The comment made above should make people realize the need to have first hand knowledge of pedigrees as often as they can.

A feature referenced as "Jerry ears" was mentioned. The assumption here is that "Jerry" is the genesis of the ear problem. What might be missed is that maybe his maternal grand mother is the culprit... just as an example..

Lets look at a scenario.. I am going to use the name "Jerry" here as an imaginary dog, but this scenario is common, regardless of what dogs you type in.

Lets say then that a half brother from the same mother of Jerry becomes a big winner and popular sire too. Many people, excited at the prospect of line breeding here, focus more strongly on the famous half brothers, and totally forget the little pet-quality maternal grand mother who is at this point, the one being linebred on.

Linebreeding comes with many risks. The main issue is that people focus on the famous dogs in a pedigree, as if linebreeding will somehow magically re-create these dogs over and over or create some super-dog.

Look around.. isn't happening, is it? American dogs now are in many cases very good.. but the breed is stale here, the pedigrees are so similar and people are breeding the same recycled pedigrees over and over.

Line breeding is a maintenance program. You just hope that you maintain a consistent level of high quality. In my own breeding program, which is very, very linebred, I don't hope to create a dog with features we never had. My hope is to just have a predictable line of dogs that are fairly reliable to give me generation after generation of dogs that I am proud of. And in looking at my dogs, there are two bitches (neither one a champion) and one dog that seem to "haunt" the pedigree. In some of my pedigrees, they don't even show up anymore, so even to research it 5 generations back, you would not even see these dogs.

Anyway, we could go on for days with anectdotal evidence of how things work and how they don't. The point is to never think you have it all figured out.

e

I'm with Dan on this!

The problem is not the initial breeding to the "flavor of the month" dogs.. many people are getting champions that way. It is what happens when those champion puppies are bred that everything falls apart.

Very few people are breeding with long-range goals. This is why you see them like a school of fish flowing one way and then the other. All you have to do is look at many modern pedigrees to see how the trends are nearly identical with so many breeders these days. If a breeding "clicks" with a pup from the "flavor" dog, then many other people with puppies from the same dog "swarm" to the dog that clicked. Not much more thought seems to go into it.

There is a long held belief that the turn-around time in dogs is 5 years. This is about how long it takes to get started, finish a dog, get all hyped up, loose some friends with the bad attitude, breed your puppy, not do as well, get disgusted, then leave.

Look at Bulldoggers (magazine) from just a few years back. Some breeders were "all in"..full campaigns, ads, showing schedule.. where are they now?

I've seen so many come and go I've lost count.

And don't get me started on the "experts" who are only experts on the internet.. and cannot back it up with their dogs..... these people tend to hang around.. and around....and around....




e

Yep And put your hands on as many dogs as you can....learn to feel what you like as well. Pictures can hide so much. Another bit of advice I always like to share is that if you can see dogs overseas in person, do it! There are lovely dogs everywhere. I have spent alot of time and cash to go and see for myself what all the hype is about and man its worth it. For those who cant make it that far, when you plan a vacation anywhere, see if there is a bulldogger near by and maybe spend an afternoon. It is more education than you would think and I have been able to sit with some of the true greats. Every breeder thinks and does different and somtimes you pick up some neat little tidbits on the road And just think, when you see that pedigree...you aint takin anybody's word for the dogs in it, you have seen em yourself and no picture will ever do true justice to a fabulous dog.

Brett & Christy McDonough
OHNO BULLDOGS
Brett's Cell 281-627-1719
ohnobulldogs@comcast.net

http://www.bulldogcluboftexas.com
http://www.bulldogclubofla.com

NM

I always appreciate this approach Sometimes there is a lovely, yet unavailable female/male so we go with a litter mate (same gene pool) barring there is no health issues or major faults. People really need to understand the importance of pedigrees and how much they can influence a litter.....We also need to understand that correcting small things each litter will get you there quicker than going drastic and dealing with the unknown E is right, breeding for marketability causes errors and big messes we are forced to clean up down the road! Take your time and do your research.....

My biggest fear in breeding is that many seem to use the same stud over and over.....are they all prepared for the fallout as the gene pool shrinks....what will we do if a major health issue is detected down the road and has been compounded on for a couple of generations.....people need to learn the difference between points and quality and big winner compared to solid producer.....sorry totally off topic but I had to throw that out there

I'm getting to the point where I would love to just have one of each in each litter.

If they both turn out I can show them at the same time with minimal conflict. Whoever doesn't turn out can be spayed/neutered and placed when they are of the appropriate age.

Probably not the most viable strategy for maintaining a breeding program or for consistent success in the ring, but I grow to hate placing puppies more and more with each litter.

Dan Bandy

We haven't had a good discussion in while (and I mean "we" in general) and it's always been an interesting topic for me, so I thought I'd play.

Jay

You make some great points, Carlos.

I hear all the time how much difficulty people are having finding good stud dogs. Whether the issue they have is with conformation or inappropriate dogs in the pedigrees of males, this seems to be an issue for several.

Jay

thanks for all of your input, Jay!

e

E,

I think it should be noted that there are different definitions of high quality for different people. Titles are surely not the only indicators of high quality. But, as a general rule, I'd hate for someone less experienced to read this thread and take away from it that it's okay to settle for less and it's okay to breed lesser quality, when there's an option to do better. That's all I'm saying. You've done well following your course of action. The medical community uses the phrase, "do no harm," that sometimes I feel can apply to breeding dogs. Sometimes not breeding a lot without a firm grasp of what your goals are and without a clearer understanding of general canine structure and health and animal husbandry actually helps the breed too. And no, this is neither an anti-breeding post nor is it meant to be a policing of breeding post.

Jay

I take what Mother Nature sends. Been doing ok with that. I like having boys and girls to choose from.

As far as only breeding the very best dogs and nothing else? Not always the best plan. While I would never advocate continually breeding poor quality over and over, many of my breedings involved dogs here that were not my best show dogs. But then my breeding scheme is often pedigree based.

You cannot improve perfection and I strongly feel that folks looking for the "perfect" stud dog are taking one step up and two steps back. If he is that good, how do you expect him to improve his next generation?

Anyway, hopefully no one would plan breedings based solely on marketability.

This is a thorny subject, so I'm putting my thoughts out here for comments too. I don't claim to be much more than a novice myself, but feel the need to get the ball rolling on this discussion. There is always more to be learned.

1. How do you define an outcross?
My definition would be - no common ancestors in the immediate 3 generations (parents, grandparents and great-grandparents)

2. What's the general concensus on outcrossing?
What has been given out at the breeding seminars I've attended is that you would do it to strengthen your linebred dog, or introduce something you don't have and need/want to gain.
Personally, the few times I've done an outcross breeding, it has bit me in the butt big time! I've not gotten what I was seeking in conformation and introduced health problems I didn't have before.

3. How many generations of line breeding are done before the need (or desire??) to do an outcross?
Again, from the seminars, every 3rd generation is the typical answer.

4. What defines the need to do an outcross?
If you have run into a trait that you can't rid your line of. Sometimes the 'hybrid vigor' theory is mentioned.
For me, it would be if I couldn't find a dog (of similar lines as the bitch I wanted to breed) that I liked anything from and felt I had to outcross for a quality dog. Even then I would seek a dog that was linebred himself.

5. If a stud is truly the product of an outcross (ex. English and American lines), would that lessen or strengthen his viability as a stud prospect?
There have been some very nice dogs produced this way. However, for me, it would lessen his value being an outcross as you can't know what traits from which ancestors he will pass on. Unless I was familiar with most of the dogs and bitches in his pedigree, and their siblings, as to health and conformation - it would be more risk that I'm willing to take. The questions are - does he pass on his own quality? Does he produce better with a certain type of bitch? Or was he the genetic lottery winner who looks great but has little to offer as a sire?

In my mind, I look at the differences between linebreeding and outcrosses as a highly compressed version of the differences between breeding 2 dogs of the same breed together, verses breeding 2 dogs of different breeds together. In the one case you are breeding 'like to like' to get similar to what you have. In the other you are breeding 'un-alike to un-alike' to get something different than what you have. Both have their place.

1. How do you define an outcross?

Breeding unrelated dogs. For all intents and purposes, in my mind, no common ancestors in 6 generations, and that can vary, depending on if that 6th gen. ancestor is inbred or not.

2. What's the general concensus on outcrossing?

It works well for many people, provided they are breeding type to type (and doing it well). I don't have luck outcrossing, but it is a little different working with linebred pedigrees. They are all bulldogs, so it is not like we are working with two separate breeds.

3. How many generations of line breeding are done before the need (or desire??) to do an outcross?

Depends on many things. The need to outcross is typically in the eye of the beholder (breeder). I think some people go "out" too soon, some don't go out often enough.

4. What defines the need to do an outcross?

Again, depends on what you are looking for. For me, it is to attempt to change (hopefully improve) a trait that is cemented in my dogs thru consistent line breeding. The trick is to not have the outside dog change the entire look of my dogs.

5. If a stud is truly the product of an outcross (ex. English and American lines), would that lessen or strengthen his viability as a stud prospect?

It depends on the dog. I have seen outcross dogs produce well, and I have seen linebred dogs produce well and vice versa. I don't think it is set in stone.
One thing I have noticed first hand (after years of hearing about it).. first generation English/American breedings rarely work. What happens then is many of them get sold as pets without exploring a second or even third generation. When you breed, you have to keep dogs, even if they are not perfect. Many great breeding dogs are sold as pets because they are not so beautiful. The beautiful ones get shown and more times than not the beautiful ones fall short in the producing area.

Any other insights?

I don't think these questions have any true correct answers. I have tried for years to find a system that is predictable and consistent. Yes, linebreeding has worked for my purposes. I still struggle when I have to outcross.
Often it is gut instinct that comes up with the best breedings.

e

Another thing that influenced my question was that I knew males determined sex and that the stud we used had just recently sired a litter of 5 males/2 females. Since the dam was closer to the sire then my bitch (physically), it made me wonder if that could have influenced the sex of both litters.

While I was/am tickled PINK with this litter but would like a male to keep next time, I realize that that may not be the case. It's OK. I'll keep and show what I get and have. I was very blessed with this, my first and only litter. All 4 pups went to show homes and I have been told that I will probably never get a litter as nice and consistant as this litter was and that it might just be a HOF litter, time will tell. Coming from the person that that came from (I won't name drop) I honestly could not be happier or feel more humbled by the advice, mentoring and opportunity that this couple has provided to me and my husband. I just hope and pray that I can do right by the girl that I kept and the one I co-own. I have no doubt that if the other 2 turn out that their owners will do right by them. It's such a wonderful feeling to have your babies go to great homes!

~Heather

Back to the original question of choosing a litter of all males or females, we all know that in Cattle this is pretty common now. Only difference is that they don´t have litters, but just one calf at a time. So probably not as dramatic as in dogs.

Concerning Cattle that is a clear preference for females (if used sexed semen of course). For dogs, I think it could be good for a breeding program but I don´t know if it would be good for the Breed in the long term.

If instead of 50%, the females let´s say become 80% of our litters, we are not only reducing the chances of having new nice and influencial studs, but also making the gap we see today in the ring (better quality bitches compared to the dogs) becomes even bigger.

So, it´s like cloning, something nice but needs to be done carefully to avoid BIG problems. Science is sure a great tool for breeders but could also be a problem if not used with common sense.

So if sexed semen or any other technique becomes available, I could see kennels with 100% of bitches being born and some nitrogen cylinders with stored semen.

Males? Could become a thing of the past. For sure a scary scenario.

at any time. I remember a couple of my mentors making a comment on my boy's ears when he was young. They said he had "Jerry ears". I had no idea what that meant! Thankfully, he grew into those ears. LOL! I know what it means now!

Wow, must be nice to receive such a compliment from your mentors, especially concerning the head!

~Heather

the names are great, but i like to get as many pictures and info from others on dogs i have not seen. Of course info is taken at face value as each has opinions. I have also gone back in the 7 and 8th generations.

I have to be careful about ears and lenght of leg. I dont have to worry to much about rib,brisket, and forchest. However i will not breed to a dog where i may loose some of the above. I always watch ears and i go back as far as i can in the pedigree and try and keep them in mind with every breeding. I have a girl who can hold those suckers up and it makes me nuts, but she can also hold them down too.

I was given one of the best compliments from one of my mentors, they said you have better heads then i do on your dogs, you have done it in a shorter amount of time too. I have to say, they are HOF breeders and I love the dogs they have. I was shocked and very happy to hear that.

Vicky,
Bosco, Bella, Breve' & Holly

www.LangagerBulldogs.com

PHOTOS ARE PROPERTY OF LANGAGER BULLDOGS, YOU MUST HAVE WRITTEN PERMISSION FOR ANY USE OF THESE PHOTOS FROM LANGAGERBULLDOG.

A few questions for anyone wanting to chime in:

1. How do you define an outcross?

2. What's the general concensus on outcrossing?

3. How many generations of line breeding are done before the need (or desire??) to do an outcross?

4. What defines the need to do an outcross?

5. If a stud is truly the product of an outcross (ex. English and American lines), would that lessen or strengthen his viability as a stud prospect?

Any other insights?

Depends on how linebred the dog was.

Some of my dogs are very linebred so to see traits of dogs far back is fairly common.

I wouldn't expect to see that in a loosly bred dog.

Plus I have seen dogs that resemble other dogs they are not even related to.

Depends on how linebred the dog was.

Some of my dogs are very linebred so to see traits of dogs far back is fairly common.

I wouldn't expect to see that in a loosly bred dog.

Plus I have seen dogs that resemble other dogs they are not even related to.

IM so tired and sad for people when they breed to the "flavor" of hte month and then are mad they didnt get great puppies.


Amen, I won't name names, LOL...I am seeing pups from a particular stud left and right and even as a "newbie" , I'm not impressed. I was even less impressed with the dog in person and then he walked and I couldn't believe the gait! You couldn't give me a FREE breeding to that dog.

~Heather

... into the pedigree do you think a dog's influence has on a potential breeding and the resultant puppies? Obviously parents would seem to have the most influence on the litter genetically, but how much do grandparents and great-grandparents actually contribute?

I've overheard some people say that a current puppy on the ground exibits characteristics passed down from a dog from 4 or 5 generations back. Can a dog's prepotency really last through that many generations? I could see it if the puppy and it's ancestors were closely linebred to that dog. But if not, then I'm not so sure I buy that.

??

and what is behind him/her and also at the dogs/bitches type as what is behind him/her.

if your breeding just on paper, then you might just have that a great piece of paper, but that doest make or break a dog.

I like to look at the dog/bitch first and the likes and dislikes. Make a list of what you like and dislike, what you want to fix and what you can live with in both. Do that for the parents and grandparents (if you can) If you have dogs you want to breed together breed the strong points, dont double or triple up on the bad. If the pedigrees line up that is great, but sometimes they dont and you have to outcross. If you keep outcrossing at some point you will not have a well line breed dog, so you have to be careful and come back in to a area of the pedigree that you liked both physical and on paper of the dog.


IM so tired and sad for people when they breed to the "flavor" of hte month and then are mad they didnt get great puppies.



Vicky,
Bosco, Bella, Breve' & Holly

www.LangagerBulldogs.com

PHOTOS ARE PROPERTY OF LANGAGER BULLDOGS, YOU MUST HAVE WRITTEN PERMISSION FOR ANY USE OF THESE PHOTOS FROM LANGAGERBULLDOG.

That being said, the people who have been in bulldogs alot longer than my couple of years, can look at pedigrees and say.."I remember that dog, he always produced...." How envious I am of that knowledge! I am stuck with looking online and in the Bulldogger, to look at what certain dogs were like and what they produced.

~Heather



at one time I was in the same boat.. just keep studying the dogs you can.

e

only, just for pedigree's sake. I would also not breed to just any champion. However, in choosing my stud, all of those things will be looked at. I would never use the stud of my current litter on my other bitch. The pedigrees are compatible and he's a champion, but he would not compliment my other bitch. In fact, I am watching a non champion dog at this time, with my other bitch in mind. He hasn't been shown yet but if he continues like he is, I would breed her to him.

That being said, the people who have been in bulldogs alot longer than my couple of years, can look at pedigrees and say.."I remember that dog, he always produced...." How envious I am of that knowledge! I am stuck with looking online and in the Bulldogger, to look at what certain dogs were like and what they produced.

~Heather

Hi Sue,

Your last question is a tough one to answer. Of course, we are talking in generalities and in theory here, but nevertheless, this type of subject always interested me.

So the idea of selective breeding is to make the perfect example of a Standard, right? In doing that, one figures out, in their mind, what the definition of perfection is as required by that Standard. Yes, interpretations may differ, but that's another subject. However, breeding animals that display desirable characteristics in the hope that successive generations consistently display similar or even better qualities is the goal. The more one seriously selects or chooses for particular traits, in theory, the more the genes or combination of genes that are responsible for those traits are concentrated in the gene pool one is working with. This can happen either by linebreeding or just breeding for type. Let's say that you have been diligent and you've done well to concentrate those desirable genes. When you breed that animal, you have increased your chances of that animal passing on its qualities. Now, exactly what genes it will pass on with each egg or sperm is left to random chance. Random chance also determines which set of genes the opposite sex will provide and how each set will combine and be expressed. So, yes, you will increase your chances of success by breeding high quality to high quality!

Jay

Hi Vicky,

There always seem to be exceptions to rules but in this case, the old adage of find the very best bitch you can and start your breeding program with her should apply.

Also, this is getting off the original topic, but not everyone that campaigns a male is looking for stud fees. Actually, if one is to be out every weekend, a dog would have to be used a lot and consistently to offset many expenses for showing, especially if one is inclined to advertise on a regular basis.

Jay

So, please tell me if I'm following this correctly:

Is what you are saying is that you may use dogs, male or female, who themselves may not be great physical specimens and could never compete in the show ring, but who are genotypically prepotent (carry the genes) for very desireable traits and consistently produce better than themselves? A dog like that would be much more valuable in a long-term breeding program over a finer physical specimen who is not as prepotent to pass on excellent traits consistently, right?

Or, if a particular line has lost something (tails, for example), one may have to select a stud who might be considered lesser in overall quality, in order to reintroduce tails back into the line. Which then leaves the breeder with the possibiity of having to deal with other undesirable traits that may be reintroduced back into his line. Then it might take several generations to cement the genes for tails, while breeding out the undesirable traits (i.e. weak fronts).

How much weight do you put on the physical attributes of a very nice study dog vs. the pedigree behind him? Or is that the magic question? I would think that would be subjective, based on the specific dog and his/her heritage.

All of this weighs on me, as we have a young female (very close to her first heat) for whom we are already researching breeding, pedigrees and studs. The breeding won't be at least for another year and a half or more, but wow there is so much to consider when breeding!!

Vicky,
Bosco, Bella, Breve' & Holly

www.LangagerBulldogs.com

PHOTOS ARE PROPERTY OF LANGAGER BULLDOGS, YOU MUST HAVE WRITTEN PERMISSION FOR ANY USE OF THESE PHOTOS FROM LANGAGERBULLDOG.

:D

Vicky,
Bosco, Bella, Breve' & Holly

www.LangagerBulldogs.com

PHOTOS ARE PROPERTY OF LANGAGER BULLDOGS, YOU MUST HAVE WRITTEN PERMISSION FOR ANY USE OF THESE PHOTOS FROM LANGAGERBULLDOG.

But aren't your odds of producing higher quality dogs increased exponentially by breeding consistently high quality to high quality?

From what I've been reading recently, it's much more likely that a dog resulting from a genetically superior gene pool has a much higher probability of inheriting the best of its parents' genetic attributes, which then may (or may not) be passed on to his/her offspring. It's not a guarantee, but isn't the idea is to stack the odds in your favor?
And while an excellent dog can be born from mediocre parents, this is more an anomoly than a commonality. And said dog from such a mediocre breeding has statiscally less of a chance to inherit great genes, and then be able to be a high-quality producer him/herself. Have I got that right?

As for stacking the gender deck, if possible I think I would if I were focusing on a particular sex for my breeding program. Although Jay makes a very interesting argument for leaving the Y chromosome in the equation. Do you think leaving out one gender consistently enough in a particular line might genetically weaken the line over time?

would bring high quality puppies, but we have seen over and over and over its not always the case.

Im not saying pet quality bitches should be breed. Since we are all so critical on our dogs and can find faults we have to breed to better the breed. No one has the perfect dog, if they did what would be the point of breeding to get teh perfect dog when someone else has already achieved it. ON the stud since many will campaign a stud for several reasons, to be in the ring, the sport, the notariety, the stauts.... and the all might stud fee. IMO if your specialing a male it should be a very high quality dog not and not just because he has a CH infront of his name.

Vicky,
Bosco, Bella, Breve' & Holly

www.LangagerBulldogs.com

PHOTOS ARE PROPERTY OF LANGAGER BULLDOGS, YOU MUST HAVE WRITTEN PERMISSION FOR ANY USE OF THESE PHOTOS FROM LANGAGERBULLDOG.

Hi E,

From the standpoint of trying and hoping to get all the "good" genes that are responsible for all the desirable traits in the pedigree to come together in the "right" combination in one or two offspring, I would think that one would lessen the chances of that "click" in the breeding if one were to eliminate Y-chromosome sperm from the equation.

It's also my feeling that it's been a long-standing cop-out to be forgiving of a not so quality bitch for breeding. Why is it that a a male has to be near perfect while clearly pet bitches are bred? Some of those pet qualities surely came about from the genetics of the animal, no? And yes, there are obviously exceptions to the rule on both sides of the argument, but logically, and statistically, one would do better by breeding high quality to high quality.

Great topic!

Jay

If I were looking to purchase a puppy from a specific litter, I would hope the litter was primarily the sex I was looking for. So, if I were looking to purchase a female, a litter of say 6 girls would be fine with me because there would be more girls to choose from.

breeders view point. The same thoughts seems to be prevalent. Need a super duper individual male to keep for breeding, and if you want females, you can improve with the female easier then the male. Old timers say that 60-65% of your "results" in the ensuing get come from the female side. So that follows according to what I see mentioned here.

And always .....Winston

I just recently had my first litter. The stud's owners came and got their puppies and we were just talking about us having an all girl litter, no reason in particular. One of them mentioned what Dan brought up in the previous post with cattle (as these people are also in other livestock).

Anyways, it appears that this breeding will be repeated, but I have 3 bitches now with me keeping one of the pups and also co-own a 4th and would like to increase my odds of having some males to choose from in the next litter. We have a male, but he is now mature at 2.5 yrs old and really too big now (72 lbs) to show/breed. He is pointed, but we have decided not to show/breed him anymore and my husband would love to have a more standard dog to show.

I also just like to learn, I am curious by nature and find this fascinating. That's where my head was, LOL!

~Heather

if i want a bitch to continue breeding and showing, then i shoot for bitches. If i want a male in hopes that he is a great example of the breed to keep and show then i shoot for that. For the most part i just want healthy puppies and momma.

IMO if your keeping a boy, it has to be very very good, an ok dog is a great pet, but not for a breeding program. Goes the same with bitches, but you can better your breedings with a bitch, and IMO its not the same with a stud.



Vicky,
Bosco, Bella, Breve' & Holly

www.LangagerBulldogs.com

PHOTOS ARE PROPERTY OF LANGAGER BULLDOGS, YOU MUST HAVE WRITTEN PERMISSION FOR ANY USE OF THESE PHOTOS FROM LANGAGERBULLDOG.

and there was any truth to that philosophy, it would depend on if I was trying to keep a puppy of my own back from the breeding. As well as what I was looking for. If I wanted a female to keep back, I'd want the whole litter to be females and pick my favorite one ;P vice versa if I was wanting a male. Otherwise, it wouldn't matter to me really, I'd like a mix etc. But if it went all one way or the other it happens.