Re: [PyrNet-L] Westminster

["Doug Hustins" <profitmanage@mgenerations.net>]

If linebreeding makes it EASY to consistantly produce generations of
beautiful dogs, I must be uniquely stupid because I find it is a great deal
of work (albeit an enjoyable workload)  that involves a huge amount of
reseach before each breeding.

The problem is that linebreeding is a tool that needs to be used like any
other to improve a bloodline.  You can't just throw any two dogs together
and just because they are related expect to get quality.  Unfortunately this
is the case with some linebreeders.

I also strongly disagree that linebreeding increases the incidence of
defects.  Actually, you can dramatically reduce flaws by doing your homework
prior to breeding.  If you know that historically there is a problem when
linebreeding on a certain dog you make sure that your breedings avoid doing
so.  By careful and select linebreeding you can avoid most surprises.  By
constant outcrossing you are throwing in more and more wildcards each
breeding.  When a problem occurs you have no way of tracing it and thus
avoiding a repetition of it.

Any breeding has the possibility of producing good dogs.  It is reproducing
that success that is made more difficult by outcrossing.  For every top
winning dog you can name that is from an outcrossed breeding I assure you I
can name one from a linebreeding.  It is no coincidence that the majority of
the top breeders use linebreeding.  The key point is that they are also
combining a great deal of skill in picking puppies, evaluating breeding
stock and knowledge of the breedings that have gone before them along with
the linebreeding.

I do agree with the poster that linebreeding is not the only way to go.  For
myself, I just think it is the most effective.

If I am repeating anything that has been recently discussed on the list, I
appologize.  I have been too busy with business of late to really read the
posts in much depth and only happen to catch this one when I came up for
air.

Take Care Everyone,
Doug Hustins
Acroyar Great Pyrenees






----- Original Message -----
From: <Kshoffman@aol.com>
To: <pyrnet-l@pyrnet.org>
Sent: February 16, 2000 10:17 AM
Subject: Re: [PyrNet-L] Westminster


> In a message dated 02/16/2000 7:53:55 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> JGentzel@aol.com writes:
>
> << I am sure most of you know by now that the English Springer Spaniel,
> Salelyn'
>  Erin's Shameless went Best In Show at Westminster last night.  I could
not
>  help but think seeing this flawless dog about a recent discussion on the
> list
>  of linebreeding, how this dog is the ultimate product of linebreeding.
> Julia
>  Gasow wrote one of the definitive books on the subject.  This lady, Julia
>  Gasow,  who passed away recently practiced what she preached.  Last
night's
>  winner was preceded by her father just a couple years ago as Best In Show
at
>  Westminster.   >>
>
> Joe, I've never denied that linebreeding is the easy way to consistently
> produce generations of beautiful dogs, but what about the things we can't
> see?  How is the bitch's health?  How is the health of all her collaterals
> and her ancestors?  Does anyone really know?  CAN anyone really know? Can
you
> gauge that from watching a dog on TV at Westminster or from any other dog
> show results for that matter?  I think not.
>
> I happen to be acquainted with the owners/backers of Samantha's sire
Robert
> (the great CH. Salilyn's Condor) who went BIS at Westminster in 1993 I
> believe.  I've always gotten the impression from them that the Salilyn
line,
> just like most other intense linebred programs, have had their share of
the
> bad as well as the good ... and that involves non-visible traits as well
as
> visible traits.  They have the dreaded skeletons in their closet just as
most
> other breeding programs do so make no mistake about that. The bitch,
> Samantha, is quite beautiful and striking, just like her father and their
> many linebred ancestors before them, but trust me, not every
representative
> of the bloodline is living in Camelot. None of them are genetically
perfect.
>
> I still stand by my assertion that linebreeding increases defect rates,
and
> that linebreeding is not the ONLY way to consistently breed pretty dogs
that
> win and that can produce pretty dogs that can win. The Belgian Tervuren
who
> made the cut in the herding group is out of a total outcross breeding
between
> a Canadian born sire (out of two Belgian imports) bred to a bitch from
> generations established American lines.  10-generation inbreeding
coefficient
> on this dog and his litter is 3.6%.  It was a litter of 6 boys, 5 of the 6
> have finished their championships and they don't turn 3 yrs old until
April.
> The male that was represented in the group last night has several Regional
> Specialty wins, a National Specialty select, several puppy sweepstakes
wins,
> and an all-breed BIS under his belt won at 20 mos of age. (Not many
Belgians
> in history have taken all-breed BIS.)  One of his brothers is also a group
> winner.
>
> His sire is a gray (NOT a favored color) and was Canadian National
Specialty
> winner under a European judge in 1998.  His sire also placed 6th and was
> rated excellent in the very large open male class (80+ dogs or so as I
> recall) then went on to be awarded the coveted "s.r." designation both at
the
> prestigious French National Specialty in 1998. The dam of the Westminster
> Belgian Tervuren dog also has many specialty wins and a National Specialty
> select to her credit.  The pedigree is strong in health, beauty, and
> temperament from all over the globe, but it is not linebred unless you
take
> it back to 20 generations or more, and this pedigree produced.
>
> Will the dog and his brothers also be able to produce pretty dogs being
out
> of such an extreme outcross breeding?  Who knows, it remains to be seen.
> This dog has three litters on the ground right now, all younger than 4 mos
of
> age.  I can tell you that his sire certainly seems to be prepotent no
matter
> what he is bred to so we shall see.
>
> There's more than one way to produce pretty show dogs who have it all, and
> hopefully good health is at the top of that list.  Linebreeding simply is
not
> the only way to accomplish those things.
>
> By the way, in case anyone is wondering "s.r." in French stands for sujet
> recommande, and translates to subject recommended for breeding.  Only a
few
> to a couple of dozen (across all Belgian varieties) are awarded each year
by
> a panel of 3 judges as part of the French National Specialty.  To be
eligible
> for consideration a dog must be 18 mos of age or older, have a passing hip
> xray on file, pass the second level of the French character/mentality test
> (test de comportement) conducted at the specialty, and be rated excellent
in
> their class. It is quite an honor for a non-European owned/bred dog to
> receive this coveted award.  Ghosty (sire of this year's Westminster
winner
> in Belgian Tervurens) was either the first or second North American bred
dog
> to do so I believe and this is quite an accomplishment, especially
> considering he is a gray. (The FCI standard does states that grays can't
be
> rated excellent nor are they eligible to compete for the CAC/CACIB, but
the
> French have always had their own ideas about the grays and they basically
> ignore these little pieces of the standard <g>).  At this past year's
French
> specialty in Aug. 1999, another 4 or 5 North American owned and/or bred
dogs
> were awarded the s.r. designation.
>
> Kelley Hoffman
> kshoffman@aol.com
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to esquire@pyrnet.org with
> unsubscribe pyrnet-l
> as the BODY of the message.  The SUBJECT is ignored.
>