Hey Kevin <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I think the example of numbers is being taken out of context....I was attempting to show that most people would look at the numbers and not the ratio to reason as to which breeder is more successful...IMO, one has to look at the RATIO. ie., most would only see the numbers 70 vs. 300 and conclude the breeder with the 300 was more successful. I would disagree. The 70 represents 70% whereas the 300 represents 30%. And this was in an attempt to explain that Deux Pottois produced probably thousands of dogs and therefore it stands to reason that there would be a good number of excellent dogs stemming from that kennel...but when one looks at the sheer numbers of pups that were produced from that kennel...it's not a surprise that one sees so many (good) deux pottois dogs in Mal pedigrees....

I completely understand what you're saying...and perhaps numbers are also 'breed specific'....don't know...just thinking out loud. Let me explain my own position on this...In the last 3 years, I've produced almost 50 pups. Out of those 50...45 are working in the programs they were selected for. 2 are not and 3 have relocated and we've lost touch. Now you know that I don't breed GSD's and that's why I'm saying that perhaps the numbers are breed specific. So I'm stating those numbers from my own position and not generalizing that this is possible with all working breeds.

And I guess, I have to define what I mean by 'working'...Police, Sport, Detection, SAR...

I think besides sociability traits...variables that influence a great deal as to whether that pup is going to make it; are imprinting, assessment, selection, and placement processes.

I TRY to select my placement 'homes' very carefully and credit has to be given to them for allowing a pup to reach its genetic potential. If I 'sold' to just anyone...then I'm sure my 'success numbers' would be much lower (regardless of how capable the puppies were)...But from my own experience (with the breed of my choice) 70% is very attainable and realistic.

Now taking into account that I love the job you do, and the hard work that you put into your pups, (read NOT a slam here please) How many of those pups were from the excellent repeat breeding that you do with Jason? (Yes all you mali people should try to get one of these pups) If you are talking production you cannot include the repeat breeding it is cheating. The numbers must come from different breedings over a period of time. Again this has nothing to do with the excellent job you do, it is just a number game. The repeat breeding would count as one breeding.

Jeff, I'm not taking this as a 'slam'...I think you have very valid questions!

50 pups were from 2 females (not related to each other at all)--one was FR/IPO lines and one was BR lines...One was from Belgium and one was from France...

Jason was also bred to outside females...One gave feedback that the pups were too strong and dominant for the average 'joe blow'. But they had drive and commitment out of the ying yang...The other was so impressed with the first litter that they bred to him a second time....Pups in PSD, Sport, and Detection...Pups that won and placed second in the Mid East US Sch Champ a couple months ago and one that won the Sch USA Obedience Ch. a couple weeks ago with 97.


http://www.bellepratique.com/mpegs/ukonregional05c.wmv

Another son of Jason:

http://www.bellepratique.com/mpegs/ulricregionalc.wmv

So far...Jason has proven to be able to cross over and produce to a number of females.

The rest of the pups are too young to be titled...and I'm sure of will be heard of after Jason is gone...He is 11 now and has been taken off the 'market'. At this point, he has an 'obligation' to fulfill for a couple other breeders and for one of my females.

As they say...no two litters are alike...so you should count each litter (repeat or not) as separate. There are so many variables that determine how the genetics will line up...why would a repeat breeding count as 'one'??? He has bred a number of females (none related to each other)...and judging from the feedback and/or the results...it just doesn't matter what he's bred to...he's produced and outproduced on a number of occasions...

Brigita, what does "working in the programs they were selected for" mean?

Does that mean TITLED in dogsport or CERTIFIED for K9/SAR work?

In what aspect are the litters different? I am curious about this in general. I haven't done a repeat breeding, and those that I have seen they were not much different.

I also am curious about how the genes lined up differently in the different litters. Do you see marked traits from dogs further back in the pedigree? I couldn't possibly type all the questions I have on this. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Another question, why not breed him after 11????

This is a great thread <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> In the last ten years I have seen the beagle breed go down the tubes alot and there are alot of reasons. Now probably, all of you think most beagles are the same, but there is an extremly large variation in gene pools , even among " families ". I think Bridget has sucess for 2 reasons , first the gene pool she draws on has alot of quality working dogs in all the families. Second Jason is probably prepotent, so he dominates and passes on his traits when bred to other Mal females. In coondogs often a breeder will breed a dog to a cur or other breed to simply see if this dogs genes pass on. Face facts folks here in america we are too " soft " to cull properly. Heck we cant even get the stray animal population under control. I commend those who limit their breedings , cull and and practice strict line and inbreeding when necessary.

Good luck

on the "%" working criterion to evaluate the success of a program to produce working dogs:

No doubt this is a "near focus" criterion very necessary to apply, whatever one means by "working."

However it may not help assess the "tractectory" of the breed (mal or gsd) over time.

To take an example from sled dogs:
Joe Runyan (1989 Iditarod champion) says that to get a competitive team of 16 for the Iditarod a musher will breed on average 250 dogs.

a few may be culled. many will go to lesser kennels. some will go to different kennels: ie large males go to a limited class team or to a skijor situation.

dog sledders are always experimenting. over the years, eskimo dogs, greenland dogs, seppala siberians, border collies, ibizan hounds, grey hounds, german pointers, english pointers, irish setters etc.

So essentially these are dogs selected at every generation with high baseline diversity among founders.

They are much faster than they used to be, even if it is for sure that some of the experimental litters were duds, and some of the generations (F1, F2, F3) are likely to have been duds, and many, many puppies are not "pinnacle" performers.

also there is the ongoing battle to keep tough feet from huskies on fast dogs (now speed comes from pointers).

Coppinger argues that high base line diversity allows for improvement.

I guess a question is in the context of the mal. and gsd or "working dogs" what is the balance between improvement, preservation, and population health.

what is "improvement" of working dogs?

Is there a site that describes the methods of du pottois (sp)?

rgds andrew may

I am certainly not an expert in this subject, but I have to agree with Brigita.

 Quote:

As they say...no two litters are alike...so you should count each litter (repeat or not) as separate. There are so many variables that determine how the genetics will line up...why would a repeat breeding count as 'one'???

I know this is a little different than dogs, but look at humans. If you have a husband and a wife that has 4 kids, each kid is going to be different. There are numerous possibilities of different genetic make-ups. You can't say each kid is the same because they came from the same parents. Like I said, this is not my area of knowledge, so if I am way off just tell me to shut up! But it makes since to me.

Curtis