Poor approach to breeding in my opinion. I've heard of people who use the lesser dogs for their brood stock and just hunt the best. Bad business plan if you ask me and I can't see that type of program lasting more than a couple generations at best before the whole bunch will need culling.
Starting with and continuing to breed the absolute best while keeping them as closely related as possible is the only way to roll.
I get irritated with those that think "linebred" is some term that simply means better dogs. Even done correctly, linebreeding is nothing more than a tool used to produce CONSISTANT dogs....meaning consistant with the ones you STARTED with. Take some mediocre dogs and linebreed them to beat all heck and you're not going to end up with anything more than a bunch of mediocre dogs that are NOW RELATED. Everyone with a viable linebreeding program can tell you the dog their line strives to reproduce...and with a little luck, occasionally you may get one that's even better. The major IMPROVEMENTS in the line usually come with a VERY careful outcross which is then brought back in tight.
I agree...
I remember a well known dog man that wrote several books on breeding, hunting, and also had a mail order dog supply catalog...he used to sell beagle pups and his advertisement used to say take any pup or pups and just leave me one...
It took me a while to figure out why he did this...it could only be 1 of 2 reasons or both...he was saying that his dogs are so much alike that it doesn't matter which one he keeps for breeding or for hunting....or that he is that good of a trainer...
to me, it should be a long process as to which pup is kept for hunting and breeding...and then at 1.5 years old I just might decide that he is not worthy of breeding...I spend most of my time on observing and evaluating the pro's and cons before I make a decision...and I believe that anyone who wants to breed better dogs should give it a lot of thought...
