|
Post by rebeccaferrell on Sept 1, 2009 18:49:46 GMT -6
Well said Rachael..I made a comment a year or so ago on a forum about hog hunters that shot over their dogs..there's actual footage on youtube of a guy blasting away while dogs were all over the place. He was a real crappy shot cause the hog wasn't flinching and he was way the heck back away from it. It went on and on too. My statement was isn't hog hunting with a gun a "chicken sh*t" kinda way to hunt a hog. But I got a lot of great answers back from people about why this was their preferred method and why it was safer for all involved. I know Tom Graham had a wonderful response but for the life of me I can't remember the details enough to quote and there were others that spoke up as well. I do remember no one wanting anyone else to shoot over their dogs but themselves unless they absolutely knew them and trusted their abilities. And since I'm not a hog hunter you may wonder about this logic--how can you trust a gritty dog to not try and catch; if they'll catch a 70# pig what keeps them off of a 150# especially when he's with a big pack? I can see a dog being more careful if by himself or another couple of dogs. Put a pack on anything and they'll tear it up or attempt to. This is certainly not a business or sport for wimps. Just give me a tree stand or the hood of a truck. Thanks for posting Rachael.
|
|
|
Post by Clifford on Sept 1, 2009 18:50:12 GMT -6
In my one conversation with Jimmy Brooks he told me he shoots hogs, and his dogs are are trained to back off when he does it. It seemed to be a point of pride with him that they were trained that way. He is not the only hog hunter I know, and where everyone got the idea that I have never hog hunted from I do not know. When I first started talking to people in Texas, I told them I had never been on a hog hunt in territory like that, or been on a hunt where someone stuck a hog. That may have been misunderstood.
|
|
|
Post by rachaelc on Sept 1, 2009 19:09:54 GMT -6
Rebecca, Even if the guy was hitting it, it probably wouldn't flinch anyways. I have shot them with the end of a deer rifle at point-blank right on their forehead and they didn't fall over for at least a full minute, in a hog trap with no dogs around, of course. And, to answer your question, all dogs are capable of reason. My bay dogs will not attempt to kill anything taller than they are because they know that they will not be able to kill it on their own. They know that they need a catch dog and they will stand there and bay until one gets there to help. That is not to say that they will not nip the hog to keep it from running. That's what makes a good hog dog. A good pack of dogs with instinct and training will never be dumb enough to try to catch a huge boar without a catch dog. But, then again, you cannot trust what your dog will do until you have seen them in the pen. That is why it is so important to train your dogs before throwing them in the woods and expecting them to get the job done.
Clifford, I never said that I thought that you had never hog hunted before, I just know that there are others here who have not. It doesn't matter to me that a well-respected Lacy breeder and owner is willing to do that. Some people are willing to take the chances involving a hunting with a gun. But, I know that even the most well-trained dog can slip up every once in a while. I guess that would only happen once, though, if you're using a gun.
|
|
|
Post by homerunbetty on Sept 1, 2009 20:05:37 GMT -6
Miss Connally: I am not sure what makes you think I was speaking of you as you were not the only individual we talked with. As far as my comment on the cross-breeding, look around. There are tons of posts about it and tons of pics to show the dogs off. The internet is a wealth of information. I have no idea what television show you are referring to. If it's not on Disney, we don't see it. ;D Clifford: I was told the same hunting methods from Jimmy Brooks as well.
|
|
|
Post by rachaelc on Sept 1, 2009 21:23:00 GMT -6
Well, a majority of the members here are members on TLGDA as well. The show was brought to my attention there. Please take a look at it and you will see what I am talking about. It is called "The Eyes of Texas", I believe. Those are registered "Lacys". The pit-Lacy crosses that you are talking about are dang good dogs, I don't care if they are full-blooded or not. They are neither bred nor registered as a Lacy in any registry anywhere. So, how can that be creating a "different type of dog at the expense of the Lacy"? As far as I see it, no Lacys were harmed. A crossbred, unregistered mutt pup can't do as much damage to the gene pool as a dog who throws whites all the time and is registered and therefore still able to produce registerable pups. Anyways, my point was that the "Lacys" featured in the recent TV show were registered and bred and because none of the genetics for white-faced dogs was eliminated because they didn't present the phenotype, we now have registered, white-faced Lacys that we never would have had if proper culling (doesn't have to mean lethal, by the way) methods had been taken.
-- Rachael Connally
|
|
|
Post by homerunbetty on Sept 1, 2009 21:53:58 GMT -6
“The pit-Lacy crosses that you are talking about are dang good dogs, I don't care if they are full-blooded or not. They are neither bred nor registered as a Lacy in any registry anywhere. So, how can that be creating a ‘different type of dog at the expense of the Lacy’?”
I never said anything about pit-Lacy, plott-Lacy, hound-Lacy or any other Lacy crosses. I stated, “I believe there are several individuals that are trying to develop a different type of dog at the expense of the Blue Lacy. Why else would they be making crosses with the Blue Lacy?” “As far as I see it, no Lacys were harmed.”
In my opinion, both breeds were harmed with the crossbreeding. A breeding should be something that is well thought out and planned. Not just a mishap. While I understand accidents happen, they do not happen more than once. The second time was on purpose. An ethical breeder always breeds for structure, soundness of temperament and working ability. When you crossbreed you are damaging the gene pool in both pure bred dogs and you are creating a new breed. A “designer” breed. This is how breeds like the Labradoodle and Goldendoodle have come into play.
“An unregistered mutt pup can't do as much damage to the gene pool as a dog who throws whites all the time and is registered and therefore still able to produce registerable pups.”
If you are referring to white on the face, tail, socks, and in other locations against breed standard, you are exactly correct. Both “mutt pup” and dogs that throw white are wrong. If a dog is throwing unacceptable white, it should not be bred any longer. Nor should the pups be registered as breedable Lacys.
|
|
|
Post by rebeccaferrell on Sept 2, 2009 5:04:03 GMT -6
Betty, I have to disagree about the cross breeding. From what is being reported about the Doodles they are making great dogs, pets. Apparently the best from both sides. This is how new breeds are developed. You'll always here that pound mutts make some of the best dogs. I wouldn't own an AKC registered dog as there has been so much reckless breeding with no controls.
I don't agree with introducing new breeds into an established breed and it still being registered however. I have no opinion on whether this is being done as I have no knowledge of it.
I saw the "Eyes of Texas" and did see the Lacy with all the white. But I don't know if that is recent footage or very old. Marlo would have to speak to this.
|
|
|
Post by rachaelc on Sept 2, 2009 5:54:04 GMT -6
In order to create a new breed, you have to have a structured breeding program and lots of genetics to work with. A couple of Lacy crossbreeds do not makeup a new breed. I don't consider any mix bred dog to anything but a mix bred dog. Some people may want to ticket that as a purebred one, but that is false and unethical. I'm sure the Puggle, Doodle, Chipoopoo, and what ever other ridiculous mixed bred mutt that are being produced out there have been being produced for a long time and neither the Poodle or the anything else side of the gene pool were disrupted.
A gene pool is the genetics of a group of organisms with the potential to produce offspring. With dogs, you would typically be talking about the breeding population of a specific breed. In that sense, why would you include Lacy crosses in this gene pool at all? I say that if it's not pure Lacy, it shouldn't be in the Lacy gene pool and, therefore, will not harm it. How does it do harm to both the Lacys and the Pits if it is not even in the same breeding population?
And there's something I've never understood. A mistake doesn't happen more than once? Well, what if next year my stud climbs into my mutt hound dog's kennel and breeds her? Mistake. What if, five years later, my stud climbs into my mutt hound dog's kennel again and breeds her again. Was that intentional? I'd say not. I don't know if you've ever owned powerful, high-energy, high-drive dog in an outdoor kennel before, I have. I've seen dogs jump clean over a six-foot fence, climb a nine-foot one, eat their kennel's roof off, and dig a four-foot hole all in less than an hour and all just to get to a gyp in heat.
Just out of curiosity, what breed standard are you talking about? I have not seen one from the LGDR.
|
|
|
Post by Clifford on Sept 2, 2009 6:58:05 GMT -6
All of these interesting posts illiustrate something I have been steadily saying for the past six months... If you take everyone who has Blue Lacys, and get them talking to each other, you find that they agree on a good 75%, and then the differences of opinion start.
The real issues apparently never get resolved, because everyone is operating in defense mode! My personal beliefs are that we need a written standard, and that I don't care what you do with your dog, as long as it includes taking good care of it, and not trying to register crossbreeds as Blue Lacys. I have no problem with dual registration, and think that we need more Blue Lacys out there to create a more diverse gene pool. I think that dividing into ever smaller factions is hurting the whole breed, and it is amazing that everyone who can lay claim to a little history thnks they are the one and only expert on a breed with such an obscure background as well.
Maybe if everyone would step back for a minute, take a deep breath, and realize that there are many more folks who know nothing about the dogs than those who do, and those folks are looking at all of this craziness on the Internet, and scratching thir heads, we would actually be able to work toward, and accomplish, the things that I see stated as core beliefs with almost everyone, which is making things better!
|
|
|
Post by homerunbetty on Sept 2, 2009 8:03:12 GMT -6
"The real issues apparently never get resolved, because everyone is operating in defense mode!" Oh so true! I think a lot of this is because there are certain individuals are always sending others over to fight their battles instead of doing it for themselves. "My personal beliefs are that we need a written standard..." Oh so true again! I believe if a lot of issues were resolved from the beginning the splintering may not have happened. "I don't care what you do with your dog, as long as it includes taking good care of it, and not trying to register crossbreeds as Blue Lacys." I agree with you. "I have no problem with dual registration..." I don't have a problem with dual registration either. This is America. It is my dog. I own it. If I want to register my dog with 10 registries, then I will. "...and think that we need more Blue Lacys out there to create a more diverse gene pool." This is very true. We have such a small gene pool. I was so amazed at how few studs I was able to choose from to breed Chari. The trunk on this tree is pretty much straight people! "I think that dividing into ever smaller factions is hurting the whole breed..." As I said above, I believe if a lot of problems were dealt with head on, maybe the fractions would not have happened. If the powers that be would just listen to the people and listen to what they want. Is it too late? "...and it is amazing that everyone who can lay claim to a little history thnks they are the one and only expert on a breed with such an obscure background as well." HA! I won't even touch this one. You would be SURPRISED at the obscure backgrounds by some of these individuals! Rebecca: I care for a GoldenDoodle and she is a WONDERFUL dog. I am not knocking the breed at all. I merely stated when you mix pure bred dogs, this is how "designer" breeds, for lack of batter words, get started. In my opinion, I do not see anything wrong with the AKC. In my opinion, it is not the AKC that has ruined certain breeds, but the breeders and parent breed club that has allowed that to happen. They have a lot to offer the Blue Lacy with agility trials, obedience, tracking, herding, earthdog, hunting tests, field trials, lure coursing, rally and working dog sport. Rachel: If I have a bitch in heat, I am going to do everything in my power to keep her away from everything, which means she will be locked up in my house. I would not leave the opportunity there for a stud to get to her. That is only asking for trouble.
|
|
|
Post by rebeccaferrell on Sept 2, 2009 9:04:22 GMT -6
Clifford, I nearly hyperventilated from taking my deep breaths! I agree with you. This splintering is ridiculous in my opinion and not healthy for the breed.
Donna, All breeds to my knowledge may have started off as "designer" dogs. I have no problem with cross breeding for a better type of dog. I don't agree with mixing in a breed and it being able to be registered as one of the original parents..say a cross between a pit and Lacy being called a Lacy. I don't know that this is being done?? If this is even what you guys are talking about.
My problem with AKC is there are no breeder code of ethics or control..yes they do have a lot more activities to get your dog involved in and this would part would be great. I don't know how you could have control over the breeders and quality of pups if Lacys were AKC registered??
|
|
marloriley
Walkin Talkin Poopin Machine
Do you need training?
Posts: 76
|
Post by marloriley on Sept 2, 2009 12:59:20 GMT -6
“The Eye’s of Texas” show never stated that all the dogs on H.C. Wilkes property were registered. What was stated was that the breed was about to out cross itself right out of existence, until a few interest parties started stepping up to do something about it. In old files from a different registry, there are fourteen black, or black and tan, dogs listed. These dogs go back to Catahoula & Lacy crosses. H.C. Wilkes' did attend the events were these dogs were listed, and did know individuals were crossing them. H.C. Wilkes' DID NOT register all of his dogs. I have the count on how many he submitted papers on. Just because he had pups, it didn't mean he put papers on them. In fact, only select few of his dogs and litters did he actually file paperwork on. This can show that even he had a personal standard of which dogs he put in a breeding program for paperwork. All of the dogs registered under his name are Blue, Red or Tri in color, and the number is lower than one might think. None of his dogs on file link back to the out-crosses on file with the different registry. None of the dogs that have been produced out of registered H.C. Wilkes' lines have been any other color than the three colors we see in the breed today. The three dogs H.C. Wilkes' had left when I first met him, were great examples of the breed, and I have personally viewed all of their offspring. The registered dogs that go back to H.C. Wilkes' files have proved to be great working dogs, and are highly valued by many old timers interested in the breed. Think about this! If Blue Lacys are getting larger, why were the TLGDA and the LGDR able to drop the standards set by men before us, who were trying to save the breed, by two inches? After a decade of personally reviewing documents, it was verified not just by the LGDR, but also by the TLGDA, that ALL of the dogs listed in the LGDR were less than twenty-three inches at the shoulder. The "Original Standard" of height, set by registrars before us, was lowered by two inches without effecting any dog within the files, or any of their offspring. These dogs are not getting bigger! A few individuals might want you to believe that, but documented paperwork proves that to be false! Many are going by what they hear from a few individuals. Just like the thought that all of H. C. Wilkes' dogs were registered. That just is not the case. I have spent over a decade personally reviewing Blue Lacy breed documents, pictures, and actual dogs. I have had an oppertunity to watch a large amount of them in a working setting. And, the breed is more consistent in looks and working abilities today, than it was in the past when they were almost extinct. We also have a considerably larger number of dogs to work with in the breeding program. We all have come a long way, in our effort to save this breed. It truly shows. The registries that have held records on this breed, did so, due to the efforts of individuals working to save what was left. If they hadn't we wouldn't have the dogs we see today in any registry. The Franks Animal Registry never had any dogs that were not Blue, Red, or Tri in color on file. This is where the LGDR stud books started. H.C. Wilkes' was the only ARF registered owner, that would later start listing dogs with the LGDR. There were only six of his dogs, with their lineages approved and inspected by the LGDR’s previous registrars, which were entered into the stud files back in the late 80's. I hope this helps clear up some of the misconceptions that have been spread about H.C. Wilkes, and his Blue Lacys. There are still several highly respected men around who can be interviewed about H.C. Wilkes and his dogs, men that have know him their whole lives, and men that kept his old lines for H.C. to pull from when needed. Back in the earlier days, white markings on the head were not an issue for breeders. This has been documented from Lacy Family descendants that kept breeding programs and dogs. Here is a link, designed to help understand white markings and coat color with in the breed. bluelacydogs.org/110886.htmlThe registries in the past, and present, have worked to help maintain the breed as what we have today! A "Big Thanks" to all the men and women before us! If it wasn't for their efforts, we wouldn't have the dogs we own and love today!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by bluedog on Sept 2, 2009 13:15:52 GMT -6
Marlo,
If that info is available for individuals to read I would be interested at some point to get together and review it.
thanks kevin
|
|
marloriley
Walkin Talkin Poopin Machine
Do you need training?
Posts: 76
|
Post by marloriley on Sept 2, 2009 13:28:03 GMT -6
Yes, and I will have alot of it at the TLGDA gathering for review.
|
|
marloriley
Walkin Talkin Poopin Machine
Do you need training?
Posts: 76
|
Post by marloriley on Sept 2, 2009 13:34:20 GMT -6
If you can't make it that day. I can sure set up some time another day as well! Another member that has lots of great archieves, is planning on comeing as well. I am hoping she will remember to bring some of the documents for review as well. I will try and get a hold of her and see.
Picking up hides for Sandy and Jeff this afternoon. It getting close! Hope to see ya, there!
|
|