Breeding Dogs With Structural Defects

Quote:

Originally Posted by evolutionkennels

If it was a grand champion sdj doy that won his last three within a 14 week period, I'd breed him to the best structured bitches from his own bloodline (linebred) each time, pick out the best structured offspring who also perform, and go from the re, but I see his pups have the same defects, I'd save my time and start breeding away from him

Hi evo , so in the case of hammonds who i used as an example of as a breeder whos line is known for deaf dogs do you think that to continually breed deaf dogs in his particular case back into a line is a good or bad breeding practice .

I personally do not care for that, as a matter of fact, I don't care for the Hammonds line at all, just my personal opinion. However, they seem to do well in Europe. I wouldn't perpetuate an unhealthy trait. But that is my standard, and who am I to tell another man what to do or not do. If he is happy with his program, that's all that matters, if people are buying his dogs, then they must be doing something right. Everyone likes what like based on what they've seen, what they have access too, or what they can afford based on what they think will make the best dogs. That's why I always get kick out of people asking what others think about this blood or that blood. The important thing is what YOU think based on your research and deductions. So, got with YOUR Gut , and at the end if the day, you'll be able to look in the mirror and say that it worked or didn't work based on YOUR DECISION. If I'd of listened to everyone, I'd of never bred Macha to 357. THAT ALL I'LL SAY

Quote:

Originally Posted by projectx

Hi jack , i used lazy towards you not becasue i think your lazy i know your not ,but because in your reply to my post you said that you hadnt bothered to read it all just like sb had stated ,and i found that lazy , as i may not agree with a post , but i will at least give it the courtesy of reading it fully before making a reply to it whether positive or negative.

Not lazy, just sick of beating a dead horse :deadhorse:

Quote:

Originally Posted by projectx

As for me saying that hammonds is bad for the breed , i dont think i said that jack , what i do think and if im not mistaken and not wanting to put words into your mouth you agreed also, is that to constantly breed in a severe defect like deafness , which gary himself has stated he thinks is not a good idea but has kept doing it is bad breeding practice ,and unless like you yourself said the dog in question would have to have been a one in a thousand type dog and also an outstanding pitdog before you would ever consider breeding to a dog like that , so why the hell are you trying to shoot me down for saying what im sure many others also think is bad breeding practice , whether its gary hammonds doing it or a newbie its still bad practice, and i dont see why i or anyone else needs to justify what they post by what credentials they have in the game, just like i dont ask anyone else that question , i just read a post and if i agree or disagree with it i dont wonder whether any post i disagree with is posted by either a rank begginer or ozzie stevens , if it has merits thats what i look at , if everyone on this or any other forum has to have credentials or a badge of honour before they can post a comment and then and only then regardless of how good or bad a post might be is allowed to say anything on any subject , then not many will be posting anything.

What I am saying is you made your GD point, and keep repeating it like a broken record. At some stage, it begins to sound like obsession or insanity. Have you ever heard The Serenity Prayer? It goes like this:

"God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change;
The courage to change the things that I can;
And the wisdom to know the difference."

It appears to me that you lack the wisdom to know the difference between what you cannot change and what you can.
You will never be able to change Gary Hammonds' breeding practices, so learn to accept this and move on.
The only thing you have control over is your own breeding practices.

Now, as far as credentials go, no one needs to have them to post here ... but if you're going to go on and on, disparaging a living legend in the breed, and won't move on and change the subject, then at some point I need to know how perfect YOUR standards are to be questioning the standards of a man who's bred some great dogs and contributed in many ways to the history of the breed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by projectx

If like many other members jack who post on a variety of subjects from feed and housing to breeding and what gamness is, you should know better than most , that its all about pereception , and even the most experienced dogman can make mistakes and they do all the time, you yourself mentioned just that in a post about breeding if im not mistaken so if i or anyone else has to show you and the rest of the forum a resume of achievements before making a post even if its a good post , then make that a rule on here and lets see how many put one up , some will and some wont either becasue they cant or becasue their not here to tell the rest of the world whom or what they have done jack ,some people arent the braging type and like some annonimity thats why you dont see to many memebrs real names if ever .

This is a copout.

If you're not the bragging type, fine. But don't be a shit-talking type then either.
If you want to keep your accomplishments to yourself, no problem, but don't keep harping on another man ad nauseum.
Have you ever heard the saying, "Judge not, lest ye be judged?"

You're setting yourself up for counter-examinations by all your judgmental talk.
Casually mentioning Hammonds is one thing; posting 3 pages of complaints is another.
You need to gain the wisdom to know the difference.

Quote:

Originally Posted by projectx

As i said to you before , if you think my posts are negative , well im sorry but im not sure how i can make a post on something like breeding deaf dogs as a rule rather than an exception a very psoitive post as i dont agree with it , maybe thats why,
and the same would apply to any other posts you say i have been negative in i would have had a reason for me to be negative or not in agreement with it for me to have said it in the first place, and i at least try to , not like some members give a full and frank explanation as to why im not in agreement or negative as you say with a post , rather than just post a comment that says nothing and just disagrees with a post be it mine or another memebers post and gives no reason as to why , thats what i call a negative post jack , and man we can find a ton of those type of posts that say nothing and give nothing so guess what you learn nothing form them nothing ,and normally those posters dont have a reason other than they run a certain line or have an affiliation with a certain dogman , at least i try to give a reason in every post i make then jack its upto another member to either agree or disagree with it and i would hope they try to explain to me by way of a post using reasons as to why they may think im wrong , and if like i think i am a reasonable and open minded person , i may be swayed by that post becasue it has merit and i may have been wrong in my opinion , but that means making an effort not just defending the undefendable or disagreeing becasue of an emotional attachment rather than using facts , that i would have thought would be the way you would like ii to be jack , just like you always give a reason why you think a certain drug or feeding theory is good by using reasons why , or examples of breeding , you give a reason for it , so others whehter they agree with you or not can at least have something to go on before making their decision to either go that way or not .

:deadhorse:

That is all you're doing here. Beating a dead horse and going on and on about nothing. This isn't even worth responding to. You're trying to tell me how an internet discussion goes, lol, as if I don't know. I probably have had more internet debates over the last 18 years I've been online than ANY dogman alive (except maybe Norrod :lol:), so I pretty much know how they go. I have been an investigator/negotiator for a living since 1988, Projectx, I assure you I am quite well versed on the subject of debate.

You've posted your opinion on Hammonds and breeding deaf dogs. I have posted mine.
I have painstakingly stated my own position. At this point, there is really nothing left to discuss.

Quote:

Originally Posted by projectx

So just incase you didnt see it jack i do appologise to you if you thought i called you lazy , i know your not and without you this forum would not be what it is , i only meant it in the case of your not even bothering to read my post fully just like SB had said and then reply to it with a sweeping statement that to be fair was derogatroy to me ,without having read my post first, that was what i meant by being lazy , so i again appologise for that it was only meant in that particular context .

I appreciate the apology, and I apologize if I have been rude myself. I promise you there is nothing lazy about me.

Just because I did not bother to read/respond to your other post doesn't mean I'm lazy, it means I already addressed those subjects and to go on and on about them further is, quite frankly, a waste of my time ... as the last :30 of my life has been wasted responding to this post, only to clarify (what should be) the obvious to anyone.

Thank you and that is all I have to say on the subject.

I have stated my views and support them with a pretty big winning record as a breeder for 2+ decades. If you feel your view is better, then support them with a better record.
If you'd like to read the opinions of 2 more experts on breeding, who run other breeds, which likewise support my views of NOT breeding for "flawlessness," but rather breeding for excellence, you can read the 2 articles I posted on this thread.

Jack

PS: I will now move onto the other thread you posted, which I find far more interesting.