On Breeding Better Dogs

[Silverton Boar Dogs]

I breed tight two or three generation, then outcross to one of two types of dog.  Outside blood that's tight bred or an outcross dog from my line. If I like the results I breed tight again from there. A female provides only 50% of the genes but truly great females are a true treasure.   Personally I don't think line breeding is an end unto it's self but a way to produce THE outcross dog that can be bred to most any solid producer to produce high percentage, high quality litters.

[WayOutWest]

Rednose, I don't know if I have the depth of knowledge to comment on that or not. I know some about a few lines but all I know is hearsay on many others. I got a wealth of information from the late J. Crenshaw and  K. Williams. I know the dogs they ran quite well and those dogs were good to me. Most of the knowledge of the rest of the lines it has just been 2nd. hand. But I do know of some issues with brittle teeth and lack of stamina.

[Cajun]

  I have pretty much stayed out of this topic because there are so many books on breeding dogs out there that are much more qualified then I am but I will give you my opinion on this. So far just about everybody who has posted on this subject has valid points. The problem arises because everybody has a different opinion on what makes a better dog & that is one reason there is such a variation in hogdogs. I run into problems breeding for bear dogs & end up getting to much grit for hogdogs  unless I just hunt one out.
  I have seen truly great dogs in curs, hounds, & mixed dogs & this is one sport where you can get away with this. I do not know of any other game pursued by dogs where they use so many different breeds or mixed up dogs with such success.
  Like most Plott breeders, I want nose & stamina with a good open mouth. Most hog hunters do not want the open dogs. Just a matter of preference. I do believe it is a lot easier to maintain what you like by line breeding & inbreeding to maintain the traits you like until the dogs start reverting back to average. Then I want to outcross to another tight bred family with the traits that compliment my dogs or make sure they are strong in the department that my dog might be weak in. I think it was Taxas A & M that did a study on inbreeding where you could breed like father to daughter for 6 or 7 generations before they started noticing smaller litters & smaller dogs. They did not mention weaker immune systems or genetic deformities. That would come out only if the dogs had it to start with.
  Like some body said I believe in keeping top females so I can pick the male I want to breed to. It also has to be a group effort among friends to help spread the dogs out. In this day & age it is expensive to raise, train, & hunt dogs to prove them out. I have seen more prepotent females then I have males & if you get a good producing female, it just seems she throws good pups no matter what she is bred too.
  One of the worst breeding practices I have seen is kennel blindness. In other words breeding to your own dog, even tho you know there is a better dog down the road. whether it is line breeding or a outcross, always try to breed to the best dog available. Now on that subject, a truly great dog has a hard time reproducing him or her self. Most of the time the mate is not up to hunting abilities of the great dog & the pups will fall back towards the average.
  You cannot even go by proven crosses. I bred a plott coon dog to a Gr. nite ch. dog & most of the pups really made nice coon dogs. Made the same cross again & only one in the litter made it. This was a outcross. Non of this is written in stone & if there was a 100 percent way of breeding better dogs, we would all have them. Well maybe not those yeller dogs.  JK. lol

[Reuben]

Ruben there was a fella I had talked to one time that new a guy down in temple area that was known for very well bred mnt curs that where way rough. Do you or any one that who that was. Most of the mnt curs I have seen have been good dogs


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I know someone in Cameron, Texas, which is not too far from Waco...but I wouldn't feed those dogs...There were 2 breeders in the San Antone area that sold a few to hog hunters including myself...

[Reuben]

I breed tight two or three generation, then outcross to one of two types of dog.  Outside blood that's tight bred or an outcross dog from my line. If I like the results I breed tight again from there. A female provides only 50% of the genes but truly great females are a true treasure.   Personally I don't think line breeding is an end unto it's self but a way to produce THE outcross dog that can be bred to most any solid producer to produce high percentage, high quality litters.

I like this style as well...but I will inbreed to the right dog...

[Judge peel]

Cajun good points


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Judge peel]

Ruben why wouldn't feed em not worth much ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[liefalwepon]

Liefalwepon, nearly every successful breeder I know has used linebreeding or inbreeding. The only time an outcross was used was when they felt it was necessary. I can't say how that translates to dogs that find hogs but there are issues that come up with bulldogs too tight bred.

So you're talking about Bulldog breeders?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Reuben]

the thing about line breeding is that there will be dogs that can/will be unrelated scattered throughout the pedigree...so there will be surprises in looks and hunting style or lack of...so one should inbreed once in a while to concentrate on a particular dog and dogs...

so when line breeding one  should look at all the dogs and use those that are somewhat related...when breeding kemmers they will be related somehow so it won't be too big a deal to go out and breed to another kemmer...just make sure to use a line of kemmer that has what you need...

with unrelated dogs find a line of dogs that is well bred (line bred) and is from a good line of dogs...then breed that to your dogs and only use the offspring to breed further into the line so as to freshen it up...I am talking about if you already have an established line...you want to guard and protect what has already be proven and for what you have worked so hard for...

when starting out...
when starting a new line try to get well bred dogs to build your line...what I am doing now is an example of how I am mapping it out...the dogs I have now are inbred kemmer off the gold nugget line crossed with a well bred pocohontas plott...the kemmer was bred to a redbone/pitbull so the pups are 1/2 pocohontas 1/4 gold nugget, 1/8 pit and 1/8 redbone...

I am supposed to get a 1/2 gold nugget 1/2 Texas Smoke female mt cur pup...if she turns out I will breed her to one of the pups and then I will see which direction I will take...my hope is that she will be all I want in a bitch and I will concentrate the genes from that line...like I already mentioned before...my main goal is to have good hog dogs...my secondary goal is to slowly breed towards purifying the gene pool...

[Reuben]

Ruben why wouldn't feed em not worth much ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

this fellow has decent dogs but he breeds them small as his preference and he uses them mostly to run them out of the fields and does not care if he catches any hogs...that is what he told me...and I have seen his dogs...

[Reuben]

I think oconee is right about breeding science being able to produce good dogs consistently, but historically this works best with large numbers of dogs, when the Germans refined their dog breeds they had kennels with over a thousand dogs at times, when you're breeding the best to the best out of a thousand dogs you can refine the gene pool much faster than if you are breeding best to best of 30 dogs, when its 30 dogs it's much more of a crap shoot like judge says, even if you are working with line bred dogs. A lot of our hunting breeds in the U.S. Have way more diversity in the gene pool than German bred dogs, some of the books I've seen that promote inbreeding and line breeding without outcrossing don't take into account the breeding history of the dog breed. It's a shame the American hunting dog breeders from a generation or two ago didn't write more books, im always curious about stories of dog sub breeds kept in one family for generations that have not experienced inbreeding depression. Some of the stories of Florida or cracker curs come to mind

Id like to see Cajun chime in and tell us what percentage of his litters make sure nuff hog dogs, not to put him on the spot but because he's a reputable breeder working with a consistent line of dogs with a German history, Mtn curs and cats I believe have exponentially more genetic diversity just judging by their color variations, maybe bmcs less so because they have been bred for color

Breeding a high percentage of quality dogs from a small family of dogs is probably harder than you think or more people would be doing it

Creating your own breed seems like an exhausting amount of work, I'm sure during the creation of some of the newer breeds like the Dogo they had hundreds of dogs at times or culled through hundreds in a year. Once your gene pool has been refined to produce mostly what your looking for you could reduce your numbers down to 15-30 but the less dogs you have the more likely you are to wind up in a corner and have to outcross


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

some of my Ideas were influenced from some of the Germans way of breeding better dogs...just put my twist on those ideas...

in Germany, there was a warden that was in charge of a section somewhat like a county...this warden would come around and cull down to 8 new born pups within a certain breed...then he came at a later date and culled down to 6 pups because the thinking was that a female can only feed and raise 6 pups properly...so part of the explanation as to why the dogs looked so much alike from an area had a lot to do with the taste of the Warden...

The pups would be tested and graded thoughout their upbringing... and they had to qualify to receive a certain certificate that would allow them to be bred...so all the dogs were outstanding dogs that were bred back then because of the expectations...that is why they had some of the best bred dogs around...

here in the USA there have been a few registries that have followed suit but don't know how strict they are...and other dog sites reward only those that win state and world championships... 

[Semmes]

I think oconee is right about breeding science being able to produce good dogs consistently, but historically this works best with large numbers of dogs, when the Germans refined their dog breeds they had kennels with over a thousand dogs at times, when you're breeding the best to the best out of a thousand dogs you can refine the gene pool much faster than if you are breeding best to best of 30 dogs, when its 30 dogs it's much more of a crap shoot like judge says, even if you are working with line bred dogs. A lot of our hunting breeds in the U.S. Have way more diversity in the gene pool than German bred dogs, some of the books I've seen that promote inbreeding and line breeding without outcrossing don't take into account the breeding history of the dog breed. It's a shame the American hunting dog breeders from a generation or two ago didn't write more books, im always curious about stories of dog sub breeds kept in one family for generations that have not experienced inbreeding depression. Some of the stories of Florida or cracker curs come to mind

Id like to see Cajun chime in and tell us what percentage of his litters make sure nuff hog dogs, not to put him on the spot but because he's a reputable breeder working with a consistent line of dogs with a German history, Mtn curs and cats I believe have exponentially more genetic diversity just judging by their color variations, maybe bmcs less so because they have been bred for color

Breeding a high percentage of quality dogs from a small family of dogs is probably harder than you think or more people would be doing it

Creating your own breed seems like an exhausting amount of work, I'm sure during the creation of some of the newer breeds like the Dogo they had hundreds of dogs at times or culled through hundreds in a year. Once your gene pool has been refined to produce mostly what your looking for you could reduce your numbers down to 15-30 but the less dogs you have the more likely you are to wind up in a corner and have to outcross


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This whole post kinda stirred my interest up.

I'm like Cajun...there are so many books and studies and articles to read on genetics and line breeding, and outcross vigor and such that it isn't worth going over.

But in this post it was brought up about German breeds and that could be replaced with any centuries old or country of origin 'breed' and then this was compared to the way american 'breeds' are, and were created. American was used in context of new breeds but could be substituted for say new world dogs from Argentina like dogos or the Australian lurcher crosses as well as some 'breeds' of the United States.

All of those purpose bred breeds of the old world started as crosses.

The German breeds like the Danes, boxers, rotts, German shepherds, dobs, etc. as well as British breeds like bulldogs, and eastern breeds be it Far East to Mid East to eastern block breeds.

These dogs may have been all bred for so long and these breeds as a whole reached a type that was created thru selection for performance and eventually a certain phenotype or even color or size that made them cookie cutters...made them distinct breeds.
All this lack of variation they were bred toward eventually caused the end of progress or depression. Let alone all the many companion breeds bred for type or conformation soley.
Sure toy can breed two pure breeds together and pretty much predict a type or temperament. Maybe even a degree if usefulness performance wise.

Maybe they did have hundreds of dogs and a group of folks breeding toward a goal be it a certain performance or type and they achieved it...wow

Many of those breeds are no longer useful or the best in the feild of their original intent...because they were originally bred from crosses which made them the best sort initially until they were actually purposefully bred for type.

Are Danes the BEST dogs bred for boar as history or the akc def claims them to be as a breed as a whole?
What about boxers?
What about bulldogs(British)
What about mastiffs?
What about German shepherds?

Etc...etc...

These breeds can all be beat by a dog that has had a cross bred in down the line then the cross bred upon at the given venue.

These breeds are all set in type and useful no doubt but at some point they tend to loose their usefulness when a certain cross is breds in and surpasses the original in working ability and changes the 'type'...albeit a little..but enough.

It's fluid.

If the dog is a true working breed...it's fluid.

This is where the best to best comes in.

Enter these 'new' breeds of tge 'new world' The dogo for instance.
Isn't there like 13 breeds in the dogo. I don't believe for a second the dogo breeders had hundreds of dogs at a time Argentina. They made a cross they liked it. Bred on it a couple gens and added another breed that brought something they thought they lacked...bred few more gens then added something else etc etc. many breeders doing this simotaneoulsy and trading dogs back n forth until the came up with a type and this is bred on and and here is where the cycle of depression starts. Same with the ab.

Curs are bit dif. They were always a hodgepodge. Over a hundred years dif folks or groups of folks added what they saw fit.
 
Be it bulldog, hound, mutt, whatever... Best to best.
 This all explains the diversity or cur types like in catahoula, or any other cur
Once folks close the books on a type, a breed is doomed to be surpassed.
That's the whole downfall with registries and pedigrees.

Same with hounds, or bulldogs, or whatever. You close the books and day this is the best the formula is set and that's the point where the depression starts and it's doomed to be beat down the road by a cross that someone try's and the cycle starts over again

Breeding dogs and dog breeds is a fluid thing.

That's just my take...



 

[liefalwepon]

Cajun thanks for chiming in.

I have not been into this long enough to have any opinions set in stone, I have a few books I've read and I've read through many old posts on ethd. I think I have a good idea how to produce good dogs but only time will tell. At the moment my older dogs are poor and my younger dogs are just getting started, but I've finally got my hands on the genetics I need to breed my own down the road. I do believe the breeder is the most important part of the equation, I know guys that have been breeding lines for 30 plus years and have not taken any of the pups offered me I've also seen guys buy cats from reputable breeders and out of a dozen dogs maybe one is a decent hogdog, out of the 8 pups I've bought here and there over the years only two are keepers and one is above average, more recently I've formed some relationships with a few hobby breeders and I can say for certain the best dogs I have were free and even though they are still young I know I have some above average hog dogs in the making, I'm sure I have some culls too. I really appreciate this opportunity to learn from all of y'all on this forum, I've bred plants and fish when I was younger and hog dogs are the most complex breeding project I've ever studied


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Scott]

Not sure if it's been mentioned or not, bu I also believe that there is an art to breeding that has to work with the science. No matter what breeding scheme one chooses to employ...there has to be both. What factors in to the art? IMO, the two biggest factors are objectivity and the ability to sort. If you aren't objective, everything else is a moot point. As for the sort...if you don't have the knowledge and experience to know what your looking at, you have a hard row to hoe.

[Reuben]

Not sure if it's been mentioned or not, bu I also believe that there is an art to breeding that has to work with the science. No matter what breeding scheme one chooses to employ...there has to be both. What factors in to the art? IMO, the two biggest factors are objectivity and the ability to sort. If you aren't objective, everything else is a moot point. As for the sort...if you don't have the knowledge and experience to know what your looking at, you have a hard row to hoe.

I totally agree...you have to know what a hog dog is...sometimes the very best dogs are very laid back until the tail gate drops...

It might sound something from way out in left field...but because I had so much time running the plant from a control room I would read cover to cover my monthly full cry...then I would study the world champion hound/cur pictures...looking at the pictures for what appeared to be common among the greats...there is a air to most of them that is hard to described...an above it all attitude...

de·mean·or


/dəˈmēnər/


noun

noun: demeanour; plural noun: demeanours; noun: demeanor; plural noun: demeanors




outward behavior or bearing.
"a quiet, somber demeanor"


synonyms: manner, air, attitude, appearance, look; bearing, carriage; behavior, conduct; formal comportment
"his normally calm demeanor"

[liefalwepon]

Semmes, I always have attributed the decline of certain German breeds to no longer being bred and used for their intended purpose, the gsp, duetch drathar and the jagd are prime examples of German bred dogs being used and bred for their intended purpose that are still high performance dog breeds even though they are bred for type, I do agree breeding for type or color can severely limit the diversity of the gene pool and is never as important as function. the Great Dane, boxer and German Shepard are no longer bred for their intended purpose, the Great Dane and Shepard became trendy and were bred for show and profit to the point today that they are prone to hip dysplasia and a host of other ailments. I don't see this as a direct result of inbreeding or line breeding or being bred for type but a direct result of not selectively breeding for hunt and health etc.

What I was saying about the Dogo was that they either had hundreds or culled hundreds, if you had 25 bitches at 8 pups a litter once or twice a year and only keeping a handful, at the beginning of a breeding project like that involving 6 different breeds it seems to me you would need those kinds of numbers to get anywhere, after a decade or so you could probably have half that many dogs

I agree with you otherwise that breeding dogs is fluid and not necessarily linear, much of the science of breeding is just theory, it fills in some of the gaps for me to read what you more experienced folk have to say, the books I've read leave you with a lot of questions and I only know two people I could call dog breeders




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TexasHogDogs]

Man o man that's a lot of reading.  Lol...Everybody wants to breed family's of great dog.  Heavy line breeding, line breeding, inbreeding and heavy inbreeding breeding to the best dogs I guess they have are can find.  They make a great family of dogs.  Threw the years the dogs start to decline due to all this family breeding.  They cross but only got so so dogs from the cross.  They cross again and same thing happens so so dogs. This family of dogs has been bred for 25 years without a real cross in it so it is really really condensed with the same family genes.  Well after the couple of crosses the man is left scratching his head and doubts start to creep in his head about his family of dogs.  This is where breeding experience come into play big time.  There is one of two things wrong here.  One the family of dogs he is now crossing into just does not cool with his family of dogs are his family of dogs gene pool has been bred over and over for so many years that once he does what is suppose to be a full out cross 50 x 50 on paper is not in reality when it comes to his line of dogs.  In other words he made the complete out cross and it shows on paper as a 50/50 out cross but it really is not because his family dogs have been bred so tight for so many years that when he out crosses the cross blood could not break down his gene pool in his family dogs.  So now in the real world and not on paper because of this his pups may still be 75 percent his blood and 25 percent the out cross blood because of this heavy family blood of his are they may even still be 80 percent his family blood.  They preform like inbred dogs and you cannot see a improvements because of this.  So a man may have to cross two are three times in order to really get a true 50x50 cross lol....... I did go on and on about all of this and you will not find it in any books !  Damn my fingers hurts doi,g this on a phone.

[TexasHogDogs]

So yes family breeding is great but a whole lot of times it is taken way way way to far! I agree the man doi,g all of this is the Trump card not the dogs.  You can screw up ten hens of breeding in just a few bad breedings.

Kennel Blindness!

Another thing,  the OUTCROSS is what makes a family of dogs GREAT.  NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND!

Good for thought.

[TexasHogDogs]

One word I HATE when it comes to dog breeding and that word is "PURE"!!!!!!!

I got pure this are that. I hate that!  Well a lotta things come pure and one of those things is PURE CHIT.

Pure don't know how to preform,  pure is just a word and a word that usually goes along with some body trying to make a big bunch of $$$$$$$$$$$$.

Some body says to you I got pure this are that my advise to u is to RUN LIKE HELL!

[Semmes]

I want to say...sometimes when I post late in the evening I type out of both ends of my body.

Know what I mean...?

I talk from my head and a$$ at the same time...lol

I may not think things thru as clearly as I should

I don't dislike pure breeds or line breeding or inbreeding and these are useful tools.

I plan to employ these tools on my program.

But I think when one gets too fixated on this they run into depression eventually. If they are not open to crossing vigor back in then their tunnel visioned kennel (or even breed) blindness is nothing but a detriment to the working ability of the dogs they started with.

It may or may not even happen in their lifetime, depends on how much breeding a person does.

But it will catch up with someone down the line if they are still breeding dogs in this persons vision but solely on traits of working animals and are open minded enough to consider these things.

The problem with purity is alot of time folks consider the visual uniformity as purity in the long run and the actual performance is bit a trial or show pony quick sort of thing.

Breeds like the dogo, ab, lots of curs have huge variety pheno and geno typically. They are not refined and never reached that point. From inception...

I say this is kinda a good thing and leaves alot of avenues for a breeder to refine for their own vision from there.

Once a breed reaches cookie cutter status it is in decline as far as I'm concerned.

...some may not see it that way and that's cool.
 
The mal had a splash of pit added to the GS. And those dogs now bear the GS at everything in the work.
The greyhounds went they much the same vigor outcross and do from time to time from what I have read.
The pit had a splash of ebt added at one point that increased a bit of vigor. The bulldog had a splash of terrier added that did the same in the old days.
To me the dogo is basically the new and improved Dane which is a high component of the dogo. But had to be invigorated by extensive outs.

In that sense what texas hogdogs just posted is where I come from.

Take the patter dale. It's a bit of a composite as well... But surpasses all the previous pure bred ground dogs at this point in time. Because a type became more important in a working breed or breeds then performance