[ SHOWGSD-L ] Lloyd Brackett book, save on your email system!!!

• From: Peter Cacioppo <PeterCacioppo@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
• To: showgsd-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
• Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 21:20:05 -0800

Here it is.  Save this on your email system/program under a Breeding Folder,
or print it out to save. 

This is a compilation of the articles Mr. Brackett wrote for Dog World
Magazine and which won for him the Dog Writers' Association Award as the
best non-professional work in the dog press for 1960.

PLANNED BREEDING

by Lloyd C. Brackett

One of the fathers of the German Shepherd in this country and the oldest
living continuous fancier of the breed in America (since 1912) his theories
on breeding have been more than proven in his Long-Worth Kennels where he
established his own strain in the breed and produced more than 90 champions
in only 12 years -a world's record for any breed. Known affectionately as
"Mr. German Shepherd" he has proven beyond doubt the soundness of his
breeding program.

Whenever two or three dog fanciers get together there is almost sure to be
talk about line breeding. The term may be used without any one of them
having a real understanding of what it means. There seems to be much
confusion, even in the minds of experienced dog breeders, about the actual
meaning of the terms inbreeding and line breeding and how to differentiate
between them. The prime purpose of this article will therefore be to try to
explain, as simply as possible, these two methods of breeding, as well as
why they are used and what should be expected from them. In covering these
types of breeding, the subject of out-crossing must of necessity enter the
picture. We should know exactly what we mean when we talk of inbreeding,
line breeding and out-crossing. Few breeders have a clear conception of just
where one leaves off and the other begins.

Prior to supplying a greater definitiveness as to what is meant by the above
systems of breeding, the following short explanations are given. In the
broadest sense they contain the gist of the whole subject.

Line breeding is mating animals who are closely related to the same
ancestor, preferably one whose type it is desired to obtain in the resultant
progeny. In other words, it is accomplished by using for parents dogs who
are closely related to that ancestor, but are little, if at all, related to
each other through any other ancestors. They are, in effect, bred in line to
that common ancestor. When a breeder says his dog is line bred, one
immediately questions, "Line bred to what?" As we shall see later, the
answer to that question enables us to somewhat evaluate the wisdom of having
used this type of breeding in that instance.

Inbreeding implies a much closer relationship between the mating pair than
does line breeding. Instead of involving second, third or more distant
generations, it is generally understood to have to do with only four
relationships-son to mother, father to daughter, brother to sister,
half-brother to half-sister (both having the same sire and different darns,
or the same dame and different sires). It should be remembered that when
mating the progeny of two litters each having the same parents (from
repeated matings, for instance), one is mating full blood brothers and
sisters. That too is inbreeding.

Family Breeding

There is no complete concurrence of opinion among breeders as to where line
breeding takes over from inbreeding, since the former is only a modification
of the latter. We find that both terms are rather loosely used, that there
are several intermediate relationships which are labeled inbreeding b~ some,
line breeding by others. It is difficult to make any incontrovertible
definition of the two terms, if indeed not impossible. It would be only
confusing if we took up here what some breeders consider to be inbreeding,
others line breeding, such as the mating of a dog to a half-brother or
half-sister of one parent. There are several other such closely involved
relationship matings upon which there are similar differences of opinion.
However, in the broadest and most commonly accepted meanings of line
breeding and inbreeding, explanations have been given above.

The reader should understand that there is an area of breeding between
interrelated animals which is not entirely covered by the terms "inbreeding"
and "line breeding" as defined here. For this type of breeding I have for
years used the term "family breeding", which, to the best of my knowledge, I
myself originated. Since "family breeding" is simply an extension of both
inbreeding and line breeding, what I have to say about these will apply in
some measure, of course, to family breeding.

Why Inbred or Line bred?

While it is important to understand that there are some differences in the
selection of the mating dogs when using the systems of inbreeding and line
breeding, it is of far greater value to know why these types of breeding are
so often employed; why they are used by almost all successful breeders of
any variety of livestock and what the results are likely to be, both good
and bad. We shall pursue that subject now.

The purpose of both line breeding and inbreeding is to bring about breed
improvement to get the best that is possible out of ones matings and to
upgrade his stock. Experience has shown that if more than mere
multiplication is to be had, and any rear and lasting results toward breed
improvement are to be obtained, a breeder must use a system of line
breeding, which not only combines animals very similar in their
characteristics but narrows the pedigree to a few closely related lines of
descent. This "purifies" the pedigree rapidly and enables a breeder to
control, to some degree, all characteristics. It discourages variability and
reduces it to a minimum.

Advantages of 

The results obtained by this system of breeding can more certainly be
predicted than the average breeder realizes. Few indeed are the dog fanciers
who do more than mate bitch to dog HOPING for results that is no scientific
reason to expect. When by good fortune one or two above average offspring do
appear, they have nothing behind them upon which to base an expectation that
they will pass on their desirable traits. On the other hand, when such
superior offspring are produced by line breeding, and improvement is shown,
it is backed up by the most powerful hereditary influence obtainable because
of the simplicity and strength of the ancestry. If the SELECTION of this
ancestry has been good, the "pulls" are all in the same direction. The
records of all breeds show the pronounced salutary results that have come
from judicious line breeding.

Disadvantages of 

Selection by pedigrees alone, without consideration being given to the
physical traits of the mating pair, is the chief danger in this system of
breeding. The writer can state in the following few words the most important
counsel to those who would attempt Line breeding: Physical compensation is
the foundation rock upon which all enduring worth must be built. A line bred
pedigree is valuable or dangerous in exact proportion as the individuals
have been selected. Line breeding does not replace selection but, on the
contrary, demands the most discriminating choosing within the line. If the
breeder selects by pedigree, and without consideration to physical
compensation, undoubtedly dogs with notable faults will result, and thus
line breeding will insure failure quicker hid more certainly than will any
other known system of breeding - No other breeding plan has ever brought
about the good results of line breeding, and no other system will ever be so
powerful in the production of consistently good animals, and this with the
greatest certainty year after year. The principal requirement is not to
abandon individual selection. A pedigree is a guarantee of bloodlines, a
record of the blood of ancestors within which breeding operations and
selection may, with confidence, be confined. The word "confined" is used
advisedly for, after line breeding has been practiced for a few generations,
the end result is the development of what is in effect a pure breed-a breed
within a breed, so to speak. When that has occurred, any attempt to
introduce "cold" blood (that of unrelated dogs of other strains) is likely
to result in the penalties of hybridization. The departure from line
breeding is a kind of "crossing" in a small degree, for when the blood of
line bred animals becomes intensified they assume all the attributes of a
distinct strain, which in truth they are, and they will likely behave as
such for a long time.

In saying that line bred dogs tend to become like purebreds, or strains
within their breeds, and that their progeny from a union with unrelated
animals are like hybrids, I do not mean that such breedings should never be
made, or that the results would be like breeding into an entirely different
breed of dogs. While in some strains of animals line breeding and inbreeding
have been intensified to a point where a herd or flock would be practically
a breed of their own, I do not personally know of such a family in any breed
of dogs today. However, there have been strains developed in some breeds to
a point where their blood has become so dominant that it will not yield for
several generations to any noticeable blending when out crossed, the
characteristics of the inbred or line bred parent always showing up. This
is, of course, to be expected.

In the dog game those who criticize the system of line breeding far
outnumber its proponents. This is true for several reasons. There is a
continual influx of beginners in breeding dogs, people who have never before
mated one animal to another, or made any study of the subject. In their
ignorance they believe that mating two dogs with "pedigrees", especially if
both are winners, or better vet, "Champions", is all there is to it. Then,
there are a multitude of breeders who refuse to take the time to make any
study of genetics, who want only to breed dogs to sell and make money, and
these have no interest in breed improvement through years of planned effort.
Again, we have the many hit-or-miss breeders who hope for the good luck
which sometimes strikes novices who by sheer accident come up with a real
"topper" or two. In listing the opponents of closed-up breeding, one should
not fail to mention owners of stud dogs, hungry for stud fees.

Fortunately there are in almost all breeds of dogs a very few fanciers
intent upon consistently producing dogs superior to the average of the
breed. Many of these know that the quickest and most certain way to do this
is by line breeding.

Inbreeding

Because line breeding is more generally practiced than is inbreeding, I have
dwelt more on the former so far in this article. The difference in the
degree of relationship of mating pairs, as generally accepted by breeders,
was explained, however. It might be well now to go more fully into the
subject of inbreeding. This is "breeding in and in" and is line breeding
carried to its limits. It possesses all the advantages and disadvantages of
line breeding to their utmost attainable degree. Breeding a daughter to her
sire gives rise to offspring three-fourths of whose bloodlines are those of
the sire, a practice which, if continued, would soon result in progeny with
but one line of ancestry, practically eliminating the blood of the original
dam. This form of breeding is practiced when it is desired to secure all
that is possible of the blood of the sire.

On the other hand, when a dam is bred to her son or sons successively, it
increases the blood of the dam. This form is practiced when it is the dam's
bloodlines one desires to preserve and intensify. Either system can, of
course, be approximated by the use of a granddaughter or grandson.

The breeding together of brother and sister is inbreeding which preserves
the bloodlines from both sire and dam in equal proportions. It is inferior
to either of the others as a means of strengthening previously existing
bloodlines, but it is freely employed when the combination of sire and dam
(of the brother and sister) has proved exceptionally successful, virtually
setting a new type. It has all the dangers of the other two types of
inbreeding, and in a greater degree because we have no knowledge of what the
new combination will produce, whereas in strengthening the pro-portion of
one line of ancestry over another, whether it be that of the sire or the
dam, we are dealing with previously existing bloodlines known to be
harmonious.

Advantages of Inbreeding

As previously stated, it is line breeding earned to its highest degree. When
superior animals are used, it is the most powerful and sure way known of
making the most of their excellence and perpetuating it. It is the method by
which the highest possible percentage of the blood of an exceptional dog, or
of a particularly fortunate "nick", can be kept, fused into, and finally
made to influence an entire line of descent. If continued, the outside blood
disappears and the pedigree is quickly loaded to an almost unlimited extent
by the blood of a single animal, or two at the most. In practice it is
usually that of a sire. Inbreeding is not so much a matter of originating
excellence as of holding and making the greatest use of it when it appears.

A large proportion of prepotent sires have been inbred or at least closely
line bred. An inbred dog is, of course, enormously more prepotent than one
who has outcross breeding. Its half of the ancestry having a great deal of
identical blood is almost certain to dominate the offspring when mated to
one of the opposite sex having an "open" pedigree. (An "open" pedigree is
one in which there does not appear the name of any one dog more than once in
perhaps several generations.) Inbreeding is therefore recognized as the most
influential of all breeding plans or systems, supplying the simplest of all
pedigrees-an advantage when we recognize the laws of inheritance. It is all
that line breeding is and more. When using either system it must again be
cautioned that careful SELECTION must continually be made, both as to
physical compensation and vigor and fertility. In conclusion on the matter
of the advantages of inbreeding, I will repeat: No other method of breeding
equals this for intensifying bloodlines, making the best use of exceptional
individuals, and in building a strain within a breed.

Disadvantages of Inbreeding

Although the doubling up and intensifying of characteristics by this method
of breeding insures results that are more probable than possible and, if
continued long enough, are a certainty, it works the same for one trait as
another, both good and bad. It affects all characteristics of the animals
involved. That is why, unless a breeder knows a good individual of his breed
when he sees one, or possesses the right stock to start with, inbreeding can
bring disaster. On the other hand, when the opposite is true, the most
strikingly successful results can be obtained. Examples of success are many,
but so can one name many failures amongst those who have dropped out of the
"game" and whose "strains" vanished or are disappearing.

Inbreeding Not Necessarily Disastrous

Undeniably, no form of breeding has so many who decry it, most of them
entirely ignorant on the subject. They claim it causes lack of vigor, size
and fertility, and a multitude of such instances could certainly be listed.
However, if what has been written here, and been proven by innumerable tests
and examples, has any meaning at all, it is that ANY characteristic can be
bred up or down, strengthened or weakened, by this method of breeding. Some
of what we know about the results of inbreeding in animals comes from the
scattered and irregularly reported experiences of breeders. It is difficult
to be at all sure that the evidence against inbreeding came from using
animals who were typical of their breed and should have been inbred upon at
the outset. There is also the question of whether one hears of the usual
effects of such breedings or only of the exceptionally bad ones. Anything
undesirable which does appear is apt to be blamed on inbreeding, in spite of
the fact that equally bad results often occur when no inbreeding has been
done. There is usually no way of making comparisons, that is, with
non-inbred animals kept under the same conditions, fed and reared in the
same way.

Since it is universally agreed by all breeders and geneticists that ANY
characteristic can be bred up or down, strengthened or weakened, by
inbreeding (providing rigid selection is followed), why then this claim that
it will bring about a loss of size, vigor and fertility? Are there some
inherent traits, which come from close breeding, or is it merely that lack
of vigor and fertility are commonly possessed characteristics and frequently
show up? Many think it is the latter. There are so many examples of great
vigor and fertility in inbred individuals, and of family lines, and even in
whole species of plants and animals, as to obviate all fear of inevitable
weaknesses from close breeding, but it doesn't take much investigation to
indicate to us that there is lurking weakness and infertility everywhere. It
is particularly evident in humans and in domesticated animals. A large
number of animals, and an apparently larger number of plants, are relatively
weak and easily succumb to disease. In nature the strongest live and beget
offspring, whereas the weaklings die. In breeding animals we are liable to
select largely for show or utility type, yes, even for color, ignoring, or
trusting to luck, as to vigor and fertility. Is it any wonder then that
these traits have crept upon us until they of ten present a strong argument
against inbreeding, although they also appear amongst entirely outcross bred
dogs?

When we SELECT for vigor and fertility, as well as for other attributes,
there will be less talk about the evils of inbreeding. In the meantime we
shall hear about it mostly where vitality and fertility were low in the
stock inbred upon. Because both of these are requisites - one to insure life
and the other for reproduction-they should be possessed in a high degree by
the dogs one intends to inbreed upon.

Charles Darwin learned from hundreds of experimental tests with both plant
and animal life that crossbreeding, or "out crossing" as we speak of it in
dog breeding, often increases vigor and fertility. He also found that this
was not true in all individuals, or in all species, even those most
sensitive to inbreeding. His experiments showed that sometimes the opposite
(weakness and infertility) occurred and he could not solve the mystery of
the cause. Much of this "mystery" for which no explanation could then be
offered has been largely dispelled by modern knowledge of heredity. It would
necessitate writing at great length were I to describe even a few of his,
and many other scientists', experiments, as well as involve us in
complicated scientific terms. This I will refrain from doing, to keep my
treatise as understandable as possible to the average reader, since I am not
writing for experienced dog breeders or students of genetics. For them this
article is elementary, with nothing supplied that they do not already know.

Recapitulation

To those for whom it is written, however, a summation of the total effects
of inbreeding, and to a modified degree that of line breeding, follows.

All characteristics both good and bad exist in various degrees in different
dogs. One wishes in his matings to secure and retain the desirable
characteristics, and it is easily demonstrable that this can best be
accomplished by inbreeding and, to a lesser degree, by line breeding. It is
also easy to show that, by using the same methods of breeding, the lowest
intensity of undesirable characteristics is attainable. Results are entirely
dependent upon SELECTION, remembering that 
"Physical compensation is the foundation rock upon which all enduring worth
must be built".

Part II

In this article it is my intention to supplement and elaborate upon the
subjects of inbreeding, line breeding and out crossing, which I discussed in
the July issue. I endeavored in that installment to explain the simplest
meaning, as most commonly accepted, of inbreeding and line breeding. It also
contained some categorical statements regarding the results to be achieved,
and the dangers involved, in using either system or a combination of both.
Therefore, in order to make what follows understandable and of more value to
new readers who may not have seen the first article, it might be well for me
to give the following recapitulation.

I concluded my July article with the following: "I am not writing for
experienced dog breeders or students of genetics. For them this article is
elementary, with nothing supplied that they do not already know. To those
for whom it is written, however, a summation of the total effects of
inbreeding, and to a modified degree that of line breeding, follows.

All characteristics both good and bad exist in various degrees in different
dogs. One wishes in his matings to secure and retain the desirable
characteristics, and it is easily demonstrable that this can best be
accomplished by inbreeding and, to a lesser degree, by line breeding. It is
also easy to show that, by using the same methods of breeding, the lowest
intensity of undesirable characteristics is attainable. Results are entirely
dependent upon selection, remembering that physical compensation is the
foundation rock upon which all enduring worth must be built.

It would seem that the italicized lines above could be easily understood by
everybody, and would need no explanation. Since writing it, however, a
reader has questioned me as to its meaning. In brief, it is an abjuration
against selecting a mating pair by pedigrees alone and emphasizes the
importance of considering as a mate for any dog one that is right where the
other is faulty. The word "physical" is stressed because any dog, which is
not mentally sound, should not be used as a breeder. In the event that such
a one IS bred, however, the same rule holds true. As just one example of
many that could be used to illustrate the meaning of "physical
compensation": Where the Standard of a breed calls for a well laid back
shoulder blade, one should not breed a bitch with a "steep", "short", or
"pushed forward" shoulder blade to a stud having any of the same
shortcomings.

While briefly on this subject, I should mention that failure to practice
"physical compensation" is perhaps the most common mistake made by the
average dog breeder. In my own particular breed, the German Shepherd Dog, we
see it constantly the mating, for instance, of terrier fronted dogs to
others similarly built and especially of soft-backed dogs to others also
possessing faulty top lines. So, when considering inbreeding or line
breeding, and presenting the advantages, I cannot over-stress the necessity
of first considering physical compensation if one expects to obtain enduring
worth, for it is the foundation rock, rather than the pedigrees alone.

In these articles I shall at time seem repetitious, perhaps bringing up the
same point several times. When that occurs it is because I may either want
to restate something so it will be remembered, supply added emphasis or
clarity some point presently being touched upon.

How To Do Inbreeding

As I have tried to explain, the first prerequisite for inbreeding is to
start with superior animals. It should NEVER be inaugurated by ANY breeder
possessing mediocre breeding stock. An explanation of this requirement
should be made because many of my readers will immediately conclude that the
advantages of this system of breeding cannot be for them . . . they may not
possess, nor can they afford to buy, or perhaps find available, superior
breeding stock. While any one or all of the above hindrances may be present,
they can eventually still do that type of breeding. It will simply
necessitate a few more years of effort before they can properly start either
inbreeding or line breeding. Possessing only a rather mediocre bitch, they
can "breed up" through using a stud whose structure bears a strong
resemblance to the breed Standard's requirements. Then, on the resultant
bitch progeny, or on a selected number from that litter, they should return
to the sire's side of the litter for following matings. I shall go further
into that later.

If one grades relentlessly and discards all untypical specimens from his
breeding use, inbreeding can be practiced with considerable impunity. On the
other hand, if a breeder finds himself in possession of a small amount of
very superior blood, and is wondering how to use it, and decides to "breed
out" or, as it is commonly termed, do complete out-crossing, he will lose
his type by dissipation. It is only because complete outcrosses are all but
impossible to make, within most breeds, (and this bold assertion will be
examined in a later article) that the matings which are termed, and believed
to be, outcrosses succeed in producing typical stock, if they do succeed.

When a breeder experiences a great variance in the type of dogs he is
producing, and can only occasionally come up with a really good one, and
that more often than not by sheer luck . . . when the percentage of those
good ones compared to his total production is disappointingly low . . his
only course which promises any thing fruitful is inbreeding. It puts his
breeders to the severest possible test, of course, and the hazard is
admittedly great, but the possible results are phenomenal. By inbreeding he
learns where his stock has dominant and recessive traits, and what they are,
both good and bad. The really sincere breeder should always be ready to
accept whatever hazard is involved thus to obtain the necessary information
for success in the future.

If, to learn with what he is working in the matter of inherited traits, both
dominant and recessive, he decides to do inbreeding and bring to the surface
more or less hidden characteristics, the best way is to go "whole hog". Many
fanciers, fearing the consequences, proceed gingerly, breeding a little more
closely with each successive trial. This, if not successful, is
discouraging, may cause abandonment of the whole plan, is sure to accumulate
numbers of undesirable individuals, and consumes valuable time.

Breeding From the Best Without Regard to Bloodlines

I have reference here to the practice of selecting and breeding from the
best individuals but without regard to bloodlines. It is probable that,
given enough time, a fancier might come up with quite a percentage of good
dogs, especially if he confined himself to a rather limited area wherein his
selections came originally from related foundation stock. But in actual
practice the breeder following this method succeeds in producing nothing of
note, and breeds a jumble of different types. It is the system usually
followed by beginners and those whose main purpose is to breed puppies they
can sell on the basis of quoting some "big" names and the greatest number of
"champions" in the pedigree. If and when such breeders turn into fanciers
whose main objective is to become preeminent by building a strain of
superior animals within the breed, they go at once into some form of
inbreeding or line breeding and this of necessity if they are to succeed.
The system of breeding one follows, in other words, depends upon the result
to be accomplished. If the purpose is breed improvement, then inbreeding and
line breeding will be found most effective.

Personal Experience in Support of Theory

While writing these articles, the thought constantly comes to my mind that,
considering the very few breeders who have any breeding plan, and thus the
many who are likely to challenge my statements, I should explain the basis
for my breeding advice. To any reader of scientific literature pertaining to
animal breeding, or to a student of genetics, no justification is needed,
although I doubt that such persons will do more than scan these articles,
which are intentionally devoid of scientific terminology with all its
references to genes, chromosomes, phenotype, genotype, zygote, homozygous,
heterozygous, etc., etc. If I find it necessary, later on, to use these
terms, or any of the many others, I shall try to define them so they will
not be confusing to those in the "beginners' class" of breeders.

As I have previously stated, at the request of The Editor I am writing
non-scientifically. Nevertheless there should be more than my personal
opinions or beliefs and ideas presented, if credence is to be given the many
arbitrary statements I make. Otherwise I would be taking upon myself a
greater responsibility to the fancy than any conscientious person would care
to assume. It seems advisable, therefore, that I should give something of
the background upon which my statements and declarations are based.

During my more than 48 years of dog breeding, I have read and studied every
book on animal breeding I could lay hand to. Many of them are in my
permanent library and are being referred to constantly as I write, to make
certain my memory serves me correctly. It is worthwhile to read theories but
a more dependable knowledge comes through testing them one's self to
determine whether they are right or wrong, and in what degree. This I have
done.

As I am writing for an all-breed magazine and know that these articles will
be read by breeders and fanciers of various breeds, rather than by those of
German Shepherd Dogs alone, with which breed I have done most of my
experimenting, I have thus far refrained from interjecting any reference to
personal experience. From all I have learned through study, however, I would
say that whatever is applicable to one breed of dog is equally so to
another, as it is to practically all other varieties in the animal kingdom.
Therefore, in writing of the one breed with which I have worked in the main,
this should be understood and considered.

It seems to me that the story of my own testing of breeding systems, and
relating some of the results, might be of interest to my readers and perhaps
be of assistance and an incentive to them in their own breeding programs. A
presentation of some of the results, prior to telling how they were
achieved, may be sufficiently impressive to warrant increased interest in
finding out how they were accomplished. The "how" will therefore be given
later.

As unimportant to the purpose of these articles, I shall omit the details of
how I obtained my first German Shepherd Dog in 1911, and started breeding
them in 1912. My bitch was one of the first of this breed in America and was
brought over in the womb of her dam. Comparatively speaking, the breed was
in its infancy even in Germany, the land of its inception. To the best of my
knowledge there are no others in this country who started with the breed in
those early days, bred them as long as I did, and have retained their
interest even unto this day. Isn't it claimed that five years is about the
lifespan of the average breeder who gets into the game, and continues his
interest in breeding dogs?

After a great many more than five, during which time my hobby consisted of
breeding dogs just for the fun of it and, when luck was with me, making a
little profit occasionally, my objective changed. For one thing, the
popularity of the breed as it became better known in this country, had
caused thousands to start breeding it. There was a saturated market of pups
for pets, as often happens when any breed achieves great popularity. During
the depression of the early thirties I bred only a litter or two a year and
found I had the time as ~vel1 as the inclination to study a bit about how to
breed better dogs. I shall skip some intervening years until about 1940, at
which time I announced my intention to establish a strain within the breed.
In my SHEPHERD DOG REVIEW ad, I stated it would be built on three great
imported males of that time, and named them, giving my reasons for the
incorporation of each one in my breeding program. Their names and close
blood relationship will be given later when I explain, HOW the following
results were achieved. It is my purpose to limit a listing of these results
to no more than enough to show that the "proof of the pudding is in the
eating thereof", and that I have tested the theories about which I write.

Before setting forth some of the results of my breeding plan, perhaps I
should explain that I no longer have ANY connection, either in an active or
advisory capacity, with any kennel, and this has been true for several
years. I therefore, have no self-serving motive in writing of my
achievements.

In the early forties, I made some incest breedings for educational
purposes-to ascertain the dominant and recessive characteristics of the
individuals being used in my breeding program. The first dogs of the strain
I was then starting began to be shown in competition in 1945. During the
next fourteen years more than 90 homebred champions were finished by
customers and ourselves, here and abroad. I am told that this is a world
record for any breeder, in a lifetime of breeding and showing. I emphasize
"homebred'' above because the total does not include the probably larger
number of those finished who were sired by our studs, or from matings made
by customers of bitches bought from us and thereafter bred to our studs.

In all fairness, I should insert here a clarification of the use of "us" and
"we" in the preceding paragraph. The kennel operation as a hobby became too
large for me and I found myself forced to neglect my business. When this
happened I seriously considered liquidating my Long-Worth Kennels,
especially since I had achieved my purpose of building a strain within the
breed and had established a definite type with the ability to "carry on', as
such closely bred (inbred and line bred) animals have the prepotency to do.
Briefly, and without further explanation I finally decided that, rather than
let Long-Worth pass into oblivion, I would give it to Mrs. Virginia McCoy
(now Mrs. Richard Vaughn). She had fist managed the kennel operation for me
and had been one of the most apt "pupils' ever to come to me to learn or
just to ''talk dogs". With my championship record well on its way, and using
many of the original foundation stock of the strain, she augmented the
number already finished for the title, and bred them independently.

Now again to some of the results, I should like to mention the Register of
Merit, which will mean nothing to other than breeders of German Shepherd
Dogs without my giving a short explanation. So far as I know, no such record
of producing sires and dams is made except in one breed of cattle, and in
our breed of dogs. Some years ago our Parent Club started keeping such a
record of producing sires, and later included bitches. Certain wins by the
at major point shows, made by their progeny, award to the sires and dams a
designated number of points. When a dog has sired 5 champions. 10 progeny
have made major class wins, and he has accumulated a certain number of
points, he receives the honor of being rated as a Register of Merit
(abbreviated ROM) sire, or dam.

Ch. Vol of Long-Worth is the highest ROM sire in the breed, with 1120
points, more than double the number (545) of the second highest rating male.
whose mother, incidentally, was bred at Long-Worth and was Vol's
half-sister. Very close in number of points (493) behind the second male is
Vol's son Ch. Chimney Sweep of Long-Worth, in third place. Sweep was not
only sired by Vol, whose grandmother was Ch. Nyx of Long Worth. mentioned
below, but his dam was a Nyx daughter. Sweep himself became the all-time
greatest Group and Best in Show winner of the breed.

In fourth position is another Vol son, Ch. Jolly Arno of Edgetowne. with 468
points. Jolly Arno was an inbred grandson of Ch. Derry of Long-Worth who was
the sire of Vol. and himself a ROM sire with 12 champion offspring to his
credit. Ch. Derry was quite an old dog before outside breeders took any
advantage of his potential (as is so often the case with great sires) and
then not more than a tithe as many used him, as those who bred to Ch. Vol.
It was Derry's close line' breeding, intensified in the mating that produced
Vol, which made the latter the most prepotent sire in the breed's history.
There are hosts of others listed in the ROM either bred at Long-Worth or
carrying its blood.

These breedings will be explained in a following article so that readers
with enough patience to read through the above, and what follows, presenting
PROOF that the writer is not just a theorist, may learn how probably the
greatest strain in any breed of dogs was built.

It is difficult to present these facts and not seem boastful, but perhaps I
may he allowed a feeling of justifiable pride in announcing that not only
did I breed the highest ROM sire in the breed, but also the top-rating brood
bitch. Ch. Nyx of Long-Worth holds that unchallenged (to date) record. Most
interesting to students of breeding is the fact that she was the mother of
Derry, the sire of Vol. Nyx has undeniably had more influence for good on
the breed than any other bitch. Bred only a very few times, she produced
thirteen champions, a breed record. Her famous "D" litter, with only six of
the eight ever shown, finished easily. This is an all-time record for any
bitch of the breed. Incidentally, this litter was so closely line bred as to
be termed inbred by some.

Also worthy of note: There were only four bitches awarded Honorary ROM
titles in '59, because of their records made prior to the establishment of
ROM for bitches. All of them were Long-Worth bitches, with one being one of
my three foundation matrons. Combined, they produced a total of 25
champions, with the foundation bitch being next highest in number of points
to Nyx. Another of our three foundation bitches was awarded an Honorary ROM
position prior to 1959 and was the dam of 8 title-holders. This points out
the importance of starting with good bitches, whether in building a strain
or in just breeding a few good dogs.

Ch. and U.S. Grand Victor Jory of Edgetowne (litter brother of fourth
position ROM sire Jolly Arno, and of Ch. Jaunty of Edgetowne) was inbred on
Ch. Derry, his sire being Vol (Derry son) and his dam also having been sired
by Derry. Ch. and U.S. Grand Victrix Yola of Long-Worth, perhaps the most
perfect bitch I ever bred, was, but let's skip the rest. The portion of the
record already given has perhaps become tiresome, but I did want to give
enough of it to prove my points: (1) That the systems of breeding I have
been writing about CAN be used to advantage if one practices, and I am again
repeating, the rule that 'Physical compensation is the foundation rock upon
which all enduring worth must be built"; and (2) That I am not open to the
charge of "talking through my hat" in writing about animal breeding theories
obtained only through "book learning' ".

As previously stated, I will discuss in the next installment HOW the
Long-Worth strain, which made the record part of which is given above, was
built. Whether there will be any further articles on breeding after that
depends upon the interest evidenced in these.

Part III

After relating in the second installment of these articles some of the
gratifying results achieved through my own use of inbreeding. Line breeding,
and "family" breeding, I stated that the "HOW" would be explained. I also
mentioned an advertisement appearing about 1940 in THE SHEPHERD DOG REVIEW
in which I announced by intention to build a distinctive strain within the
breed using three great males. In that announcement I gave their names and
the reasons each was to be utilized as a foundation head, stating that they
were closely related.

Building a Strain

Up to that time my breeding operations had been of the sort practiced by the
average dog fancier, fully 98% of them, I would estimate. This consisted of
mating the best bitches I could get to the best available males, regardless
of related bloodlines. It is true, however, that for many years I had
practiced compensatory matings - using studs strong in characteristics in
which the bitches needed improvement. This was a plan, but not a breeding
program such as I then inaugurated, although it produced more than the
average run of good specimens which are bred by those who make only
hit-or-miss matings, but still it did not give me multiple Champion litters,
or establish a definite TYPE. As explained in the preceding articles, these
results can be obtained ONLY by utilizing the power of inbreeding and line
breeding.

Referred to hereafter by their first names only, these three foundation
males were German Sieger, U.S. Ch. Pfeffer v. Bern, his half-brother (same
sire) U.S. Ch. Odin v. BuseckerSchloss, and German Sieger, U.S. Ch. Arras
a.d. Stadt-Verbert. The common sire of the first two dogs was Dachs von
Bern. Dachs' sire had as his paternal grandfather Ger. Sgr. Utz von
HausSchutting, while his dam Vicki was sired by Utz. Now we come to Arras,
the other male in the triumvirate. His dam was the triple Siegerin (German
Grand Champion) Stella von HausSchutting, claimed by the German breeders to
be the greatest specimen of the breed they had ever produced. Stella's sire
and dam were BOTH by Utz, making her the offspring of a half brother-sister
mating. From the above we see that all three dogs stemmed closely and
strongly from Utz.

In addition to being thus closely related, each dog had some compensating
factors for the others. (Remember as applicable here the several times
repeated principle given in the previous installments: "Physical
compensation is the foundation rock upon which all enduring worth must be
built".) My breeding program was predicated upon "closed-up" bloodlines,
commonly designated as inbreeding and line breeding, hence the importance of
that dictum.

Only in a general way are the compensating factors, which I had to consider
of importance to the fanciers of other breeds. Every variety may tend to
have different shortcomings at one time or another in their history. It may
be heads, or feet, or on throughout the entire category of physical
structure. However, to make this clearer, I might state that some of the
main shortcomings, or faults, most common in our breed at that time were
soft top lines, straight (terrier-like) fore assemblies and fading pigment.

In announcing my intention to build a real strain within the breed, using
these three males as the foundation stones, I wrote that I was using Pfeffer
for his over-all, type, noble appearance, excellent rear angulation, and
pigment. His half-brother Odin was to be used for top line correction, ideal
ribbing, perfection of gait and, in common with Pfeffer, a good shoulder
assembly. Arras was being incorporated in my projected strain to increase
the strength of Odin's top line influence, as well as Pfeffer's pigment;
also for his good, although small, amount of somewhat unrelated blood which
brought in traits possessed by the other two which were desirable but not as
strong in their dominance as I felt was needed.

Importance in Selection of Bitches

Having decided upon the breeding program as has been briefly outlined, my
next step, of course, was to find and obtain the necessary bitches with
which to implement it. This is not an easy task at any time, or in any
breed. Owners of females of breeding age who have proven themselves, or
because of type and bloodlines give promise of being worthy producers, are
loathe to part with them. When one adds the stipulation that they must be
daughters of certain studs, their procurement becomes increasingly
difficult. Suffice it to say here, with no other explanation than that it
took me about two years to find and obtain them, I DID get a daughter of
each of the above three studs. Moreover, in most respects they evidenced the
traits for which their sires were notable, and for which I had chosen them
to found a strain.

With only the mention of my foundation BITCHES given above, I am sure I have
not sufficiently stressed their importance. It is a much-used aphorism that
no stable is better than its mares, and no kennel better than its bitches.
That, of course, is true. The most valuable acquisition a would-be dog
breeder can make is that of a good bitch or bitches. Without one or more of
these, the tasks of breeding superior specimens in any breed is a long, if
not indeed a hopeless, one. It is better, surely, if the bitch herself
possesses all the attributes of a show specimen, but of great importance
also is her genetic background. It is in her bloodlines, as delineated by
her pedigree, that her potential worth can best be judged.

Perhaps some elaboration and explanation of that statement should be made,
especially as there are those who believe that a top bitch, regardless of
what may be behind her in blood-lines, will as likely produce good ones as
will another who, though less perfect herself, has a family of good ones
behind her. Every experienced dog breeder knows, and it was pointed out in
an earlier installment, that sometimes a superior specimen will come from a
quite nondescript and hit-or-miss mating. Such a one is an accident or
"happenstance". To claim that a bitch is more likely to reproduce in her own
image than that of any one of her litter mates, for instance, is to
demonstrate an ignorance of the laws of heredity. Which one or ones, if any,
in the litter might carry the genes for the characteristics she alone
manifests can be determined only by testing them as breeders.

Here as an illustration is just one example of many observed during my
experimental dog breeding days. In a litter of eight there appeared only one
who was white. Structurally she was the best of the lot and quite a superior
specimen. Bred a total of seven times during her lifetime, she herself never
produced a white, nor did any appear in succeeding generations, at least not
up to the fourth, when I lost track of them. She either did not carry the
genes for white, or the genes for pigment, which she carried, were dominant.
On the other hand, several of her sisters did whelp whites.

Bitch's Background of Utmost importance

While one of the tenets of all animal breeding is selectivity, this does not
mean that a superior bitch, with nothing behind her in sufficient strength
to dominate, can be expected to produce as well as another who, although
somewhat less perfect in her own structure, has a family tree inbred or line
bred upon superior quality.

The sometimes heard statement that "Like produces like" is far from being a
dependable truism, BOTH are of importance, the over-all quality and type of
the bitch, as well as her family tree, but of the two the latter will be
found to have the more influence both for good and for bad. The first
article in this series explained why this MUST be true.

It is my desire to get away from the subject of my personal operations, in
the matter of building a strain, as quickly as possible. Supplying a record
of all, or of even a few, of the inter-related matings would be, I fear, not
only somewhat confusing, unless pedigrees were given for study, but would
also result in book-length articles unsuitable for a magazine, and
particularly for one read by fanciers of all breeds. However, in order to
explain the "how," it seems necessary to continue with that subject to a
somewhat greater length.

Having obtained the three foundation bitches, each related to the others
through their sires, and with one having both Pfeffer and Arras close up in
her pedigree, I was ready to begin breeding operations, ready, I thought and
hoped, to start a breeding program from which would eventuate a noteworthy
strain of dogs.

Choosing the Males

If it has not already been noted by my readers, I should call attention here
to the fact that, since my start was made with bitches sired by three
closely related males, I was able to dispense with some years of preliminary
matings. Had three unrelated sires been chosen, it would have taken several
generations of breeding before I could have had in my kennel bitches so
closely related in blood as to make inbreeding and line breeding possible.
With two of the foundation males having the same sire (plus other related
blood), and the third a close-up descendent of the great German Sieger, U.s.
Ch. Utz v. Haus-Schutting. as were the others, I was actually STARTING with
line bred animals. (Had either Odin, or his half-brother Pfeffer, been a
bitch, and one bred to the other, that would have been inbreeding.)

Therefore one can see how quickly I was "cooking with gas" or, perhaps
stated mores understandably, doing planned line breeding, when I bred either
an Odin daughter to Pfeffer, or the reverse-and I immediately did both. The
results to be anticipated, as described in my first installment explaining
what can be expected from inbreeding and line breeding, were quickly brought
forth and plainly visible. It took only a few generations until the type I
had wanted to establish and "set" was obtained.

While none of the three males upon which I started the strain was perfect in
all characteristics (no dog as yet has ever been), it should be pointed out
that not, only were they quite superior specimens in themselves, but each
compensated the other in one or more respects. This being true, when some
unwanted or undesirable trait showed up, coinpensati9n could usually be
found in one of the others.

Foundation Blood Intensifies

Pedigrees: Year after year, and generation after generation, this foundation
blood continued to intensify in the pedigrees of my dogs. Modified out
crossings were made only occasionally. By "modified" I mean that, when
reaching out for some needed trait, I used a stud or bitch possessing at
least one-fourth, or better, one-half, of the blood of my strain. Both in
such instances, and in the rare ones when complete out crossing was done, I
made it a practice to mate one or more of the resultant progeny right back
into the strain. By doing this, I did not lose the qualities I had strived
to obtain and make dominant, nor did I dissipate them.

Some of the results of this breeding program were reported last month.
Multiple champion litters became more the rule than the exception, of ten
with every member who was given a chance, through being shown by its owner,
finishing for the title.

Temperament and Mentality not Sacrificed

If any of my readers are Obedience enthusiasts, and not particularly
concerned with structural perfection, they may feel that no consideration
was given to intelligence and trainability in the building of this strain.
Nothing could be further from the truth.

Because the abbreviations for German training degrees would be confusing to
those in breeds which did not originate in that country, I purposely omitted
them when giving the names and CONFORMATION titles of the three sires upon
which the strain was founded. Each of them, however, had received, prior to
his importation, one or more training degrees showing he had passed the
necessary tests to "graduate". As I now remember it, all three had been
awarded the PH. (Polizeihund- Police Dog) degree, which signifies much more
than our U.D.T.

The crux of the above dissertation on mental attributes is this: Qualities
of the mind, as well as physical characteristics, are subject to the same
laws of heredity. My strain became well known not only because of its
members' structural superiority but because of their exceptional
trainability in Obedience work as well. One member became top-scoring dog,
all breeds, in the United States for two successive years prior to his
retirement. It should be stated that I take no credit for this, having
neither bred nor trained the dog. The sire of this "dual Champion" (both a
bench show and an obedience trial title holder) was a son of Pfeffer, one of
my foundation studs, while his dam (one of my world-famous "D" six Champion
German Shepherd Dog litter) was so closely line bred on both Pfeffer and
Arras as to be considered by some geneticists as inbred.

The belief, and some uninformed breeders' contention, that inbreeding and
line breeding per se will cause either physical or mental deterioration is a
fallacy many times proven. Consider the breeding of the above dog as just
one example of many that could be cited.

Inbreeding and line breeding cannot be looked upon as a way to bring NEW
characteristics into a breed but, as Humphrey states, it " is a source of
never ending combinations of racial characters in new individuals, producing
variations, which are COMPARATIVELY SLIGHT EXCEPT WHEN THE TWO PARENTS ARE
FROM WIDELY SEPARATED LINES."

Part IV

Since I am not a professional writer, nor do I possess either the aptitude
or inclination for such work it has been my intention and desire to
discontinue these articles as soon as I felt that the editor's request for
something on the above subject had been covered. It seems, therefore, that I
made a mistake when I stated, at the end of a previous installment, that a
continuance would be predicated upon the interest shown by DOG WORLD
readers. I am sure the response has amazed till of us.

Because through lack of time I have been unable to write personally to each
of those who have requested more articles, I want to express my appreciation
here.

The effort made to be of whatever help I can is doubly rewarding because of
the many novices who have written that although they had long wanted
information on breeding better dogs, and had repeatedly asked successful
breeders for help, little had been forthcoming. One does indeed wonder why
so many old timers are chary of assisting the beginners. We seem to forget
that we ourselves were once in their position, and how much easier the road
would have been for us had we been given encouragement and a helping hand.

The preceding installments have dealt mainly with defining inbreeding and
line breeding together with their advantages and the results to be expected.
There was also a report of some of the writers successes obtained by using
these breeding methods. While much more could, and perhaps should, follow
along the same line, it can wait until a future time. The subject of out
crossing is particularly timely now, when there seems to be not only many
misconceptions regarding it, but probably never before in the history of dog
breeding such a regrettable and harmful amount of it being done.

Somewhere in a previous article I made a statement to the effect that in
some breeds the bad results of out crossing were not as evident as they
would be were it not almost impossible to find absolutely unrelated blood in
those varieties. This, I said, would be explained later. Probably this
should be done now, before going into the matter of out crossing.

Ancestors in Common Don't Guarantee Worthwhile Breeding

Many breeds, and the German Shepherd Dog is a prime example, can trace their
origin back to not only one or two foundation heads, but also through
little, if any, more than a human lifetime. I myself bad dogs but a few
generations removed from Horand Grafrath. He was whelped in 1895 and was the
first dog of our breed to be registered. To my knowledge, every living
German Shepherd Dog in this country traces back, through one or another of
his sons, to Horand. Some breeds which have existed since antiquity, with a
type somewhat like that of today, can similarly trace their upgrading, which
developed the present specimens, to some "great" of the relatively close
past. This is true in many varieties of animals, as illustrated by
Hamiltonian 10 in racehorses, to cite just one example.

If one will examine the complete pedigrees, perhaps through six generations,
of ancestors behind any two purebred dogs of a recognized breed, it may be
seen that the two mated dogs will have at least one ancestor in common
somewhere in the combined pedigrees It is more likely that there will be
several common ancestors in the six generations and that the name of one or
more of them will appear more than once in one or both pedigrees. With the
usually shortened pedigree, supplying the names no further back than perhaps
the great-grandparents' generation, the breeder may believe that he is
making a complete outcross.

While it is most assuredly not my contention that the breeding of one dog to
just any other in the same breed is- not out crossing, I am trying to
explain that there often is some interrelationship. Although a common
ancestor is so far removed as to have no significant influence, the type
that lie originated may have kept the breed members more closely alike than
they would have been without him.

In view of what I have written above, some of my readers may conclude that
an outstanding animal appearing once or even several times further back than
the third generation will have a noteworthy influence. One often sees
pedigrees, especially those of German Shepherd Dogs currently being
imported, stating that there is line breeding to one or more sires, as "4-5"
or "5-5", meaning in the fourth and fifth, or twice in the fifth,
generations. When it is considered that a dog appearing the fourth
generation contributes only about 1/256 of the heredity factors in a puppy,
one can understand that those distant relatives could not have done much to
overcome the influence of the unrelated and perhaps inferior specimens
appearing in the pedigree later. Altogether too many fanciers are misled
into feeling they have a worthwhile breeding animal because back in the
third or fourth generations there appears one or more outstanding dogs.

Out crossing, Part of Planned Breeding

There have been many, and far better, articles than I can write anent the
matter of out crossing including if, when, and how to do it. One such
appeared only last year in DOG WORLD by the famous geneticist Dr. E. Fitch
Daglish. Anything that I, or anybody else might write would have to be
repetitious, so well did he cover the subject.

Pointing this out to our editor, he explained that there were probably many
who did not read it, that there were new subscribers who had not had the
opportunity, and, "Besides, it and the other subjects you have been covering
can't be repeated too many times." If all this be true, I need then only
apologize for singing the same song again to those who are excepted from the
above categories.

Out crossing is, of course, a concomitant of "planned breeding" and
therefore MUST be considered when offering any effectual treatise on that
subject.

Previous installments have dealt in the main with the use of inbreeding and
line breeding to establish a strain within a breed of dogs. It remains now
to cover the matter of how often it is advisable to introduce an outcross
and, when and if such an outcross is made, where one goes from there.

I would like to interject here my observation of something that continually
amazes me, 2nd it has to do particularly with our present-day German
Shepherd Dog breeders. Practically none of them have evolved a "plan" of ANY
sort. There is presently a heterogeneous crop of imported males available
and they are being used as breeders by hundreds of fanciers who have NO
knowledge of those dogs' ancestors. Neither have they the least knowledge of
the producing abilities of these studs themselves, in most instances. I have
asked dozens of these breeders (they cannot rightly be designated as
"fanciers"), "Where do you plan to go from there? and I cannot remember a
single instance when any one of them could tell me of a breeding plan he had
for the future.

We are about to discuss out crossing and, as above outlined, "how often,"
"when," and "if" to do it. This will mean absolutely nothing, whatever I may
write, to such hit-or-miss breeders who are not only starting with
outcross-bred animals, but must almost of necessity CONTINUE that process
unless they immediately find some way to breed back on the sire's side
(often inadvisable when his forebears are considered, or impossible from the
standpoint of availability), or start inbreeding on the best dogs of the
dam's side. But when asked, "What are you going to do next?" as stated
above, the usually reply is, "I haven't gotten that far." or "I haven't
thought of that."

Using the vernacular. I will state unequivocally that "nobody but nobody"
amongst them is going to do constructive animal breeding or produce a
satisfactory percentage of top specimens, and most certainly they WILL NOT
build a strain within the breed. This having been proved to be true
innumerable times by geneticists and all successful animal breeders,
regardless of variety, what follows can be of value or interest to those now
doing such outcross breeding only for one reason: to demonstrate why they
are not getting the desired results

Outcross Only for Definite Purpose

Those doing planned breeding based upon inbreeding and line breeding should
outcross only for a definite purpose. Where the misconception started that
it is not safe to inbreed more than three generations without an outcross
nobody seems to know, but it is not necessarily valid. To my own misfortune
I myself believed this fallacy at one time, and reaped the consequences.

Every experienced breeder knows that, perhaps more often than not, the
offspring of a first-generation outcross of two excellent animals show many
of the good points of their parents. That is why, when so many of those
first generation puppies from outcross matings are doing well in the show
ring, their breeders, and others who have noted this, rush to make similar
breedings. They will undoubtedly learn, as I did, that the youngsters of
succeeding generations of outcross breeding will be a heterogeneous lot,
showing an absolute lack of uniformity. This will not only prevent those
breeders from developing and holding a proper type, but will help to make
their breed one of even further differing types in size and proportion.

Such breeders then, do a disservice to their breed and are mainly
responsible for the great differentiation within it. They also are the cause
of many judges' bewilderment. One often hears puzzled fudges ask, in judging
German Shepherd Dogs, for instance, "What DO you WANT, anyhow, those big and
square ones, the small long ones, those angulated as your Standard calls
for, or those built about like Collies?"

Breeders who believe that an outcross should be made at some definite time
as, for instance, the previously mentioned third generation, are, as another
writer has put it, giving credence to one of those "old wives' tales" to
which some dog breeders seem to be particularly addicted.

When Should Outcross Be Made?

In answering this question, I can give no better advice than that advanced
by Dr. Daglish: "To ask when an outcross should be made in a certain number
of generations is like asking on which days of the week one should carry an
umbrella." It seems to be a popular belief that bringing in new blood every
once in awhile, or even with every breeding, must be beneficial after line
breeding and inbreeding have been practiced for a few generations, but it is
absolutely the opposite of the truth if my several times repeated tenet,
'Physical compensation is the foundation rock upon which all enduring worth
must be built." has been followed during the period of closed-up breeding.

If my readers have obtained a correct understanding of the earlier
installments of these articles, they will know that inbreeding and line
breeding make for the elimination of recessive factors, which produce
faults, and bring about purification within their strain. This close
breeding upon the blood of one or more superior specimens has quite rapidly
done away with the influence of the more faulty ancestors, and caused a
definite type to be established. Because, at least after the first
generation of an outcross mating, a breeder will LOSE THE TYPE HE HAS WORKED
TO OBTAIN through line breeding and inbreeding (unless he then breeds back
into his established line), an outcross should be made only FOR A SPECIFIC
PURPOSE- to correct a fault or faults which may have shown up in his inbred
strain. More will be written about this later.

To be successful as a breeder, one must seek to produce animals which are
genetically pure for all those dominant qualities which are demanded by the
breed's Standard of perfection. The nearer he approaches that ideal the more
uniform-similar in type-will be the dogs he produces.

When a breeder of any variety of dogs uses the more distantly related
animals in his matings, he can expect less uniformity in the offspring. So,
as previously stated, if complete outcrosses are used at all, they should be
made for a definite reason and not with the belief that the purpose of the
matings will be fulfilled in one generation. To cover fully the reasons for
this statement and prove its worth would entail the writing of a full-length
installment in this series, as well as the use and explanation of many
terms, which might be confusing to novices in the breeding art.

To supply some backing for what I have written however, other than my own
statement of fact) which is based upon both study and experience, I quote
Onstott: "Any virtues which may be added to a strain through out-crossing .
. . cannot be looked upon as inherent in that strain UNTIL THEY HAVE BEEN
PURIFIED AND FIXED WITHIN THAT STRAIN THROUGH INBREEDING.

Out crossing is only to be employed as a means to an end and as a
preliminary to the FIXATION of its good results, if any, through
inbreeding."

Strains and Real Strains

To those who have become readers of DOG WORLD since this series started, I
might explain that in speaking of a "strain" I mean, as someone has put it,
a "variety within a variety" of animals.

One familiar with many breeds of dogs is struck by the fact that few breeds
have many real strains within them. Uninformed breeders speak of "my strain"
or "his strain' when all that any of them have is a kennel of dogs
possessing hit-or-miss pedigrees with a hodgepodge of ancestors, perhaps
including "Champions" in their pedigrees, which, of course, indicates to the
cognoscente that the advertiser is a rank and uninformed novice of the first
order. In conversations, these people usually speak of their "strains" when,
as stated above, all they have is a mixture of several strains, or perhaps
one of "just dogs" with no rhyme or reason for any of them having been mated
together.

However, where there ARE real strains within any breed, one seldom finds
them unmixed with the blood of other so-called strains, because most
breeders start their strain with the same ancestor, or ancestors. This is
done because those mutual ancestors were considered to be great dogs of
their time, as they probably were, or else a breeder knowledgeable and
serious-minded enough to start building a strain would not have chosen them.
WHEN such superior specimens have in mutuality been selected by the founders
of different strains within a breed, the so-called out-crossing between
their strains is less hazardous than would he the using of animals with
either no, or very distant, relationship.

I shall continue this important subject of out crossing in the next
installment and try to explain how best to do it, when it is considered
advisable.

Part V

In the preceding installment, I stated that there are few real strains
within any of the various breeds of dogs in this country. I defined a strain
as being a "variety within a variety" having a distinct type, the members of
which are recognizable as being of that family.

It was also explained that, where there are strains, one seldom finds them
unmixed with the blood of other so-called strains since most breeders
started their strains with the same ancestor or ancestors, this because that
dog or dogs were great ones of their time and recognized generally as being
so. When outcrosses are made between two such strains, there is not as great
risk as though there were not common ancestors reasonably close up in both
pedigrees.

Before going further into the subject of out-crossing, I feel it should be
repeated that NO complete out breeding should be done unless some fault or
faults have shown up in an established strain. If even through careful
selection during the building of his strain, a breeder finds he has some
shortcomings he cannot eliminate or improve without using outside blood,
then it is time to outcross. This may well be one of the most critical
periods in his breeding career.

It is not the experienced and informed breeders who constantly practice out
crossing but rather the novices and uninformed who hope, through out
crossing, to retain all of the virtues, the while they eliminate the faults,
in the first generation resulting from an outcross. Unfortunately it is not
as simple as that, for out crossing BRINGS UNDESIRABLE CHARACTERISTICS TOO.
Faults brought in through out crossing can be eliminated or line breeding of
the progeny resulting from an outcross.

To Get Desired Characteristic When 

In reaching out, through outcross blood, to obtain some wanted
characteristic not present in his strain, or to correct a fault he has not
been able to eliminate from it through closed-up breeding, a breeder should
make the outcross as partial as possible. In other words, he should obtain
the desired correction or improvement through using a stud possessing the
needed trait, and who is also, if possible, related to his own strain-the
more closely related the better. Through this procedure he may save himself
from the necessity of generations of breeding to regain the virtues already
in his strain as well as hold those he obtained by out crossing. This is
true because out crossing is quite as likely to destroy the good traits
already possessed as to add others which are missing and desired.

Perhaps at another time I will explain the basis of this principle by going
into the matter of genes and chromosomes and how they combine. For the
present, however, as I have stated previously, I am making these articles as
easily understandable as possible to the novice breeder. To do so, I must at
times make statements of fact known to every geneticist and student of
animal breeding, without explaining scientifically the proof supporting
them.

So important is the matter of what to do after making an outcross, I think
it should be repeated that any bad results from out crossing can be
eliminated only through continued inbreeding or line breeding, and careful
selection, so that the benefits derived from out crossing may be
incorporated in one's strain.

There art two reasons why a breeder sometimes obtains approximately what he
is seeking in the first generation of an outcross. The first is that what he
believes to be an outcross may be the mating of two dogs who are not as
unrelated as it appears to him from looking at their short pedigrees. As
previously stated, a more extended pedigree might show relationship.

The second reason takes a bit more explaining. A breeder sincerely
interested in producing high quality dogs usually searches for a prepotent
stud dog known to sire outstanding progeny. It is quite generally known that
such males are dominant because of being, in most instances, either inbred
or line bred, and, putting it in the most simple way, they thus have the
power to impose their own characteristics over the recessive ones of a
hit-or-miss bred bitch. Sometimes I like to explain it this way: such a cold
bred bitch can be likened to the seed bed, the earth, while the male's sperm
is the seed which produces its own kind. Of course, the reverse is true when
the bitch with inbred dominance is mated to a cold-bred stud.

Danger in Continued 

When salubrious results are obtained in the first generation of an outcross,
many breeders think-, the mating was an unqualified success and all they
need do thereafter is to continue such out crossing to, become great
breeders with an established type of their own, producing a high average of
good ones. They could not be more mistaken, since the exact opposite is sure
to occur. I can do no better than quote here from the world-famous
geneticist Dr. E. Fitch Daglish, who is also a contributor to DOG WORLD. -
The following is an excerpt from his article in the June l959 issue:

"INVISIBLE FACTORS INHERITED: One of the fundamental principles of genetics
is that it is not the visible properties of individuals that are inherited
but those factors or genes which endow them with the ability to produce
certain qualities under certain conditions. When two animals differing in
genetic make-up are mated, their offspring must be genetically impure in
varying degrees however closely the two parents may resemble each other in
outward appearance. It is this, which causes the wide variation in size,
shape, constitution and so on that is invariably seen is, the second
generation of cross breeds.

Impressive examples are furnished by the familiar utility crosses in
poultry, cattle and pigs produced by farmers. Such first crosses are, as a
rule, very uniform in appearance and for certain purposes are preferred as
layers or fatteners, but if such hybrids are bred from the results are
always disappointing. They are impure in respect to so many genes for all
those factors in which their parents differed-that their progeny show the
widest variations and include a large proportion of individuals of very low
qu4itv from whatever point of view they are judged. "It may be objected that
what happens when different breeds are crossed is not relevant to the
effects to be expected from out crossing within a single breed but,
genetically out crossing and crossbreeding differ only in degree. Both
involve the mating of individuals whose genetic constitution is almost
certain to differ widely so that there must be a drastic reshuffling of
genes in the offspring." (Italics are my own.)

It should be remembered, therefore, that as dog breeders we are dealing not
only with the physical structure of a mating pair, but with the GENES
inherited from the forbears shown in their pedigrees.

Failing of Many Breeders

The number of breeders who know practically nothing about the ancestors of
their dogs is appalling. Many cannot even name when asked, without looking
at a pedigree, the names of the sire and dam of a dog or dogs they own. Were
they asked for a four-generation pedigree of one of their dogs, only a few
could write it from memory. In my breeding days I could do this on any one
of a hundred or more dogs in my kennel, with seldom an error.

My contention is that, unless a breeder can do likewise and also has quite a
complete knowledge of the virtues and faults of all the ancestors through at
least the third generation and even further back is preferable he will not
become even a good breeder, let alone a great one. He MUST KNOW from whence
came certain traits, both desired and undesired, if he expects to retain or
eliminate them. This cannot be accomplished by hit-or-miss breedings, be
they inbred, line bred, or, most certainly, outcross.

Whenever a breed becomes popular, there is an influx of novices not only
ignorant of what constitutes a good specimen in the variety, but much more
lacking in any knowledge of animal breeding. Newcomers should be, and
usually are, welcomed when they indicate a sincere desire to find out what a
good specimen of their chosen breed IS and have a willingness to learn and
study. It is they who must replace those who are constantly disappearing
from the game for one reason or another.

Of late there has been a big influx of beginners in several breeds, Poodles,
German Shepherd Dogs, Miniature Schnauzers and Basset Hounds, to name just a
few. Most of my life having been spent hobbying German Shepherds; my
connection with, and knowledge of, that variety is greatest, but I
understand somewhat similar conditions as to the type of breeders above also
exist in breeds other than the German Shepherd Dog.

Referring now to what has already been written about out crossing, I can
state unequivocally that in the German Shepherd Dog breed, as in no other,
can so many of the evils of that kind of hit-or-miss breeding be found
today. Out crossing is more the rule than the exception. It is being done
not by novices and beginners only, but also by many who should know better
because of greater experience in dog breeding. The results are presently
visible to all and should be a warning to fanciers of other breeds. In no
other breed with which I am familiar does one observe in the show ring such
a wide diversity of type.

Recent years have seen dozens of German Shepherd Dogs imported, with no two
of them much alike except perhaps in faults not heretofore common to our
breed in this country:

short necks, coarse and unattractive heads, insufficiently long and pushed
forward shoulder blades, soft backs, rear angulation and proportion of
length to height both falling far short of the breed Standard's
specifications, etc. Because of the belief, born perhaps of an inferiority
complex, that anything imported must per se be superior to something
produced in this country, together with lack of knowledge as to what a goad
specimen of the breed looks like, many of our breeders are rushing "like
mad" to breed their bitches to these imports.

"Warning Blood"

In all dogs we have what is termed "warning blood." As implied, this means
that there are certain faults contained in the genes of those animals, which
are quite certain to show up when they are mated to others. These
shortcomings became dominant through a lack of selection in the matings of
their ancestors, which, properly planned, would have eliminated them. I wish
to pursue this subject only enough to use it as a demonstration of WHY any
kind of out crossing, and especially that which is now being done in German
Shepherd Dogs, is dangerous and can eventuate in harm to the breed.

As has been pointed out, a breeder, to be successful and not trust entirely
to luck, must know the background of his mating pair. He must, most
importantly of all, know the WARNING BLOOD behind them. It is difficult
enough to learn of such warnings in the pedigrees of dogs with several
generations bred in this country, so HOW can he find out about those from
abroad? The fact is that probably not one in a hundred of the breeders using
imports DOES know one darned thing about what to guard against-long coats
and all of those quite commonly possessed faults listed above. If he is
ignorant of what a good specimen of his breed looks like, or hopes that the
visible faults is the dog are not inherent and will not appear in
descendants "even unto the third generation," he is fooling himself and
doing his breed a great disservice.

Imports Could Be "Tainted"

Our Shepherdists were the first to take cognizance of, and try to do
something about, hip dysplasia, that crippling disease found in so many
breeds. Great efforts have been made to eliminate it through an educational
campaign instructing breeders to use only sound animals for breeding
purposes. This is admirable and to be commended, but how sincere, may I ask,
are those (and amongst them are several who were tl2Ie loudest in their
demands that affected dogs be discarded as breeders) who themselves bred to
these imported males?

The taint has been shown to be inheritable. Not the slightest attention is,
or has been, given to it by foreign breeders. The individual dogs may be
shown to be untainted through an X-ray examination, upon or before
importation, but what about the genes they may carry for it? Do the
importers know-do the purchasers from these importers know-do the fanciers
who breed to these dogs know? What about the parents or the littermates: are
they "clean"? Who knows? The answer is that nobody knows, because no
recognition is given to hip dysplasia in Germany-no X-rays and no consequent
culling of their breeding stock. Theoretically, dogs in this country could
eventually be produced free of the taint, and then one imported dog carrying
it could start the whole thing over again. It is commonly known that some of
these imported dogs are amongst the worst offenders in siring dysplastic
progeny (and orchidism, as well). At least one dog, perhaps as perfect a
specimen as has recently been brought to this country, and for which a big
price was paid, has been returned to Germany by a conscientious American
breeder because she was dysplastic.

What does all of this actually mean to breeders? It means that out crossing
is particularly dangerous when traits both visible and those inherent in the
mating pair's ancestors, are not known. A breeder is gambling when he makes
an outcross mating, and it is an outcross breeding when no common ancestors
appear in the fourth or, at least, the fifth generation. In out crossing one
is mixing the bloodlines of different strains and consequently unwanted
recessive characteristics are likely to be brought in. Very often novice
breeders present the pedigree of their outcross-bred bitch to me, asking for
advice about breeding her. Such a pedigree cannot be evaluated properly
because it is impossible to know the genetic makeup of such an animal.

Summation

Never outcross when things seem to be going well-do it only as an
experiment, or when some fault or faults cannot be eliminated by staving
within one's strain Breeding complete outcrosses is a dangerous procedure,
sure to result in a hodgepodge of breed traits with a loss of all true type,
if practiced carelessly, or beyond an initial mating for a definite purpose.

When, and if, an outcross is made, every effort should be expended to see
that the outcross dog brings in as few alien traits and genetic impurities
as possible. To insure this, one should use an individual, which carries as
much blood as can be found of the foundation stock of the strain which is to
be crossed.

After an outcross has been made, a breeder should then breed right back into
the original strain. This is the only safe procedure after the purpose of
the outcross has been achieved.

As Dr. Daglish states it: "Only in that way can the high degree of genetic
purity established in a valuable true-breeding strain be recovered and the
bad effects of mixing the genes carried by unrelated animals be avoided."

Part VI 

Better Not to Breed Without Knowledge 

In earlier installments I have pointed out both the benefits and dangers
inherent in line breeding or inbreeding and dwelt at considerable length on
the necessity for using only as near faultless stock as it is possible to
obtain as one's foundation animals. It is very evident to me now that I have
presupposed a greater knowledge of what constitutes a good animal of any
given breed than the majority of its fanciers possess. This being true, it
seems to behoove me now again to warn some of today's breeders NOT to
attempt any kind of closed-up breedings; in fact, not to do ANY breeding
until they have a better knowledge of WHAT they want to get FROM their
matings:

Of course, the person who is interested only in the commercial aspect of the
game, the breeding of dogs to sell and make money (if indeed that can be
done), or because it is fun to have some cute puppies around, will have no
interest in what I have written previously or in what I say now.

To the many, however, who seem sincerely interested in breeding better
specimens, to the many who want to know HOW to do it, I want to stress as
strongly as I can: YOU MUST FIRST KNOW WHAT IS A GOOD DOG OF YOUR BREED. In
other words, know your breed before you try to breed it.

The manufacturer of any product must know what that article should be and
look like before he starts to make it. The baker of a cake must know what a
cake should look like and, in each instance, the manufacturer and the baker
must know, and be able to recognize any and all faults or shortcomings in
their products.

We Must line bred-But Wisely!

The subject of inbreeding and line breeding might be summed up this way:
Probably no great epoch or step forward in any breed has ever been achieved
without the constant and unhesitating use of consanguinity; at the same time
we must realize that its use is full of dangers and pitfalls for those
novice breeders who fail to recognize the imperative need for using only
stock which is sound in constitution, organs and structure-and which also
possesses outstanding points of merit, with NO SINGLE FAULT COMMON TO THE
TWO ORIGINAL PARENTS.

This means we must line bred, but line-breed wisely, and not until we are
able to recognize all the shortcomings, as well as the merits, of our dogs,
and are informed about the same in their ancestors.

Need for the above advice, or warning if you will, has been impressed upon
me more and more as breeders have contacted me. Some have asked if they
should linebred upon dogs whom I have found to be so "full of holes"-with so
many faults-that they should not be used as breeders at all.

Then there are so very many, especially in German Shepherd Dogs, who state
their intention to inbreed or line breed upon imported animals. When asked,
they admit to no knowledge whatever of the inheritance factors possessed by
these dogs, the good as well as the warning blood in them. To breed to them
in order to find out is one thing, but to plan the building of a strain,
through inbreeding and line breeding on them, is quite another matter.

Always Know What to Expect Through Inheritance

It should be made clear that I am not taking any stand against breeding to
some of these imported dogs. On the contrary, I recognize that doing so has
given the German Shepherd Dog breed in this country a boost and eventuated
in some excellent specimens.

The point I am trying to get across is based upon what I have written above;
i.e. that ONLY those breeders knowledgeable in what constitutes a
near-perfect specimen of the breed, as well as those having information on
what to hope for, and look out for, through inheritance factors, should even
THINK of doing closed-up breeding on them. The same, of course, applies to
our American-bred dogs.

While on this subject, I would indeed be remiss did I not again point out
some of the traits which I find so very many of our German Shepherd Dog
breeders of today are either not knowledgeable enough of their Standard to
recognize, or which they ignore- traits that, should they be "set" through
inbreeding or line breeding, would put the breed back many years and be all
but impossible to eradicate. I realize that these were listed in earlier
installments, but because there seems to be few who know them, even amongst
judges, I feel that attention should again be called to them.

Serious Faults in Some Imports

The most important faults in the imported German Shepherd Dogs, it seems to
me, are these:

Lack of proper type as defined by the Standard of the breed. Where it calls
for dogs to be longer than high, very many are practically square.

Proper angulation at BOTH ENDS is difficult to find. Rear angulation, in
many instances, approximates that of Collies, while the forequarters have
scapulars (shoulder blades) much too short and steep-pushed up into
too-short necks.

Properly high-set withers, with strong backs, are all but non-existent in
many of these imports.

The very idea of, even the giving of consideration to, inbreeding or
linebreeding on such dogs, causes any real student and lover of this noble
breed great concern.

As most of those either contemplating or engaging in such a breeding program
are novices or formerly unsuccessful breeders, I can but hope that my "lone
voice crying in the wilderness" will make them pause before irreparable harm
is done to the breed.

Recapitulation

(1) Through studying the breed's Standard of Perfection, attending dog
shows, talking with knowledgeable people in one's breed, and owning good
dogs, a breeder should learn what IS a good specimen of his breed before he
starts ANY breeding operations, let alone the more or less involved types
such as inbreeding and line breeding.

(2) When either of the latter are attempted, make certain to select as near
faultless foundation stock as it is possible to get, and cull relentlessly,
never mating together two dogs with similar faults. I repeat for the
umpteenth time in this series "Physical compensation is the foundation rock
upon which all enduring worth must be built."

Regrettably Little Information for True Breed Students

In some of the preceding installments I have pointed out that most of my
experimenting with various breeding theories has been done with German
Shepherd Dogs, but stated my sincere desire to be of all help possible to
beginners in any breed. Resultant information obtained from the many
contacts made since the appearance of the first article in this series has
shown me how many dog breeders are deeply and seriously interested in
obtaining knowledge which will enable them to produce better specimens of
their particular breed.

It is indeed regrettable that, at least in the more popular breeds, with a
consequent greater number of fanciers, there are not more sources of
information available to such students, that there is not a printed
compendium of knowledge about the various qualities of the leading sires in
each breed.

It goes without saying that any such record should be compiled by very
knowledgeable and experienced fanciers of a breed, and, of most importance,
that it be fostered by its Parent Club. While such a program presents great
advantages in theory, its practical application is all but impossible,
especially if the compilers of such a record essay to give breeding advice.

Analysis of Breed Survey Systems

The above is written as a prelude to what I am about to write regarding the
patently ill-advised organization termed 'The American Breed Survey Society
for German Shepherd Dogs, Inc." Because I find such a large proportion of
the readers of these articles are fanciers of that breed, I hope my
inserting the following in what is, in the main, material for all breeds,
and printed in an all-breed magazine, may be pardoned.

It may also result in second thoughts on the part of any personally
ambitious fanciers of other breeds, or clubs contemplating the establishment
of such an organization.

For the benefit and information of those in other breeds who max- not know
about this "Breed Survey" in Shepherds, or who have not read the challenging
article concerning it written by Mrs. Leslev Kodner together with the reply
by Mr. Grant Mann. as these' have been appearing in DOG WORLD, some
explanation should be given.

In Germany, the "home" of this breed, and where it has been most highly
developed throughout the almost three-quarters of a century of its history
as a distinct breed, there is accessible to its fanciers a wealth of
information. In all but inexhaustible detail records have been kept of every
animal, especially of all those used as breeders.

Such breeding and show records have been published in book form and so are
available to all German fanciers of the breed. Neither available space, nor
the probable interest of many of my readers in this subject would warrant a
full explanation of how this estimable program is conducted in that country.
Neither is it necessary to relate all the reasons why it could not be, and
never has been when previously tried, a success in America.

Suffice it to explain that over there they have "surveyors." or breed
wardens, who through many years of intensive training and practical
experience, are worthy of being listened to when they give advice, or
estimate the qualities of a dog. Also, such it seems is typical German mind
that they will sub-being regimented and, in the matter of mating their dogs,
listen to, and obey, the advice of the appointed authorities.

Fortunately or unfortunately, according to the way one may look at it such
is NOT the case here in our country. Neither will most of us comply with, or
heed, any advice given relative to breeding our dogs, nor do we have in this
country many, if indeed any. who are sufficiently knowledgeable through
experience, or sufficiently dedicated to have studied bloodline inheritance,
to make a similar program valuable or workable.

It is regrettable that such is the situation because, as previously stated,
in THEORY an organization supplying valuable data on physical structure, and
reliable information on breeding worth, could be of inestimable advantage to
ALL breeders and especially to those beginners who are so hungry for
knowledge about their breed.

It would seem from the above, and it is true, that while I recognize the
need for an accurate source of information, especially about dogs used for
breeding, and which would be obtainable by the many fanciers of all breeds
who are hungry for it, I do NOT look favorably upon, or in any way approve
of, The American Breed Survey Society.

For whatever my opinion may be worth to those either contemplating having
their dogs "surveyed", or who have already had it done and may assume the
reports made on their dogs either completely accurate or, in the matter of
breeding advice given, worthy of acceptance, it seems I should detail some
of the reasons upon which my opinion is based. This I shall now do in the
form of questions and answers.

Has such a project ever before been inaugurated in this country? Yes, on
several occasions and under the sponsorship of the Parent Club of the breed.

Because of success in supplying unbiased unprejudiced accurate and valuable
information, were any of them deemed worthy o continuance? Quite the
opposite. About the only result was to prove how unworkable (an for too many
reasons to elaborate upon here such a program must be in this country.

Who were those doing the examining o dogs and termed 'surveyors' during
these previous experiments? Selected German author ties of breed renown in
their country, an brought over for the purpose of helping u establish a
record of our American-owned dogs' attributes such as is available in the
country of its origin.

Are Survey Leaders Qualified?

Who is the originator and operator of the so-called "American Breed Survey"
now currently functioning? Mr. Grant E. Mann Detroit, Mich.

Does he have the experience and necessary attributes to evaluate the
qualities of a dog? feel, and the general consensus of opinion seems to be,
that he has, since he is a long time breeder, erstwhile judge of the breed
and producer of many top-quality specimens

Who, other than Mr. Mann, are listed officers of his organization? A.D.NI.
Barti as "Gen. Counsel." R. T. Lundquist, Treasurer and, as Secretary, a
seemingly obscure man named Brotherton about whom nobody seems to have any
information other than that he is the owner of one dog. To my knowledge, at
least, there is evidently no record of Mr. Brotherton's or Mr. Lundquist's
previous activity in the breed upon which to predicate a belief in their
importance in such a venture.

Did the Board of Governors of the German Shepherd Dog Club of America, when
urged by Mr. Mann to accept and sponsor his "Breed Survey" idea, vote to do
so? No. Having knowledge, of the failures of previous attempts, and the
basic reasons for their debacles, they wisely refused to participate in any
way. They seemed to feel, however, that they had no authority to prohibit
Mr. Mann from operating such a project "on his own".

Are the purposes of the organization as altruistic in all its claims,
including that of its being a non-profit venture, as are stated? Per haps
that should not be challenged, despite there having been no reports made, to
anyone s seeming knowledge, either privately or publicly, as to its income
and disbursements. In the absence of any such accounting, one is of
necessity left to draw his own conclusions.

What are the charges made for the examination or "surveying" of a customer's
dog? They seem to vary according to the number of dogs gathered at a
pre-arranged surveying point and the distance the surveyors must travel, the
minimum, I understand, being $10.00 a dog.

Are such charges reasonable? They would seem to be, providing the customer
receives in exchange enough of actual, usable and dependable information to
make the cost and the time consumed worthwhile-providing much more is
received, we would say, than any knowledgeable judge of the breed could, and
usually would, be willing and capable of supplying 'for free" at any dog
show.

Do the written reports, as furnished to those who submit their dogs for
evaluation by the committee appointed by the Society, really supply enough
more information than could be obtained, as above mentioned, to be worth the
charge? Indeed, are many of them even accurate or detailed enough to warrant
one's serious consideration, even could they be obtained without ANY charge
having been made for them?

Personal knowledge of many of the dogs surveyed, together with a familiarity
with their ancestors, as delineated in their pedigrees, lead many of the
cognoscente to strongly question it. In fact, so many of the reports I have
seen are sufficiently inaccurate, and wrong in listing the surveyed dog's
physical characteristics (as many others, including capable judges, have
found them to be), together with their ill-advised recommendations for its
breeding use, as to raise the serious question:

May not the results of the organization's work prove to be more harmful than
beneficial to the breed, if its findings are accepted seriously by
customers? Just one of many such misleading and very inaccurate survey
reports to come to my attention is the one mentioned in Mrs. Kodner's "Open
Letter to Grant Mann", which appeared in the November issue of DOG WORLD and
the October issue of THE SHEPHERD DOG REVIEW.

Before me as I write is a Photostat copy of the Breed Survey's report on her
dog Ch. By Jiminey. I have had the experience not only of judging the dog at
least three times, but also the opportunity of studying him outside the ring
on numerous occasions. In addition, I have seen, and know, his immediate
progenitors. A considerable knowledge of the ancestors, I might add, is a
prerequisite to making ANY breeding recommendations. Unless it is known
which traits are inherited and which may be acquired, as through feeding and
disease, for instance, NO worthwhile or even reasonably accurate
recommendations can possibly be made as to certain "warning blood," or what
type of mate is, or is not, suitable.

In the case of the above-mentioned dog, is it probable that there could have
been any knowledge of his ancestry possessed by the surveyors? At least one
of the three participants, the Herr Funk of Germany, could not possibly have
known much, if indeed anything, about that. Considering the recommendations
made, it is my belief that neither did the other two surveyors on the team.
That opinion is based upon my above stated familiarity with the dog, his
ancestors, and the offspring I have seen sired by him and out of different
bitches.

If this article were appearing in a breed magazine, much more could and
should be said about this sample case of improper and disillusioning
"surveying". However, any informed breeder and fancier, or student of the
breed, can easily determine for himself, with a little effort, why there is
so much dissatisfaction with, and criticism of, the American Breed Survey
Society for German Shepherd Dogs, Inc.-decide for himself by checking the
Survey report on Ch. By Jiminey, in conjunction with the dog himself, by
SEEING the faults enumerated by his conscientious owner but NOT mentioned in
his report-by comparing him with his inferior brother who was given a higher
rating-by learning about his ancestors so as to determine the validity and
worth of the "Breeding Warnings", etc., etc.

Are the "Surveyors" Qualified? Who, in addition to the operator of this
Breed Survey Society, do "surveying" for it? 
Its letterhead lists eleven names as "Advisory Panel." What are their
qualifications? Mr.Mann has listed the names of several of the surveyors in
his well-written reply to Mrs. Kodner's "Open Letter," this reply having
been printed in the December and January issues of DOG WORLD, so the reader
may judge for himself. Amongst those listed on the Society's letterhead
there are only three, it seems, who have obtained their judges' licenses.

How many of the listed surveyors have a record as prominent or successful
breeders? None, so far as I know. It would be difficult to remember and name
any noteworthy number or top-quality dogs ever bred by any of them other
than Grant Mann. A few either presently own, or in the past have bought,
good dogs.

Human nature being what it is, breed Standards being as they are (subject to
differing interpretations), and exhibitors' opinions about judges varying as
they do, who is to say that any judge, be he on the Society's panel or not,
is capable? That matter, as well as the qualifications possessed by them,
and the non-judge surveyors, both as to their abilities to evaluate dogs and
advise others about "Breeding Warnings," etc., should, it would seem, be
given thoughtful consideration by all potential users of the Society's
services.

There is probably no dog breeder or person interested in the "game" who does
not wish there were a dependable source of information such as the present
American Breed Survey Society for German Shepherd Dogs was organized to
supply.

The sincerity and reasonableness evidenced in Grant Mann's reply to Mrs.
Kodner's "Open Letter" is indeed commendable. His admittance that
improvements in its operation are needed and planned for might create hope
for such an eventually dependable source of information.

However, considering all the factors, some of which have been touched upon
in this article, plus others more fully elaborated upon in Mrs. Kodner's
"Open Letter," her short rebuttal, and more that some of my readers
personally know about, is it reasonable to entertain expectations for such
improvement as would insure the continued existence of this organization?
Only the most naive of those whose opinions are based upon wishful thinking
could possibly expect this to happen. Its comparatively early demise has
been predicted by many since the announcement of its start of operations and
the selection of its surveyors.

Part VII

After each article, correspondence and personal conversations have indicated
to me the need for further elaboration upon inbreeding. The old bogeys and
superstitions held by so many, and for so long a time, seem all but
impossible to eradicate. They pop up even in some scientific circles amongst
investigators whose experiments have quite patently been conducted in a
wrong or incomplete manner.

An instance at hand is the recent report of a Laura A. Harris and associates
regarding inbred bulls and their semen evaluation. Since nothing was stated
as to any selection having been made to insure potency when the inbreeding
was done, one must presume that this factor was not given consideration.
Most certainly through inbreeding one can increase, or lose, not only
virility but the many other traits composing an animal. It all boils down to
CAREFUL SELECTION.

In this short article, preceding the final chapter which I hope to have
ready for the March issue of DOG WORLD. I would like to draw attention to
some facts which are so often overlooked or forgotten. Because there are so
many misconceptions about closed-up breeding, it might be well to touch upon
certain categories of living or animal organisms, starting with Humans.

Humans

The origin of the human family is mysterious, but history has given us
certain examples of consanguinity.

We have read of an old Syrian tribesman named Terati who had three sons and
a daughter named respectively Nahor, Haran, Abram and Sarai, by different
wives. Contrary to modern custom, the two latter (half brother and sister)
married, and their son married Nahor's granddaughter who was twice his first
cousin, once removed, and they were known as Isaac and Rebekah. Their son
Jacob married his two first cousins (great-granddaughters of Nahor, Terah's
son) and had eight sons, who became the founders of the most persistently
influential nation in human history, the ever-miraculous Jewish race.

Eight of the twelve founders of tribes have each four separate crosses to
Terah, and they passed a law to establish their tradition that their
children should not marry into strange families, which law survives in
essence today. Of the many charges brought against the Jews in all of
history, nobody has ever levied, or even heard, that of degeneracy. 

Wild Animals

In wild animal life amongst deer, foxes, rodents, cats, dogs, horses and
cattle, inbreeding, checked only by the SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST, has
prevailed uninterruptedly since time immemorial. As a result, there has been
a pronounced similarity prevailing in the age-long result; nor is there any
inherent degeneracy traceable to such inbreeding.

Horses and Cattle

Some mention has been made in previous installments of foundation horses
from whom almost all of today's race horses stem. Those much more conversant
with horse pedigrees than am I could supply interesting and valuable data, I
am sure, but I shall not attempt it without a great deal more studs' being
given to the subject than is possible.

A piece of enlightening information did come to my attention some time ago,
however, regarding cattle. It has to do with milk-producing Jersey cattle.
Quite some years ago, a daughter of the bull Saturn and the cow Rhea was
mated to her full brother, and the resulting heifer was mated to her sire;
the daughter of this mating was mated to her full brother and, again, the
resulting heifer was mated to the same bull; their calf was put to the same
bull and their calf yet again to the same sire.

The result of this intensive and exaggerated inbreeding, by which the last
calf had nine crosses of the same original parents (Saturn and Rhea) and no
other blood, was Purest, a cow of exceptional vigor and robustness, and an
amazing milk producer.

Pigeons

Many such examples as the above might be found in all varieties of livestock
but only those in which the excellence lies in strength, vigor and fertility
would help to open the eyes of a generation of breeders who have associated
inbreeding with a loss of those attributes.

There is perhaps no greater test of physical endurance than the prolonged
flight of a racing pigeon; here, if ever, one might expect a constant demand
for "new blood," but what are the facts? I have read that Continental and
British breeders of racing pigeons vie with one another in "wrapping up the
blood" of their stock-that is, in preserving their own strains in
concentrated form.

Summary

What is true of humans, horses, cattle, pigeons. and every variety of
animate beings is, of course, equally true of dogs: By inbreeding and line
breeding we intensify both the merits and the faults of the original
foundation parents.

The Syrian tribesman Terah must have had a strong, healthy body and a keen,
lively and judicious mind. The cow Rhea must have had much more than a
productive udder to commend her highly for being bred upon so heavily.
Dreadnought (the Abraham of homing pigeons) must have had not only a deep
keel and strong wings, but must have been perfectly balanced throughout.
Cottage Queen (the first hen to lay an egg every day of the year except
Sundays and Bank Holidays) must have had no ovarian blemish to bequeath to
her countless daughters.

We as dog breeders, when considering inbreeding and line breeding, MUST
remember that outstanding quality is good; indeed, it is excellent, but the
absence of similar faults or shortcomings in the mating pair is every bit as
important. We must also remember that by using as our tap-root, or
foundation, animals for inbreeding or line breeding two specimens having a
similar fault, it is far more easy to establish that fault in our strain
than had we used some other type of mating.

Any student who will take the trouble to study the original forebears of any
strain in any species of livestock will find that inbreeding and line
breeding have played a large part in creating their type. There is a
persistent belief that such breeding endangers virility and fertility, but
the absence of the latter essentials to existence is, in any case, very
common, inbred or not.

Many domestic animals are weakly, many are sterile, and any tendency in that
direction in a parent becomes, of course, doubled by inbreeding. This
belief, therefore, becomes re-established by the experience of those who
have inbred their stock WITHOUT ADEQUATE SELECTION OF SOUND SPECIMENS. 

Part VIII

In these, the final installments of the series which has been appearing for
several months, I have been asked to supply both a summation, and some
examples, of planned matings.

First, it must be recognized that all faults. Excellencies, capabilities and
diseases of all living matter can be divided into two categories, depending
entirely on whether they are (I) inborn, or (2) acquired.

To obtain a proper understanding of these two terms, it is necessary to
study briefly another point. All life has its origin in what is .known as
the living "cell." the lowest form of animal life consisting entirely of one
single cell. As the animal forms rise to a level above this simplest type of
life, more cells are added and the creature becomes an organism of
multi-cellular life.

The cells of which an animal is composed are of two kinds: the pro-creative
germ, or birth cells, and the body cells The first of these, the germ cells,
are the most important in planned breeding and are the result of the
fertilization of one cell, the ovum of the female, by another germ cell, the
sperm of the male. Because these cells are the true bearers of the heredity
of the individual, and their chromatin material passes on from generation to
generation. these are the ones with which we are concerned in this study.

The second group of cells

The body cells are essentially covering or protective cells. In higher
animals they are always associated with the idea of protection and use and
are of various kinds; such as, muscle cells, bone cells, skin cells, etc.

Because we are here mainly concerned with the matter of heritable
characteristics, rather than acquired, little need be said about the latter.
It might be well, however, with the object of clarification in mind, to
consider briefly some differentiation between the two groups of cells-this
particularly because. I have found, there is confusion in the minds of some
beginner dog breeders as to what constitutes inherited characteristics in
contrast to those which are acquired.

So very many ask, when some fault of their dog is pointed out to them. "Can
I do any-thing to correct it?" or "Will exercise improve the condition?"
They thus indicate their confusion over the two types of cells. It seems to
me that unless an understanding is had on this matter, there would be little
help given to novices in the breeding art by the further consideration of a
breeding program.

As is well known, there is never any growth without the stimulus of
nourishment of some kind. Thus the GERM cells develop under the stimulus of
nourishment, while the growth of BODY cells comes through the stimulus not
only of nourishment, but also of use or injury. As examples, muscle is
developed by use while the bad effects sometimes eventuating from distemper
are caused by injury.

These points are important for an understanding of the subjects of
particular interest to dog breeders, named the inborn and acquired faults,
virtues, or diseases of their stock.

Inborn Traits Heritable - Acquired Are Not!

It can thus be seen that the inborn and the acquired characteristics are in
two separate classes.

The inborn is the result of the germ cells and is heritable, while the
acquired affects the body cells, is not continuous in its life, and so
cannot be transmitted.

Take as an example rickets, which is a disease of the bones (the body cells)
due to a lack of vitamin D, calcium and phosphorus. It is, therefore, an
acquired disease and is not transmitted, although, through faulty
metabolism, the ability to assimilate the above mentioned essentials of
proper nutrition might be.

On the other hand, the short tails which often appeared in the descendants
of Nores v.d. Kriminalpolizei back in the nineteen twenties' German Shepherd
Dogs were the result of an inherited trait due to genetic influence.

Contrasted to this, we find that the tails of several breeds of dogs, such
as Fox Terriers and Dobermans, can be docked for generation after generation
and, as this is a body cell injury and not inheritable, no change is made in
the germ cells and succeeding generations of these dogs continue to come
with long tails.

If the above principles are understood and applied to dog breeding, it will
at once be seen that the main essentials of a good specimen are all
dependent upon inborn characteristics and are therefore inherited.

By training, feeding, and other good care, they can be improved up to a
certain PREDESTINED point, but beyond that it is impossible for them to be
changed or improved.

This explains the characteristics, which are hereditary and thus
transmissible, but when we come to the manner in which they are transmitted,
in what degree they are transmitted, and how we can increase or eliminate
them, the questions become much more difficult to answer.

Numerous scientists in the field of genetics have propounded various
theories of animal breeding. As is well known, Mendel based his experiments
on sweet peas, with which he explained the transference of characteristics
from parent stock to succeeding generations. The characteristics of sweet
peas are limited, but in dogs there are almost unlimited inherited factors
and combinations of factors.

Gait for example, depends not only upon the conformation of the dog as
regards his skeletal structure, but also upon the muscles working over it
and the motor-nerve force stimulating them to action. The complexity of all
these influencing factors is such that any attempt to use the Mendelian
theory in the breeding of dogs is, for all practical purposes, out of the
question.

This law, now generally accepted by all authorities on animal breeding,
presupposes that the two parents contribute, between them, half of the
inherited traits, each of them contributing one-quarter. The four
grandparents contribute among them one-fourth of the inherited traits, or
each of them one sixteenth. The eight great-grandparents contribute among
them one-eighth, or each of them one sixty-fourth, and so on, the whole
inheritance equaling the sum of the series.

It might be well to interject here a mention of how little influence any
grandparent or great-grandparent has, when it appears no more than once in a
pedigree, and also to indicate, to the proponents of continual
out-crossings, how they are misleading both themselves and those who listen
to them when they point to some notable dog in the third or fourth
generation of their dog's pedigree as being of particular value.

In order to apply Galton's law with any degree of success. ~n animal breeder
should be in possession of very accurate data as to the characteristics of
the ancestors of the mating. pair, and this is often difficult to obtain.
Furthermore, too few dog breeders are sufficiently interested in their
breed's improvement to take the trouble to look for such data before making
their matings.

A further hindrance to the obtaining of ac curate information is that our
conception o beauty and perfection is so changeable. Ideas regarding these
attributes are comparative and our standards change continually, while
perhaps not in actual wording, at least in interpretation by the judges.

These differences of opinion and selections by judges, some qualified and
perhaps more who are not, lead to confusion. They make all but impossible
any definite standard of beauty or utility.

While, scientifically speaking, neither Mendel's nor Galton's laws can be
applied, practically speaking there are known results which work out very
much in accordance with them.

Producing and Breeding Hybrids

For example, Mendel, in his experiments with sweet peas. bred together a
tall and a short variety and got a hybrid generation. He bred these hybrids
together and found he obtained 75 per cent tall plants and 25 per cent dwarf
plants. The small plants were then bred together and produced nothing but
small plants, but the 75 per cent of tall plants. when bred together,
produced two kinds: (1) a mixed collection of tails and dwarfs, and (2)
nothing but tails, the ratio of talls to dwarfs being as 2 to 1. In this way
he learned that by breeding two hybrids (or intermediates) the result was 25
per cent tall, 50 per cent mixed, and 25 per cent dwarfs.

In all breeding it must be remembered that there are two types of
characters, or factors, DOMINANT and RECESSIVE. In sweet peas, the talls
were proven to be dominant and the dwarfs recessive, and each, when bred to
its own kind, bred true; whereas the mixed when interbred produced the same
formula of 25 per cent tall or pure dominants. ~0 per cent mixed, or impure
dominants, and percent dwarfs, or pure recessives.

To set up the formula as simply as possible, we will take the letters PD to
represent pure dominants (talls), PR to represent pure recessives (dwarfs),
and ID to represent impure dominants (intermediates). The result of a union
of two ID would work out as follows: 


ID plus ID = 1PD, 2ID, 1PR. 
That is, there would be one pure dominant to three others.

The Formula in Practice

If we consider some of our most prominent sires of the past whose records
are available to us, as well as a few of the present dogs, we will find that
occasionally there comes along a stud who seemingly sires outstanding
specimens. as judged by their show wins. This is also true of bitches, as
evidenced by Ch. Nyx of Long-Worth. for example.

I am mentioning the late Ch. Nyx here both because she is well known to
every Shepherd breeder, and because she has undeniably had a greater
influence for good on the breed than any other bitch, at least in
comparatively modern times. Something of her record was given in an earlier
installment and, while much more could be supplied, it would not serve my
purpose here.

By the same token, I could use her grandson Ch. Vol of Long Worth, were I to
choose a male for the purpose. Let us suppose that the parents of Nyx were
both impure dominants and, for use in as simple a manner as possible, that
the average litter is four in number. Then it is possible, even if not
proven scientifically, that Nyx was the pure dominant, in various
characteristics, in her litter.

While I found in actual breeding use that she was dominant in quite a number
of characteristics, suppose we select one, rear angulation, to use here.
(Although I am cognizant of the fact that rear angulation is not a simple
genetic factor, but rather a combination of factors, it will nevertheless
serve to well illustrate my point.)

Now let us set up some possible matings and their results. Taking the
average litter as four, and figuring on three litters, there would be twelve
puppies. Nyx, with dominant good rear angulation, if mated to a male with
dominant good rear angulation, would produce all pure dominants. Mated to a
sire with impure dominant rear angulation she would produce one-half pure
dominants and one-half impure dominants. If mated to a pure recessive-a male
with straight angulation in the rear as a pure recessive characteristic-she
would produce all impure dominants.

These results may be tabulated as follows:

PD plus PD all PD

PD plus ID = one-half PD, one-half ID

PD plus PR all ID

Of the twelve puppies from the three sires, Nyx would produce six pure
dominants and six impure dominants, but no pure recessives, as shown above.

Now take a bitch who is an impure dominant in this factor of rear
angulation. which for demonstration purposes we have selected as the trait
to use as an example, perhaps one of the above ID offspring.

The formula works out as follows:

ID plus PD = one-half impure dominants, one-half pure dominants

ID plus ID one-fourth pure dominants, one-half impure dominants. one-fourth
pure recessives.

ID plus PR = one-half impure dominants, one-half pure recessives.

Again taking the average litter as four, there would be twelve pups out of
this impure dominant bitch, sired by a pure dominant male, an impure
dominant male, and a pure recessive male. There would be three pure
dominants, six impure dominants, and three pure recessives in the offspring.

Thus, from a pure dominant female there would be in twelve puppies twice the
number of good ones, or pure dominants for sufficient rear angulation, and
no really poor ones. Again, as stated above. I used the bitch Nyx in these
illustrations only because she is better known amongst the fancy than any
other bitch of the breed, with a record of producing winners from every
mating.

In the actual working out of these theories it is perhaps easier to use a
sire. His ancestry is usually better known, and through being bred to many
bitches his classification as to whether he is PD. ID. or PR in certain
factors is more easily and quickly determined.

All of this seems more simple than it is often found to work out in actual
practice but we all know that, in speaking of the prepotency of a sire or
dam, we mean to what extent that animal is able to predominate in the blend
resulting from matings with it. Its prepotency may vary and extend to any
degree up to an entire inheritance.

Earlier in this article I mentioned Galton's law and stated his theory that
each ancestor contributed a certain proportion of the sum total in the
offspring.

We will now take up what is sometimes termed "piling up the blood" of
certain ancestors, or inbreeding and linebreeding, the terms used when the
name of some ancestor appears several times in the pedigree. The exact term
varies according to how many times the name occurs and where it occurs in
the pedigree.

It stands to reason that if an ancestor's name appears twice in a pedigree,
especially if it is not far back in it, then his influence must be greatly
increased; if three times, then it is of still greater value.

In matings where similar blood is united- where the pedigrees of each of the
mating pair contain the name of a notable specimen of the breed-we often get
results which are so fortunate as to cause us to speak of that particular
mating as a "nick mating."

Suppose, for example, that a bitch has the blood of many sires but three of
which we will designate as A. B and C. If she is mated to a stud who also
has blood of different sires, but amongst them he also has stud C. as a
close ancestor, we will say, then the resultant offspring will more likely
inherit the characteristics of the C dog than of A or B, or any other dogs
in the pedigree.

If these characteristics are desirable and what we are striving to breed
into oar dogs, then the mating can be called a "nick mating." The Nyx mating
to Ch. MarIo was an example, for this "D" litter containing six

One too often hears from exhibitors and breeders such remarks as, "I breed
for the type that is winning, regardless of the Standard." This means to me
that the speaker s future as a consistent' producer of high-quality dogs is
most doubtful-and that his real interest in the "game" is the superficial
one of Champions (all that were ever shown out of the eight is represented
in a large percentage of our modern type, and later-day, prepotent American
bred German Shepherd Dogs.

Applying Theory

In as simple a manner as possible let us try to apply this breeding theory.

All animal breeding operations must of necessity start with the female and,
as it is a truism that "No stable is better than its mares." so is no kennel
any stronger than its bitches. Too much stress cannot be placed upon the
importance of the careful selection of a prospective matron or matrons, and
an entire chapter could be devoted to this subject. It is highly important
to ascertain that the brood bitch is as free as possible from inherited, or
inborn, faults.

Perhaps the easiest fault for a beginner to recognize. as well as the most
important ]n many breeds. is that of temperament (again not the result of a
single genetic factor), so I shall use that as an example here.

The brood bitch, then, should be free of inherited shyness or savageness,
one fault about as bad as the other, the latter often a result of the first,
and both probably as difficult to eradicate as any other fault in some
breeds.

Careful selection of mates who are pure dominants in the matter of proper
temperaments through several generations, is the only way to eliminate this,
as with any other fault. Close breeding to pure dominants on the other side
of the pedigree from the one showing the fault is the best and surest way to
get rid of it.

Again, given a bitch whose pedigree is "hit-or-miss " with no definite
breeding plan indicated in the combining of the blood of her ancestry-a
bitch whose pedigree's so open that there is nothing to "catch hold of" the
best results from any standpoint should be obtained by mating her to an
inbred or linebred stud who is a pure dominant in as many desired requisites
as possible. His influence should, and usually will, predominate over the
traits of an outcross and a hit-or-miss bred bitch. In practically all
breeds there is a big majority of such bitches, the result of generations of
careless outcrossings.

We will next consider a mythical bitch and try to plan a mating for her,
with the object in mind of improving the mean or average quality of the
breed.

Part IX

One too often hears from exhibitors and breeders such remarks as, " I breed
for the type that is winning, regardless of the Standard" This means to me
that the speaker's future as a consistent producer of high quality dogs is
most doubtful and that his real interest in the "game" is the superficial
one of winning rather than of breed improvement.

It becomes, therefore, more important for the beginner breeder to obtain
some knowledge of genetics, together with a complete misunderstanding of his
breed's Standard, than for him to visit dog shows to see what type is
winning!

It goes without saving that in the long pull, the time it takes to breed
consistently good specimens, let alone establish a strain, a breeder must
hitch to something-and that should be the Standard of his breed rather than
what is currently the "style" as established by the interpretations or
perhaps vagaries of the judges.

In other words, if there is to be any continuity of effort toward the
production of a standard type within, a breed, it must be predicated upon an
all but unchanging written Standard of perfection, rather than upon an
often-changing of the Standard (either written or implied) through
interpreting it to fit the present show dog. Any current fad incorporating
qualities not called for by a breed's Standard can, and often does, change
periodically, leaving breeders who have based their efforts on producing
stock to conform to "today's winners" out of the running.

With the establishment in the minds of beginner breeders of what has already
been written, we can now turn to some applications of these precepts and
theories which have been propounded in this series of articles on planned
breeding.

Much easier would it be, and more quickly could salubrious results probably
be obtained, were the beginner breeder for whom I am writing the owner of
two or three very good bitches. Such is not the customary case, however,
judging from the situation of many who have contacted me since the inception
of these articles. Few indeed are those who have more than one bitch and,
more often than not, that one not such a specimen as a knowledgeable fancier
of the breed would select as a foundation brood matron.

Questioning brings forth this usual information-they are stuck with what
they have, and feel they must use it. Affection for the animal, lack of
funds with which to purchase a better one, or inability to find and select a
more suitable bitch for their start, are the more common reasons given for
not beginning with something better than the one perhaps mediocre specimen
they already own.

In addition to the physical shortcomings of the average beginner's bitch,
she is apt to have a hit-or-miss pedigree. There may be numerous "Champions"
in it, more likely than not all picked for use because they WERE such title
holders, but without any selection having been made, in the matings
producing her and her immediate ancestors, for physical compensation of
faults.

To Achieve Better Results Faster

Our editor has asked that, taking such a bitch as an example, I try to
point, out a procedure by which a beginner breeder might, most quickly and
surely, improve the "mean or average quality of his production-and indeed
might within a few years bring forth, and quite consistently, some
"toppers."

Granted that the possessor of such a foundation bitch as outlined above must
expect to spend much more money and time than if he could start with either
or both: the bitch herself a good show specimen, and/or the possessor of a
line-bred pedigree. In the absence of these qualifications, however, he must
take the longest and most difficult road the one being traveled by the
greatest number of beginners, and whom we most want to help.

Instead of names for the animals in the pedigree, I shall take alphabetical
letters. In the interest of keeping the use of space to a minimum, as well
as for elimination of confusion, I shall, at least for the present, project
only a 3-generation pedigree. It will be observed that no dog appears more
than once in the above pedigree, so it is what is known as "wide open". Also
that none has been designated as a Champion, although several or all of them
might have had that title.

We must now carefully analyze the structural attributes of the above bitch
and to do so. I shall presume her to be a German Shepherd Dog. As explained
in previous installments, although I have made some study of almost all of
the A.K.C.-recognized varieties, with particular emphasis on Working and
Non-Sporting, the most of my breeding work has been done with Shepherds.

Furthermore, the Standard requirements of quite a number of breeds,
especially those of the larger varieties, demand somewhat similar
specifications They all stress the importance of type, balance, toplines,
ribbing, fore and rear angulation, bone and substance, feet, correct "bite,"
gait, color, of eyes, color and texture of coats, etc. Surely there are
enough characteristics in that list for us to use here in an evaluation of
the hypothetical bitch being considered.

Studying her, we will probably find that she has many shortcomings and
faults, that she is more or less, "just another dog" of her breed. To the
non-critical and uneducated eye she might be called "pretty," and is easily
recognizable as a specimen of her particular breed. She might have done, or
be capable of doing, some winning, even placing above superior specimens at
times for one reason or another. Yes, she may even be a Champion for, as we
all know, "holes" can be found in even the best of such title holders, and
no absolutely perfect specimen of any breed has ever been produced, or is
likely to be!

Know Faults to Breed for Correction!

For the purpose of our present study, we must center our attention on
several faults in type or structure possessed by this bitch, so we can go
about breeding her for correction and over-all improvement. I shall select
topline, fore-assembly (the entire shoulder structure composed of shoulder
blade and upper arm, the length of those bones, as well as their placement
one with the other - the angle made where they join) and, as the third
structural characteristic to be considered, rear angulation.

I have selected these three for several reasons but mainly because the
proper formation of these is the most important in the make-up of the
greatest percentage of dog varieties, as well as the ones most often found
to be faulty.

No more than a cursory glance at our bitch indicates to the knowledgeable
fancier of her breed that she is "soft in back"-that is, she has a dip in
her topline, the back between her shoulder blades and hips being lower than
either. When trotted, her back "bounces" instead of holding steady and firm
as it should in order to insure no loss of power as it is transmitted from
the rear to the front.

So, since we find this bitch to be somewhat soft in back, we will want to
mate her to correct this fault in her progeny, or at least in most of her
grandchildren. Closer inspection, necessitating perhaps the use of our
hands, divulges a too short and "steep" shoulder blade. Instead of being
long and well laid back, or put on "obliquely", as many Standards state,
this one, we find, is too perpendicular.

Likewise, as in the matter of topline, the third fault in our bitch is quite
easily observable-she hasn't sufficient rear angulation, is "too straight in
the rear." A full explanation of this as well as the two above-mentioned
faults would necessitate the use of all the space allotted to this article.

Besides, I have explained earlier that until a breeder is fully conversant
with what constitutes idealized perfection, as well as faults and
shortcomings in his breed, he should not attempt, or at least expect, to
consistently produce outstandingly good specimens. I must therefore
presuppose a complete knowledge on the part of my readers of ALL facets
pertaining to the three structural faults listed above, and possessed by our
mythical bitch.

Because, amongst the 14 animals in her immediate pedigree, there does not
appear the same dog's name more than once, it would not be likely that we
could determine from which, or any several of them, came one or more of her
faults.

If we DO know that either the sire or dam, or any others amongst her
ancestors, did have one or more of the faults mentioned, then we most
certainly do not want that dog or dogs in the pedigree of the mate we select
for her if we can possibly avoid it. Should such be unavoidable, then that
animal should be so far back in the pedigree as to make its influence
negligible.

Having a hit-or-miss bred bitch with which to start and one with such a
complexity of faults, we must consider her as only a seed bed the "ground"
in which to plant the improved seed (sperm) of a male who, in particular, is
correct in the places where she is faulty and without other and perhaps as
bad shortcomings. We must also try to find one who not only possesses these
correct attributes himself, but comes from dogs who had them.

We should also select a stud who is preferably inbred, or at least quite
strongly line-bred, so that the strength such breeding gives to his
prepotency will most likely insure his dominance in the mating pair.

Favorite Breeding Practice for Superior Stock

There is a favorite breeding theory, or system, used by successful breeders
of many varieties of animals. It usually eventuates in superior stock IF the
male selected is himself an outstanding specimen, nearly faultless, and has
such progenitors. It goes as follows: "Let the sire of the sire be the
grandsire of the dam, on the dam's side."

Does that seem complicated? A look at the above pedigree will clarify it.
The dog we are using (BB) has as his sire 0, while his dam P also has as her
"grandsire on the dam's side" the same dog 0.

Because the majority of dog breeders formulate no breeding plan and seldom
if ever, when making a mating, consider how or what they will mate any of
the resultant progeny, a stud bred such as the above dog is not common. As
you will recognize, it takes some years of planned breeding to produce such
a dog.

In the absence of a stud with such bloodlines, those with modifications of
it can be used. As one example amongst many, the sire of the sire might be
the grandsire of the dam on the SIRE'S side, instead of on the dam's.
Another: the sire selected might be the result of either a full or a half
brother and sister mating, and thus inbred. And so we might go on listing
differing formulas indicating inbreeding and line breeding.

The point I want to make, however, is that in selecting a mate for a faulty
bitch whose wide-open pedigree offers no individual in it free of her
faults, and dominant in correcting them, one must select as her mate a dog
not only himself CORRECT where she is failing, but through some intensity of
corrective blood is dominant.

Foundation on Which Worth Is Built

I feel it well to interject here that "paper breeding" is not alone the
answer, any may be dangerous-in case I haven't made it sufficiently clear
heretofore that:

"Physical compensation is the foundation rock upon which all enduring worth
must be built."

It therefore goes without saying that we have selected stud BB not only
because of his line-breeding on 0, but also because both he AND 0 are
correct where the bitch AA is faulty.

It has not seemed practical for the purpose of this article to become
involved with listing dogs further back in the pedigrees than are given.
However it is worthy of note that in the ancestry of our stud RB there are
lines running in the fourth and later generations to top quality as well as
top-winning males and bitches.

Two studs and one bitch, for instance, appear three or more times back of
the 3rd generation, and all three were eminently strong in the sections
where our bitch is weak. The male 0, as an example, goes back with three
lines to the great dog we will designate as UU and four times to one of the
best bitches ever produced in the breed, ZZ.

The latter, incidentally, not only possessed a practically perfect
fore-assembly, ideal rear angulation, and an un-criticizable topline, but,
in turn, was a descendant of another "great" in the breed, one dubbed as
"the dog with an iron back." 

It would be unreasonable to expect that in this first generation produced
from an entirely outcross-bred bitch with several faults, although sired by
a line-bred male without them, we would get any, let alone all, of the
resultant litter entirely "trouble-free." It is, however, reasonable to
assume that one or more of the pups showed some, or a complete correction of
one or all of the dam's faults. Why?

Because, as we have pointed out, the sire through his line breeding should
be somewhat dominant over the "seed bed" in which his sperm was placed. As
all experienced dog breeders know, such a mating as outlined above does
sometimes produce considerable improvement over the dam, with some or most
of the puppies resembling the sire a great deal more than their dam.

So that we can proceed with this projected breeding plan, in which we found
it necessary to start with such a foundation head as described above, and
attempt to "breed up" from her, we must go on, using the best of what we
have obtained for this first mating.

Select Best Bitch Puppies Not Male!

As soon as the litter is sufficiently grown so enough can be told about them
to make a fairly safe selection (and this varies amongst different breeds),
we try to pick the best bitch puppy. Let us presume that we find one
resembling her sire more than the dam, as we have planned and hoped We are
not at all interested in keeping a male, and should not be in the
foreseeable future, unless none such as we must use in our breeding program
is available at public stud. As a beginner breeder without the space and
means to permit us the luxury of maintaining a large breeding establishment,
we must of necessity confine ourselves to the use of others' studs for the
small number of bitches we can breed and litters we can produce.

Impatient for desired results and those good-quality specimens it is our
determination and desire to eventually produce, there are two things we can
now do with our foundation bitch AA. We can "pension" her as a pet,
discarding her as a breeder, or we can mate her again while waiting for the
selected puppy from her last litter to become old enough for breeding.

Incidentally, it is always best to keep two females in a litter from which
one plans to pick future breeders, giving some insurance that, should one be
lost while maturing, there will be a replacement.

Should the alternative be decided upon (breeding the bitch AA a second
time), there are again two decisions to make: Shall we repeat the first
mating or select another stud? The decision as to whether to repeat the
mating will, of course, depend upon what came out of the first.

If a different mate is selected for AA's second litter, then who should he
be? One could decide upon several courses-select another stud with different
bloodlines but equally corrective and prepotent, or one closely related to
stud BB.

In the first instance, the resultant litter might be of such higher and more
uniform quality as to make it advisable to use one from it with which to
carry on, and in the second, with the two litters having a measure of
identical (and corrective) blood, a puppy or puppies from each litter might
later be mated together.

Breeding Bitch from 1st Litter

We are patently unable to delve deeply into such problems or matters in this
article. In fact, it is bound to run a greater length than planned if I go
no further than suggest what to do with the selected bitch from the first
litter of BB to AA, which litter I will designate as CC.

If what I have written in earlier installments, together with this one, has
been followed by our readers, I am sure you will pretty well know what I
shall suggest as the next move in this projected breeding program. Yes, you
are right-further use of the bloodlines of the original male BB and, in
particular, that of his sire and his dams grand-sire 0.

We will say, as would have been quite likely, that the puppies in litter CC
showed improvement in, or correction of, the listed faults of their dam, at
least to some extent. Also that the bitch puppy selected for future breeding
use was found to possess her sire's good fore-assembly, and topline but not
his proper rear angulation. After all, one cannot hope for, or expect.
EVERYTHING wanted from just one mating, and I am stretching the probable
facts greatly when I admit to the above two improvements so soon after the
start. But, in the desire to be helpful, I should be as encouraging as
possible. Right?

If it takes longer to obtain such correction as outlined above, do not be
too discouraged you must continue with intelligent breeding to corrective
and, if possible, closely related animals.

In the mean time, this warning: Make sure you do not lose other and valuable
characteristics possessed by your breeders, the while you work to eliminate
the three special faults we have listed as needing correction.

This sounds simple, but I must warn you that it "ain't".

Well, while we have digressed above, we shall take it for granted that our
young bitch has matured to breeding age. The answer as to how we should mate
her, from own experience and in my best judgment, as well as in accordance
with genetic knowledge, has been given above. It occurs to me that we have
not as vet named our young bitch, the product of a mating of BB and AA-so,
being a 50-50 combination of the two, she is named BA.

We have presupposed that BA received from her sire BB his cood fore-assembly
and topline but no improvement over the rear angulation of her dam AX. \Ve
therefore want to hold and 'set' the good characteristics obtained from BB.
the while we acquire the proper and needed rear angulation.

Our greatest chance for success in this endeavor lies in returning to either
the sire himself, breeding his daughter back to him, or in using one of his
sons who not only possesses BB's front and topline but, because of blood
from his maternal side of the family, has a strong dominance of proper rear
angulation. In other words, BB having been bred to a good bitch, herself
possessing proper rear angulation (and if possible others in her ancestry).
Bb's son out of such a bitch should carry extra strength in this
characteristic.

Here again we would be doing "paper breeding" had we not stressed the
importance of physical compensation in the mating pair.

Space permitting, I might go on with outlines of suggested future use of the
progeny of bitch BA from the litter by her sire BB. or one of his sons.

It should be recognized that the recommendations made in this article are
not always possible of exact fulfillment. For instance, no such stud as BB,
with a pedigree in which "the sire of the sire is the grandsire of the dam
on the dam's side" may be found and, if located, his sire and dam's
grandsire might not be at all the type of animal one would want to
line-breed on.

It should be understood that, in its widest application, the recommendation
made as to a mate for the foundation bitch AA would be a stud who not only
himself but, more importantly, his immediate ancestors, possess as nearly as
possible the proper structural attributes demanded by the breed's Standard.

Stressing the importance of the above, we must remember that inbreeding and
linebreeding serve to accentuate not only the GOOD but the BAD points and,
Again, that when such breeding is used. STRICT SELECTION must be made.

Given a foundation bitch who herself is of superior quality as compared to
the average of her breed, and who has a pedigree in which some top-quality
dogs appear one or more times, the procedure recommended herein, of course,
would have been different Advice would have been given to breed back on one
or more of those "toppers."

(c) Lloyd C. Brackett 



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----


Peter Cacioppo, CFP...Eagle Hill
www.members.tripod.com/EagleHillAdvisor
Financial Advisor.  Phone: 925-377-6416
"Fees for advice or plans, no product/investment sales"

www.members.tripod.com/EagleGSD 
German Shepherds and Belted Galloway cattle
 
 


============================================================================
POST is Copyrighted 2004.  All material remains the property of the original 
author and of GSD Communication, Inc. NO REPRODUCTIONS or FORWARDS of any kind 
are permitted without prior permission of the original author  AND of the 
Showgsd-l Management. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 

ALL PERSONS ARE ON NOTICE THAT THE FORWARDING, REPRODUCTION OR USE IN ANY 
MANNER OF ANY MATERIAL WHICH APPEARS ON SHOWGSD-L WITHOUT THE EXPRESS 
PERMISSION OF ALL PARTIES TO THE POST AND THE LIST MANAGEMENT IS EXPRESSLY 
FORBIDDEN, AND IS A VIOLATION OF LAW. VIOLATORS OF THIS PROHIBITION WILL BE 
PROSECUTED. 

For assistance, please contact the List Management at admin@xxxxxxxxxxxx

VISIT OUR WEBSITE - http://www.showgsd.org 
============================================================================

Other related posts:

• » [ SHOWGSD-L ] Lloyd Brackett book, save on your email system!!!

1. Home
2. showgsd-l
3. Archive
4. 12-2004

---

• » Previous by Date
• » Next by Date
• » Related Posts
• » View list details
• » Manage your subscription

---