blue merle

[skycat 6,174]

Things like prey drive, determination, physical soundness, good feet, durability, strike, stamina, temperament are all inherited from the parents and ancestors.

 

I've had 2 Hancock dogs in the past. One was loopy, really nervy strange temperament, though adequate in the field. Hancock later admitted that the Greyhound dam to this bitch was very nervy. The other was one of the best lurchers I've owned, with ticks against all the above boxes in the first sentence.

 

The nature/nurture debate is never ending, but when you see generations of good working lurchers reproducing those same traits needed in the field, and you notice little things from the next generation down that remind you of a grandparent, then it is obvious that a lot of things are inherited.

 

A good strike, for example. I've had pups given to me from semi or non working parents who have had no inborn ability to coordinate mouth and eye. It has taken them an age to learn how to connect witht a rabbit. Then I've bred pups from a line noted for its strike, and all the pups are catching myxie rabbits with ease at 5 -6 months old, and not trying to hold them with their feet either.

 

Same thing with retrieving: some lines do it instinctively and never stop doing it: others you have a real job to teach them to retrieve. Of course there will always be exceptions within any line, though it's my belief that individual temperament (very dominant or mightily independant) can play a part in an unwillingness to retrieve as well.

[scouser3038 1]

I think its a known fact that if you get a pup from proven parents the chances of it making the grade are a lot greater.

 

Personally i think there are exceptions for the above comment as its known fact that Hancocks stud dogs are rarely let out of there pens for general exercise let alone work!!! but i know of about half of dozen Hancock dogs that perform ok on everything and to date havnt seen one that does not, although i may not have seen as many as others run.

 

They may not excel at a particular quarry like a beddy whippet on rabbits or a bull x on fox but they make excellent all rounders whether the parents are worked or not which is why i chose a pup from Hancocks kennels.

 

Absolutely spot on there mate,i have an old Hancocks bitch here that was a very capable dog in her day,and i have seen plenty of decent grafters come from his kennels,in fact a mate of a mate told me that the Hancocks dog he had in the early 90's was the best fox dog he ever owned.Would i buy a dog from Hancocks? absolutely not.

 

Why wouldnt you buy a dog from Hancocks?

[undisputed 1,664]

A good strike, for example. I've had pups given to me from semi or non working parents who have had no inborn ability to coordinate mouth and eye. It has taken them an age to learn how to connect witht a rabbit. Then I've bred pups from a line noted for its strike, and all the pups are catching myxie rabbits with ease at 5 -6 months old, and not trying to hold them with their feet either

 

You've part answered your own question there skycat...the probable reason for the poor strike rate is simply lack of practice on the dogs part....In relation to your pups again the probable reason for the pups doing well on the myxied rabbits is that they are so much easier to catch and with early success comes confidence. I had a similar experience many years ago when we had a group of pups around the six month mark. Our estate was rife with myxie which meant the pups were catching regularly and with ease I have no doubt this helped the pups mature into good sensible adult dogs but it was something they learned by doing not something they were born with.

[Guest oldskool]

Ah but there is no tried and tested way of determining if the right minerals are there in any dog is there? so you go buy your pup you takes your chance..if as you claim it's down to the working ability of the parents how do you explain such a mixed bag of results in a litter?. And how do you explain my success with so called untried stock?. In relation to my clay anology I dont know of any sculpter who would use shite to mould anything and one other thing you dont have to agree with me you have your opinion I have mine. Also my theory has nothing to do with bull pups. Someone made a good point earlier about a good foundation and I think thats spot on, the original idea behind a collie x greys was that you were combining probably two of the most unchanged breeds in the history of dogs. Luckily the KC and breeders havn't spoiled either breed and they have both proven their worth. The grey for its speed and the collie for its brains and durability thats why the x has lasted so long.

 

 

 

 

i do catch your drift but i still think its down to breeding as well as training... of coarse a pup from the best stock can not be taken and thrown into a field and be expected to do what the parents are good at without alot of encouragement, time and patience just like any dog but lets me say this... i know there isnt many collies that are not from a working farm yard at sometime not to far back in they're heritage and there is probably alot less greyhounds that lack the instinct to chase but dummies do exist in both breeds... and if you put the two dummies together then ok, you might take a pup under your wing and manage to stir up something from way back in its family tree and you'll have something good... but have far less chance of it...

 

somebody said previously that hancock hasnt worked his dogs for nearly 25 years??? well my own theory on his success is this>>> i have no doubt that when he did work them, like anyone interested in the game, he wanted and used the best he could get and when he tried and tested them he then found they produce quality which has to be the reason he is so successful in the first place??? IMO, if he is still producing good lurchers (he must be because i always hear more positive than negative) then he has found that the off spring is producing equally as good lurchers and his customers feedback is proof enough so now that he has lost interest in the game he can sit back and enjoy his retirement with plenty of change in his pocket...

[Jim Grant 4]

I have owned Beardie/Grehound X Working Deerhounds for the last five decades. My current one, it's Dam, litter sister, all had to be spayed for medical reasons. The bitch still works well and does the business.

I have been trying to source another potential breeding bitch for the last year (see my wanted ad).

The only person I have heard of who has gone out there to source a working Beardie as a Stud dog is Hancock.

My contacts in god's country, (Scotland), tell me that the only good, working stud dogs will have to come from off-shore, ie the Outer Hebrides. Some may be some found up the West Coast. (Scotland that is). From what I have heard Hancocks is not a puppy farm as the Irish would know it!!. I am very tempted to get back to him and get his stud rates.

If you don't spend the time with your dogs you won't get the result.

Edited July 22, 2008 by Jim Grant

[undisputed 1,664]

i do catch your drift but i still think its down to breeding as well as training... of coarse a pup from the best stock can not be taken and thrown into a field and be expected to do what the parents are good at without alot of encouragement, time and patience just like any dog but lets me say this... i know there isnt many collies that are not from a working farm yard at sometime not to far back in they're heritage and there is probably alot less greyhounds that lack the instinct to chase but dummies do exist in both breeds... and if you put the two dummies together then ok, you might take a pup under your wing and manage to stir up something from way back in its family tree and you'll have something good... but have far less chance of it...

 

somebody said previously that hancock hasnt worked his dogs for nearly 25 years??? well my own theory on his success is this>>> i have no doubt that when he did work them, like anyone interested in the game, he wanted and used the best he could get and when he tried and tested them he then found they produce quality which has to be the reason he is so successful in the first place??? IMO, if he is still producing good lurchers (he must be because i always hear more positive than negative) then he has found that the off spring is producing equally as good lurchers and his customers feedback is proof enough so now that he has lost interest in the game he can sit back and enjoy his retirement with plenty of change in his pocket...

 

 

I dont disagree with you about some dummys being out there and god knows I've been responsible for some myself. What I am trying to say is nearly in all cases of a dog failing, the fault will lie with the trainer. I believe similarly to us dogs learn from their experiences good and bad and carry these through their lives. A good dog properly entered is a confident dog and from confidence everything else flows. The more success a dog has the more confident they become. Its not rocket science just plain common sense in my opinion. Now if we look at Hancocks dogs, as I said you can almost certainly take the dam out the equasion as we know none of the grey dams are worked to quarry. Which basically leaves the sire's as the main provider of the working genes if we use the Nature arguement. So again if we break this down even further in the case of the half x we are diluting the working genes even further as we can assume only the collie side of the x has been worked, can you see where I'm going with this? In terms of what is passed on to the dog there is no doubt that certain physical attributes are passed on such as, bone structure looks etc but working ability I believe has to be learned just as it is with humans, after all you wouldn't reasonably expect say two top tennis players to marry have children and they turn out to be top tennis players without the proper coaching now would you? so why should it be any different for dogs?

[Guest bigredbusa]

you are rewriting everything that has been done and proven for years , dogs dont play tennis

 

why do people use working stock spaniels

 

why do people use proven dogs for fighting

 

infact any working dog ??

 

you are obviously set in your own ways and firmly believe in what you preach , i dont know what to say ??

[tattooben 23]

cheers everybody for voiceing ur opinions! i didnt expect such a reaction.there seems to be more good said than bad,which has pleased the mrs.been on his website last night and am goin to give the old boy a ring.

cheers!

[Jim Grant 4]

What I think you are saying is that rather than line breeding, get some fresh blood (that you think will boost the line).

You cannot in-breed for a couple of generations without degrading the stock.

[undisputed 1,664]

you are rewriting everything that has been done and proven for years , dogs dont play tennis

 

why do people use working stock spaniels

 

why do people use proven dogs for fighting

 

infact any working dog ??

 

you are obviously set in your own ways and firmly believe in what you preach , i dont know what to say ??

 

Are you saying you have dogs? there was me thinking it was banned too. What has spaniels got do with anything and who trains the bloody things anyway,,,not themselves thats for sure...your back to foot before mouth again aint yah! try thinking before you type,,,as for being set in my own ways it works for me so I'm happy. I'm not re writing anything either.

[undisputed 1,664]

cheers everybody for voiceing ur opinions! i didnt expect such a reaction.there seems to be more good said than bad,which has pleased the mrs.been on his website last night and am goin to give the old boy a ring.

cheers!

 

I think we kinda hijacked your original post but its been a good debate I think, glad you've decided to have a look for yourself...so at least something came out of the original post..good luck whatever you decide

[Guest bigredbusa]

Are you saying you have dogs? there was me thinking it was banned too. What has spaniels got do with anything and who trains the bloody things anyway,,,not themselves thats for sure...your back to foot before mouth again aint yah! try thinking before you type,,,as for being set in my own ways it works for me so I'm happy. I'm not re writing anything either.

 

ok mate , i wasnt being funny so take a pill , dont tell me i fight dogs . you know nothing .

 

funny how you seem different in a pm and nothing more then a gobshite on the boards . so come on fella after the last pm at least try and keep it civil hey

 

so to round up .

 

99.9% of the board prefer proven working parents - you lot must be mad lol

[Guest oldskool]

undisputed

 

 

I dont disagree with you about some dummys being out there and god knows I've been responsible for some myself. What I am trying to say is nearly in all cases of a dog failing, the fault will lie with the trainer. I believe similarly to us dogs learn from their experiences good and bad and carry these through their lives. A good dog properly entered is a confident dog and from confidence everything else flows. The more success a dog has the more confident they become. Its not rocket science just plain common sense in my opinion. Now if we look at Hancocks dogs, as I said you can almost certainly take the dam out the equasion as we know none of the grey dams are worked to quarry. Which basically leaves the sire's as the main provider of the working genes if we use the Nature arguement. So again if we break this down even further in the case of the half x we are diluting the working genes even further as we can assume only the collie side of the x has been worked, can you see where I'm going with this? In terms of what is passed on to the dog there is no doubt that certain physical attributes are passed on such as, bone structure looks etc but working ability I believe has to be learned just as it is with humans, after all you wouldn't reasonably expect say two top tennis players to marry have children and they turn out to be top tennis players without the proper coaching now would you? so why should it be any different for dogs?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

undisputed, our discussion has gone off track a little... when i first posted it was about an enquiry into whether or not hancock could sell me a pup from good foxing parents now its about strike and speed etc... i agree with nearly everything you say about training and sculpturing a pup... but to instill a hatred for foxes in a pup that simply doesnt feel the inclination to tackle a fox is impossible IMO... i had a pup that would rag fox skins and shot foxes with great fury and hatred... his mum was a good foxer but its dad was a poor arse biter... he saw his first fox when he was 20 months and when he got badly bitten that was the rage finished... shakin a dead fox was always ok but he would run around a fox barking at it just like his dad... so he didnt have the minerals to take his fight to the real McCoy!!! do you mean to say that you or a better trainer could have made him into a fox dog??? i just dont think it was there and maybe if both his parents were good at the job he would have been better??? i dont know how the other siblings done regarding foxes maybe 1 or 2 took after the mother but that was a chance i took... i bred a litter about 2 years ago now and i'm waiting to hear on theyre progress... mother was a hard bitch but the sire who was an ex track dog wasnt that tough but had made a few kills... all i was after was more speed so i thought i would get that attribute from him and the rest from her??? if none of them will take a fox then i wont be blaming it on the owners...

[undisputed 1,664]

Are you saying you have dogs? there was me thinking it was banned too. What has spaniels got do with anything and who trains the bloody things anyway,,,not themselves thats for sure...your back to foot before mouth again aint yah! try thinking before you type,,,as for being set in my own ways it works for me so I'm happy. I'm not re writing anything either.

 

ok mate , i wasnt being funny so take a pill , dont tell me i fight dogs . you know nothing .

 

funny how you seem different in a pm and nothing more then a gobshite on the boards . so come on fella after the last pm at least try and keep it civil hey

 

so to round up .

 

99.9% of the board prefer proven working parents - you lot must be mad lol

 

If I'm being a gobshite its because your being stupid I dont mind an arguement but your taking it to a silly level...first of all you mentioned fighting dogs not me....I merly asked the question (tongue firmly in cheek) if this is to much for you dont answer back ....go read back your post

[undisputed 1,664]

undisputed, our discussion has gone off track a little... when i first posted it was about an enquiry into whether or not hancock could sell me a pup from good foxing parents now its about strike and speed etc... i agree with nearly everything you say about training and sculpturing a pup... but to instill a hatred for foxes in a pup that simply doesnt feel the inclination to tackle a fox is impossible IMO... i had a pup that would rag fox skins and shot foxes with great fury and hatred... his mum was a good foxer but its dad was a poor arse biter... he saw his first fox when he was 20 months and when he got badly bitten that was the rage finished... shakin a dead fox was always ok but he would run around a fox barking at it just like his dad... so he didnt have the minerals to take his fight to the real McCoy!!! do you mean to say that you or a better trainer could have made him into a fox dog??? i just dont think it was there and maybe if both his parents were good at the job he would have been better??? i dont know how the other siblings done regarding foxes maybe 1 or 2 took after the mother but that was a chance i took... i bred a litter about 2 years ago now and i'm waiting to hear on theyre progress... mother was a hard bitch but the sire who was an ex track dog wasnt that tough but had made a few kills... all i was after was more speed so i thought i would get that attribute from him and the rest from her??? if none of them will take a fox then i wont be blaming it on the owners...

 

 

Yeah it has hasn't it...lol...Look I am in no way suggesting I know it all cause I dont my opinions are based on my experience with my dogs. I have found my way to bring on my dogs and its up to others to find theirs. All I am doing is offering an opinion and debating an issue about how dogs learn to hunt. I stand by what I said dogs and foxes are not natural enemys and this has to be instilled in them. If I can offer a view on the dog you mentioned. You never said whether or not you ran him single or doubled up with an experienced dog...and to be badly bitten on his first fox was unfortunate and would have been a massive dent to his confidence. Many people believe that you shouldn't run a dog on a fox till its at least two year old there maybe some validity in this statement but I know of people who have let them go much younger. Maybe you should have aimed a little lower with the dog to get his confidence up by running him on young foxes even cubs at least that way he learns were the sharp end is gradually and it shouldnt come as such a shock to the system when he gets bitten. I dont know if I would have been able to make a better job than you did I dont know your dog my approach might have been different but as I said I dont know what the circumstances were in relation to the night you mention. One other thing I will add if none of the aforementioned litter (what mix are they) take fox the owners are exactly the ones I would be blaming not the dogs.