deschmidt27
UKC Forum Member
Registered: Jun 2008
Location: Burlington, CT
Posts: 1758 |
Ok… I’m back.
Joe is right, in that he had some sarcasm in his post that I read and didn’t take offense to. Joe and I often bring our friendly banter onto this forum. I respect all of Joe’s opinions and agree with most of them!
Shane is right, in that he’s taking a 5000 foot view of the situation, which is where I was coming from. You can dissect all of this as much as you want, but unless you had THE perfect hound, and he/she was line bred, to a line that was available for more line breeding, you are not going to reproduce another perfect hound, even if perfection is all from your perspective.
Joe had a stud, that as I understand was pretty talented and from what I’ve seen, heard and according to the statistics was capable of reproducing other highly talented hounds. And I know Joe is not alone, as I’ve seen similar results with other breeds and breeding programs. But what I have not seen in those various programs, with all of those breeders’ diligence, science and understanding is those talented reproductions, in turn creating carbon copies of themselves or their daddy, or better yet a progression in talent. I hunted with another long time breeder with even more years (hard to believe) than Joe. From what I understand, he had a talented stud many years back and has been line breeding on that pedigree, with some strategic out-crosses, for a multitude of generations. And what I hunted with were talented dogs, and saw pups with very predictable and desirable traits. But what I didn’t hear and wasn’t told was how all this knowledge led to dogs as capable as or better than that patriarch. Joe is right, in that if you don’t want another one just like them, don’t breed them, as that’s likely what you would get. But how many people have actually reproduced generation after generation of that same dog? Not the same type of dog, but the same dog or better.
So I hear what everyone is saying, and I believe in Joe’s and Larry’s experience and knowledge, but here’s how I’m interpreting it in my mind… if you want consistent, explainable results generation after generation, then line breed or out-cross to another line-bred dog. But if you want exceptional, breed to that dog that is exceptional and a dominant reproducer of exceptional dogs, and roll the dice with hopes of landing that exceptional pup in the litter. Because the perfectionist in me, wants exceptional, not explainable. And until someone shows me a 3-generation pedigree, of line bred dogs, and can honestly point to the great granddad and say he was mine and was exceptional, then I made some strategic decisions and produced the granddad and he was equal or a bit better, then more science and decision making produced the dad who was outstanding, and now the pup who is phenomenal. Then what’s the point??? We line breed to remove variation and establish consistent traits in a line of hounds that never produce as fond of memories as that old dog way back when?!?
So what did I do… neither of the above. I didn’t find a dominant reproducer (as I have no idea what Boom is capable of) and I didn’t make an out-cross to another line-bred dog. I took a dog that I do truly love, but frustrates me to no end from time to time, and bred it to a dog who’s granddad was one of those dominant reproducers, and who happens to be Boom’s great, great, great… granddad. My thought being that there’s chaff in both gene pools, but the female has potentially less chaff in hers since Lipper is closer in generation.
Dave
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|