like this:
Dog A has 75 pups on the ground with 10 being GRNite/NiteCh
Dog B has 65 pups on the ground with 12 being GRNite/NiteCh

The actual statistics would say that there is no difference in their reproduction ability.

The difference may be significant at the over 100 mark.

__________________
Dane
________________________________
Crimson Sunrise Kennels
Please email me if you know
GRCH 'PR' Crimson Sunrise Fire Storm

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2006
Location: munfordville ky.
Posts: 1166

I THINK IF MORE PEOPLE PAYED ATTENTION TO THE P.A.D. ON THEIR PEDEGREE THEY WOULD SEE THESE DOGS THAT ARE REALLY REPRODUCING BEFORE A DOG GETS ITS 100 PUPS. THIS IS THE MAIN TOOL I USE WHEN CHOOSING A STUD OR A FEMALE FOR BREEDING. I WANT THE HIGHEST PERCENTAGE I CAN FIND ON EVERY THING IN A PEDEGREE. IF A DOG HAD 6 PUPS & 2 OR 3 MADE IT, I LOOK AT THAT JUST AS HARD AS A DOG WITH 500 PUPS. STACK IT UP WITH REPRODUCERS & NO MATTER WHERE THE GENES COME FROM I FEEL YOU GOT A BETTER CHANCE TO GET WHAT IT TAKES TO WIN & REPRODUCE. LOOK AT A PEDEGREE & ITS FULL OF NO DEGREE, NO DEGREE, NO DEGREE ON ANCESTERS PUPS & YOU GET A STUD OR A FEMALE WITH A FARLY HIGH PERCENTAGE, I WONT EVEN LOOK AT IT.

YES HISTORIC SHOULD GO BY % & NOT #'S. GET YOUR 100 & DOG HAS A % DOUBLE WHAT A DOG WITH 500 PUPS HAS, WHO IS THE BETTER REPRODUCER.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2004
Location: Bunn, NC (Near Raleigh)
Posts: 1584

I'd like to see UKC mix it up a bit; One month make it based on numbers, the next month make it based on percentage, then repeat by numbers with the minimum reduced to 50 pups, repeat again by percentage with minimum reduced to 50 pups...Change it up, the way it is now we have only one set of data to use when making our decisions, if they mix it up we can compare data sets, those of ya'll that are smart enough could trend data based on the different sets of data...
What I am saying is that I agree in reducing from 100 pups, but would like to see multiple datasets used, I can think of 6 good datasets, that means only twice a year it would be calculated the same way. To me it would make the list something I looked forward to because I know it might be different each month.

__________________
L. Chris Herring
Pine Cone Redbones
"And let us not be weary in well doing, for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not." Gal. 6:9

Home of:
CH 'PR' Herring's Pine Cone Tally-Ho (TALLY)
and
In Memory of - CH 'PR' Herring's Pine Cone Chance; aka "The Phenomenon"

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2003
Location: Chattanooga, TN
Posts: 214

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chris Herring
I'd like to see UKC mix it up a bit; One month make it based on numbers, the next month make it based on percentage, then repeat by numbers with the minimum reduced to 50 pups, repeat again by percentage with minimum reduced to 50 pups...Change it up, the way it is now we have only one set of data to use when making our decisions, if they mix it up we can compare data sets, those of ya'll that are smart enough could trend data based on the different sets of data...
What I am saying is that I agree in reducing from 100 pups, but would like to see multiple datasets used, I can think of 6 good datasets, that means only twice a year it would be calculated the same way. To me it would make the list something I looked forward to because I know it might be different each month.

---

__________________
Dane
________________________________
Crimson Sunrise Kennels
Please email me if you know
GRCH 'PR' Crimson Sunrise Fire Storm

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

quote:

---

Originally posted by Autumn Clements
but if that was the case what would some people do, wait and register the pups after they're starting, and the the culls that aren't registered aren't being figured into the percentage.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged