I am curious as to thoughts as to how far back in a pedigree you would look when considering a new pup and what impact it has on your choice. I have my own thoughts but am curious as to what others think.
Marty

Here's a paradox for ya!

I have a pedigree program that is chock-full of pedigree information, and I can trace any pedigree back 30 or more generations.

When I look to buy a pup or use a stud dog, I look at parents and grandparents. That's it. I lok at the parents for positive traits. If it isn't in the parents, it won't be in the pups. I look at the grandparents for negative traits; those pesky recessive genes that won't show up in the parents, but could crop back up again when they skip a generation!

Lisa

Knowing what the negative (and positive) traits are in the first place, that is the hard part right?

Lisa
Growing up with Race Horses and having a Grandfather that could recite pedigree's of his broodmare's that went back to the time when buggies were the means of transportation (pertaining only to the Mare's side of the pedigree) kinda has slanted my view. The first two generations will let you know if the pups should have "IT" and I agree that the balance of the pedigree will allow you to monitor the recessive problems.

I was taught and with plenty of emphasis both mental and some times physical (big smilie here) the following,
I switch to our terms here.

The "Bitch" line makes the dog. They get their desire, personality and brains from the bitch and their physicality, heart and bottom from the Dog.

Over the years having gotten to see breedings of clients bitches to different dogs the former "Breeding Rules" that were laid down by my Grandfather's Generation has rang true more often than not.

I am always look to the bitch line first going back as far as I can to see what if any thing has been produced by previous bitches both for a competitive dog and health issues. Today the public, sees only the top side of a pedigree and will buy a pup more often than not off of the results of the dog and not look at the bitch line at all.

Curious as to your thoughts.

Marty

Marty
Lisa's philosophy makes sense as well as yours. I can give personal insight to what breed-lines are considered for using dogs as Service Dogs, which may be also useful for all dogs (inc HT/FT dogs). When considering a dog for service use, usually a female, the prospective candidate's lineage is reviewed using the following criteria: The male (stud) pedigree
is reviewed for 2 generations (parents & grandparents). The female (bitch) pedigree is reviewed for 4-5 generations, if obtainable. There are also alot of "checks & balances" used in conjunction to lineage, eg personality, health clearances,
behavioral traits (in dog & ancestors), etc. I was taught that the female line is of utmost importance because of genetic traits - esp health issues (most diseases/disorders seem to stem from the bitches lineage). I personally experienced that most dogs that "do not make the grade" to be useful in service dog capacity had lineage on the female parents side that was not consistent; by this I mean that the personality & mannerisms of all the females varried greatly. This does not seem to matter in the males side. Curious to your observations with this as related to your training experience.

Marty;

I am partial to bitches, and always take a hard look at the bitch line. It is also why I work my bitches hard and keep track of plusses and minuses. I have never subscribed to the "brood bitch" mentality of doing squat with one's bitches, just relying on their pedigree and breeding them to a "name" stud dog. The bitch is responsible for half the pups' genes; one had better know how she handles pressure, what she is like in the water, and so forth.

So while pedigree is important, the real flesh-and-blood animals are the most important.

Lisa

....nothing like those strong bitch lines, especially on BOTH sides of the pedigree with PROVEN producers.

Marty, once again you are on a "good" roll.

Keith

Couldn't agree with you more Lisa, if you only know how quick fast and deep my Grandfather culled his brood mare's it would make your head spin. I can think of several times he bought really well bred fillies from top racing/producing blood lines and when the filly or fillies didn't pan out he did not sell her he, for lack of another term put her out to pasture permanetly(sp). I heard him say many time's that he had no use for an animal that did not live up to it's potential and that he would not accept or utilize anything that did not measure up. This time frame was in the early 60's and I was about 6 or 7 years old but until the day he passed away he never kept a filly that did not do well on the track. He was big into bird dogs and used the same philosophy in culling his pups that he sent off to train, if they did not hit his mark then they never came home.

This attitude was fairly common in the past and am curious why breeders today don't cull. But then maybe some do selling pups to folks as "pet quality". Maybe this needs to go on another thread but if you are breeding to improve a breed why would you pass on something that you think is inferior and does not measure up to your standard or the reason you bred in the first place. One thing I want to make clear I am not picking on breeders I would really like to know your reasons for putting pups into the market that do not meet your standard. The experience with litters that my clients have had over the years is that at least two or sometimes three pups don't show traits that would make me spend my money to buy. They made someone a nice dog and there is nothing wrong with that, but if you promote yourself as an individual that is trying to improve the breed why sell an inferior product.

Marty

Dr. Charles
I currently have two pups 13 months old and if you saw them you would not believe that they were litter mates, to more different looking pups from the same litter I do not ever remember seeing. This is the third litter from this bitch that I have had pups out of to train. To date this bitch has produced from 16 or 17 pups total, including the current litter of six, 7 Master Hunters and 3 Senior Hunters bred to a different dog each time. I have trained
5 pups three from the first that are already Master Hunters and 1 from the second that is a Senior Hunter that needs only 1 pass for her Master title, I have 2 in training now that will start their career this fall from the third litter. Until this past litter all the bitches were the spitting image of their mother with her temperment and attitude. These two girls I have in training now have their mothers temperment and attitude but look nothing like her.

I know this is kinda long winded but, using the above as an example over the years most female pups seem to fall closer to the look and attitude of their mother than their father and males seem to take on several personality traits of the bitch as well. The exception in most cases is the Alpha female and the Alpha male, I see there temperment leaning more towards their Sire than the Bitch. Has anyone else noticed a similarity when comparing looks and personality traits from their breeding.?

Marty

Kieth
What the HE@@ else do I have to do when the DA$$ temp is 97 and heat index is 102. I get up at 5 and get done by noon, so my childlike brain has to have something to do. If I had not scheduled my box to be worked on in the next week whenever they get th "Big Project" they are currently working on ahead of me I would be sitting on your front porch drinking your beverages talking about how my pup is better than your pupa and enjoying you agreeing with me, Oh yea and enjoying a cool mountain breeze.

But I can take a couple of weeks of heat cause when snow is to up to your knees I will still be wearing my shorts,flip flops and golf shirts doing water work.hahahahahaha

Marty

Marty,

One cannot go back and undo what our forebearers did, and I commend your grandfather for his integrity in culling animals, but I believe there can be a home for every animal, i.e. what doesn't work for one is outstanding for another. Being a horse crazy teenager growing up in the 60's I would have given my eye teeth for your of your grandfather's 'gone forever' horses, as would some of my friends. But that's another story.

quote:

One thing I want to make clear I am not picking on breeders I would really like to know your reasons for putting pups into the market that do not meet your standard. The experience with litters that my clients have had over the years is that at least two or sometimes three pups don't show traits that would make me spend my money to buy. They made someone a nice dog and there is nothing wrong with that, but if you promote yourself as an individual that is trying to improve the breed why sell an inferior product

Sadly, there will never be the perfect litters despite what we, as breeders, want to believe, but as I said above, I also think that there is a home for every animal.....you just have to get them into the right ones. And, yes litters should be culled, but those not suitable for breeding make perfectly wonderful pets and gun dogs for the most part depending on the lines they are from.

Unless I know the person well who might wish to breed one of my dogs, I don't really want them bred by people whose motives are not know to me. Consequently, 99% of all my pups go on AKC Limited Registrations, and I have yet to lift one. Doesn't even mean the dog isn't a quality to breed....my lines have had their problems with PRA over the years and I just don't want people mucking things up because they don't know the lines or may be wanting to breed for the wrong reasons.

I've talked to breeders over the years and asked if they use the Limited Registration offered by AKC and you'd think I was talking Greek to someone, yet I see lots of the offspring from these breeders listed in the AKC Stud book pages as being bred and when I go to look up certifications on the OFA website, there are none!

In this day and age with all the anti-breeding legislation being passed or attempting to be passed, and the present economy, I think that breeders have to put much more though into where there pups are going and what those buyers will do with them when it comes time to hand out the registration papers. And, if there are problems in the lines, they have to be realistic about them rather than to bury their heads in the sand and let the problems just continue on down through the generations.

Just my two cents worth!!

Kathy Miller
Sandy Oak Chesapeakes

Kathy
I think you using limited registration is an excellent tool and you and others that use it are doing the right thing in trying to limit breeding dog's that don't measure up to your standards.

But is placing a sub-standard pup in a pet home doing our breed any favors? With the reputation that our breed has for agression, territorialism, stubborness etc. might this be a part of the reputation that Chesapeakes have?

I currently have two young Chesapeake Bitches and if they perform then I will breed them if not then they will never be bred. I have standards that they must meet and the minimum is a Master Hunter Title, as far as Show Titles I know nothing about this game, but would probable send them to someone if that person thought a bench title achievable. If they do not perform then they will be spayed and moved on to someone that needs a good hunting dog. The older of the two is doing Derby level marks and is working on becoming a good blind running dog so her future is assured either on the line or in a Duck Blind. The younger at this stage is really a nice pup and shows plenty of potential.

Limited registration MIGHT be an answer but with the advent of all the current health issues in all retrieving breeds and the reputation Chesapeakes have maybe we need to start thinking a little more "Old School".


Marty

Marty, You wrote: "But is placing a sub-standard pup in a pet home doing our breed any favors? With the reputation that our breed has for agression, territorialism, stubborness etc. might this be a part of the reputation that Chesapeakes have?" You also said "I currently have two young Chesapeake Bitches and if they perform then I will breed them if not then they will never be bred. I have standards that they must meet and the minimum is a Master Hunter Title,".
This is the big quandry for breeders. If you breed only the top achievers (or potential to be so), and neglect breeding the
"non-performers", you run the risk (esp after many generations) of depleting and severely limiting the gene pool. This has the potential to be extremely detremental to our CBR's. Espesially since diseases/ailments are arising in our peakes that are now fully understood as to their specific cause, eg DM, EIC, PRA, etc. Using your two "bitches" as an example, if they
do not perform, you said they will never be bred. What if they carry a gene that negates an ailment or does some good for the breed that we do not know about. And this trait is limited in a few lines. By selective breeding using "performance" as the standard, these traits/genes would be eventually eliminated. Most breeders (as seen on this forum) are responsible and concerned enough to breed what they feel will produce the best, well-rounded litters; litters that can be used in a variety of functions. If breeding for "performance only", the chessie may lose their capability for other uses other than
FT/HT, hunting, etc. Specifically, the personality may eventually be bred-out to form a single "mind-set" that is mostly
prevelent in CBR's used for competition. Addressng your first quote, a "sub-standard pup", esp in a pet home,(using that term to denote "non-performers") is what is needed to assure a well balanced gene pool and suscess of chessies as a breed.
The reputation of CBR's are a misnomer that is perceived by the uninformed and uneducated about the chesapeake breed. Granted, chessies can be aggressive, territorial, stubborn, etc, but so can any breed!! Chessies need a different approach to their upbringing/handeling that, for example a lab, other breeds don't. This difference (personality & mind-set) is what makes our chessies so endearing. It does not make them inferior or undesirable, only unique. The problem with the labeling them as aggressive, territorial, & stubborn is not so much as they are, but with the owners/person's inexperience in working, handling, and training them correctly. Especially if the owner/person has no conception of the breed. Ideally,
no one should own a chessie if they have no clue to what the breed is, or what is needed to own one. The "reputation" of negativity is not from sub-standard breeding, but rather from individuals who become frustrated because they do not know how to handle/raise a chessie. Chessies need direction and confuse easily - possibly due to their overwhelming desire to please. The trick is to let the chessie KNOW EXACTLY what is expected, desired, etc. Charlie

Kathy, two paws up for using limited registration. I wish all breeders were as concientious as you to the welfare of peakes

Charles, I think you hit the nail on the head with your response!! I actually had posted a reply and when I hit the "Post now" it stalled, than came back with an error message and my response was lost! I figured it was a message not to post it after all, so I didn't! I like yours better .

Kathy Miller

Charles, performance is just not in the field but in every venue. IN any venue for a dog to be competitive it must perform in some way. Move around a ring exhibiting traits the judges are looking for, do the work as a service dog you require and the work in the field necessary to fit the needs of a hunter or the extreme end of performance field trials and hunt tests.

In each litter there are individuals that do not meet that particular form or function that it was being bred for. Each "Breeder" has a standard that they should be breeding for before it ever takes place or they should not be breeding. The pups that exhibit traits that are not desirable should not be placed in the Gene Pool. Placing pups that do not help improve a breed be it Chesapeake, Lab or Golden does every potentisl owner a disservice.

Your premiss can be used a couple of ways, maybe one of my Bitches might produce a National Field Champion, or in the other direction a gene that if allowed to spread might cripple the breed as well. I nor anyone else would never know. But using the premise that I have been taught, IF I ever raise a litter of pups it will be from a bitch that meets "My Standard" and the Standard our Breed. The folks that helped create our breed, bred for a standard and if their pups did not measure up they were culled.

If a gene pool should get to "Tight" in any venue, then buyers will be forced to go to another "Line" to infuse new genes into that venue. It is happening now has always happened when the gene pool gets to tight in any breed.


I really enjoy this type of discussion, makes the grey cells work overtime. I spend most of my day with dogs and do not get the opportunity to discuss topics that I am interested in.

I am going to a Wildlife Extravaganza this weekend so will be out of pocket until Monday. Looking forward to more discussion on this.

Marty

Marty,

Charles points were good though. I agree that no individual should be bred unless he has the best qualities for the breed, but by whose standard. There is a breed standard and there is an individual preference. If you are into field trials, then the individuals priorties are directed to dogs who have the moxy to cut it in trials, but do these breeders always take into consideration and/or temperament, or are they just breeding to get the best qualities of a field trial dog? Or someone else who feels their dog exhibits the best all around traits, but may not produce dogs that trial individuals feel are hot enough to trial.

Then are you saying that only the best of these pups should be sold and the remainder disposed of?

I agree that poor or inferior quality speciments should not be bred, but it doesn't make them any less good pets, or obedience dogs, or gun dogs, and if the breeder utilizes the Limited Registrations and/or spay/neuter contracts, then there is little chance these dogs will be bred.

But as I've pointed out many, many times, and I think that Lisa will support this: 80 to 85% of the chesapeakes registered every month in the AKC stud book pages come from unknown breeding, and 99% of these dogs have no health certifications, so it would seem they are being bred by backyard breeders or puppy mills who don't know there's more to just breeding 2 dogs and selling the resultant offspring, or they don't care. How do you educate these people in the finer arts of breeding dogs?

Kathy Miller

quote:

If you are into field trials, then the individuals priorties are directed to dogs who have the moxy to cut it in trials, but do these breeders always take into consideration and/or temperament

Sorry for the typos! This sentence should have read: If you are into field trials, then the individuals priorties are directed to dogs who have the moxy to cut it in trials, but do these breeders always take into consideration CONFORMATION and/or temperament...

Kathy

While this is a great discussion on breeding I personally feel there is a major ingredient lacking, evaluation. Evaluation of the litter is likely the biggest ingredient in successful breeding and it is lacking in a majority of circumstances. It is a rare person who has been around the breed long enough to recognize quality. As Kathy mentioned even these established breeders will have natural tendencies towards their own areas of importance or preference.

It takes a qualified judge to evaluate not only a dog’s natural ability but their conformation. A good dog person can see good ability, or bad ability, through the veil of training. A great dog can be made average and an average dog can be trained to look great. Seeing the difference is another key ingredient to breeding.

Evaluating a litter takes a minimum of two years. How much can a breeder know about their litter after two years? Aside from a puppy they may keep, or one or two that may go to someone with an opinion they respect, most of the litter goes to homes and is heard of little afterwards. How often is every puppy in the litter checked for health clearances, tested in some hunting venue, or evaluated for conformation?

The only way to truly improve the breed would be to set a standard for breeding. All dogs bred would be given a limited registration and not allowed to breed until they passed the set criteria, which would have to include a conformation score. It would require large scale participation which would be pretty hard to come by. Most people in dog games care more about the “now” rather than the “tomorrow”.

Just some rambling thoughts.

Adam,

in Europe there are some registries which require dogs to meet minimal requirements - conformation and field - before beeing given the documentation that they can be bred...these tests are completed when/before (not after) the dog is 2 yrs of age.....

Some of these tests are pretty intensive....

The only way that would ever happen here is by breeders freely volunteering to do so....

Wouldn't it be wonderful to be able to keep a litter until it turned a yr old (or even 2)...That is why you find some breeders (more show than field) co-owning the pups they breed...So that they can come back to those dogs they feel are worthy of breeding w/out having to actually keep the dog in their own kennel....

Juli

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Juli,

quote:

Originally posted by Juli:
Adam,

in Europe there are some registries which require dogs to meet minimal requirements - conformation and field - before beeing given the documentation that they can be bred...these tests are completed when/before (not after) the dog is 2 yrs of age.....

Some of these tests are pretty intensive....

The only way that would ever happen here is by breeders freely volunteering to do so...

The grass is always greener...

Those registries put paper before actual flesh-and-blood dogs, with the consequence that producing real top-quality animals becomes a challenge. As long as the dog meets the minimum of all the tests, it is considered breedable. That means a dog with a show Ch that stumbles to a WD-level field test is considered "breeding material", while a FC with a bad bite is not. Which would you rather have in your kennel? I know which one I'd want!

Balance this against a real understanding of how genetics works, and that EVERY animal and person has negative genes to go along with the positive ones. Some of those top-notch dogs in our gene pool carry negative genes, no question. But the good genes are worth conserving, especially when one understands that there is as much art to breeding as there is science.

The European model may ultimately have to be abandoned as more and more actual gene-based tests are developed. Eventually, someone will wake up to the fact that there is no dog out there who will pass 100% of all the tests. Then what, do we eliminate the entire canine species from the Earth, write it all off as a bad deal? Of course not!

Lisa