BigGameHoundsmen.com

what ratio do you think is acceptable in a litter that makes a dog
what ratio shy
what ratio wont start
fight at tree
back track
if ya had a litter of pups and at least two wont hunt is that acceptable breeding
i dont know i have seen lots of great dogs that cant throw pups as gd as them and they are ten years old none of there pups or grand pups ever surpassed them
see lots of dogs hounds and curs quiet a hog track in 20 mins plain drop out and ya gotta feed them back into a screaming race a few times
some dogs take 2 or 3 years to get going
oh slick treein fools uggh
i have seen and heard of top breed hounds and curs that wont even start anything were is the none hunting gene coming from
from bable mouth retards back trackers none starters dog fighters dogs that quit in 20 min i know guides in the north and south whos who business is on the backs of one or to dogs and if some thing happens to that dog they are up shits creek
most of the guys i run with are either guides on bear or hog or comp coon hunters there a whole nother story
i went to go see a beagle guy the other day two hours in a briar patch 3 dogs finaly a rabbit pops out and they open for a few barks ran the track 100ft or so then turned around unbelieveable i told the guy and these are ya best dogs he says some day theycant run humidity high pressure low fog idk seems like a lot of trash out there in all breeds is this normali have seen 8 week old catch dogs trying to to catch a hog twice there size i know it takes alot more to make a hound but to me it is alittle depressing whats out there just want to know what ya think thanks

Heres my thoughts-for what their worth. When I was a kid my father had hog and coon dogs in northwest Florida. He ran mostly plotts with a bluetick or walker now and then. If he got a dog that wouldn't hunt at 18 months-he shot it. He didn't sell it or neuter it or try to fix the problem, he got rid of the dog and kept hunting. He didn't go back to the breeder and decry their whole program or demand his money back. He figured that a cull dog every now and then was all part of the sport. Now days it seems to me like there are a lot of three to four year old dogs being sold or advertised as "started" or "pack dogs". Really? Those dogs used to be called "pets" or "culls". Now instead of just culling out the tree fighters and no-hunters and back trackers, they just get sold to the next poor bastard as a "started" or "pack" dog.

Lifediver, what you are saying is true but I think it's more of a breeders issue.
I would say overall hounds and dogs in general have become better however finding them is not easy. Good breeders are very hard to find because it take years of hard work and ruthless culling and an understanding of genetics for a breeding program to last.
Very few breeders will keep whole litters for several generations and keep only the best based on performance, looks and genetics. Then keeping only the best specimens with those traits, similar pedigrees and use those for breeding and then doing it again and again. If you want very few culls that what it takes.
Once you have developed a line it is lost as soon as you outcross because the original line will be lost to recessive genes by the third generation.
In magazines and on these websites new overnight breeders think they can buy a hound from a famous breeder and overnight they too are great breeders. Unfortunately after the first two litters (F1 hybrids) the breeding falls apart. F1 hybrids tend to make excellent hounds but cannot produce their like and it’s all downhill from there.
These day most people want things right now however you cannot mass produce hounds like a factory. It takes many years even if you start with excellent stock. One thing from the past that cannot be overlooked is those breeders produce the different breed of hounds we have today. Mostly by using the methods described above.

bayem'up, what a breath of fresh air. that post made me believe that there is a glimmer of hope for this computer nonsence. my friend,your statement proved to me you have something between your ears, and there is no doubt in my mind your hounds do also! as for percentage out of a liter that make it. i believe in a litter of eight, you will probaly get two to three culls,two or three average dogs, and two or three as good or better than their mom and dad. this is only if mom and dad were worthy of breeding. if they were three or four year old started or pack dogs this goes to hell in a hand basket immediately! this is what i have found over the last 45 years. but am fully prepared to be corrected by the computer experts.

JTG wrote:.
In magazines and on these websites new overnight breeders think they can buy a hound from a famous breeder and overnight they too are great breeders. Unfortunately after the first two litters (F1 hybrids) the breeding falls apart. F1 hybrids tend to make excellent hounds but cannot produce their like and it’s all downhill from there.

I have heard this before. If the F1 hybrids cannot produce thier like, how does a breeder continue to have good stock past these generations? I have absolutely no intentions of breeding, but would like to know to help the decision process when picking a new pup.

I think there are better dogs being bred out their today then in the past. I think there are still people out there that will breeding and will sale anything. I think people expect way to much out of the dog and no responsibility on the person training the dog. I think there are a lot of people that don't know what they are buying or offering for sale. Dewey

I belive it really depends on your location, a state by state basis on the quality of hounds in a area.
In My home state of Washington I have seen a extreme deline in the quality of hounds in the last 15 years. There are really no old timers to speak of becouse of the bann on biggame hunting in 1996. The amount of knowledge that has been lost to future generations has taken its toll. There are very few what I would call good breeders in my state. I can count them on one hand.

T-hunt

You ask a very good and complicated question. If I was looking for a pup I would look for one with as many common ancestors as possible on both sides and as far back as possible. Common ancestors give you the highest inbreeding coefficient with the greatest chance to pass on homozygous genes. I would also look for a litter where at six weeks or older you could not tell the pups apart.
To answer your question on how to continue to have good stock is to family breed, keep whole litters and use the best members of that family to improve what you have. Breed those to replace what missing from the others within the same family. This is very important or what you have will not improve.
It's a long expensive process and very few are willing to make this type of commitment.

JTG

JTG wrote:T-hunt

You ask a very good and complicated question. If I was looking for a pup I would look for one with as many common ancestors as possible on both sides and as far back as possible. Common ancestors give you the highest inbreeding coefficient with the greatest chance to pass on homozygous genes. I would also look for a litter where at six weeks or older you could not tell the pups apart.

Sounds like good advice, but buyer beware,inbreeding is a double edged sword.Many people do it.Very few do it well.

True Blue, No argument from me, especially on the very few.

JTG wrote:To answer your question on how to continue to have good stock is to family breed, keep whole litters and use the best members of that family to improve what you have. Breed those to replace what missing from the others within the same family. This is very important or what you have will not improve.
It's a long expensive process and very few are willing to make this type of commitment.

JTG

Thanks JTG. It is a little more clear. What is too close, as far as inbreeding goes? Are you saying to breed these whole litters with each other, or previous generations to the litter?

T-hunt

Your really setting me up for an argument but that fine. The very closest you can get is a brother and sister cross. There are studies out there where for 20 plus generations they did brother and sister crosses with mice that became so alike that they were all identical twins.
Holstein cattle are mostly inbreed and they produce more milk, healthier and live longer. I hear a lot of argument about this but it’s hear say and not scientific fact. There is a big differences between the scientific method and a theory.

It’s very important that you have a very good understanding of genetics prior to starting a breeding program like this. If you have any other questions PM me because frankly I do not feel like debating, unless they can show me scientific evidence to back up there statements.

JTG

So you supply hear say but will only accept science in replies? Haha! Great rules for a discussion.............

Sent from my C771 using Tapatalk

Breeding live stock is far easier than breeding hounds. Most of the traits you want in livestock is for meat or milk production. In hounds most of the traits takes year of hunting by experts in the right environment to come out. By tight inbreeding you can reproduce what you start with but can you make it better? Dewey