Hobbit

Just trotting by........ so, the house insurance was cancelled (or threatened to be cancelled) because you had a [b]Pit[/b] (or something that looked like a Pit).........but it's okay to have a [b]Pit[/b]/Boxer? TOTAL BS.

Cassie --- again, BRAVO!

[b]Roo ... TLCPets....[/b] are we NO longer allowed to have private conversations?? I am really sorry if my post somehow confused you or hurt your feelings, it surely was not meant to do that. Some people do not check their pm boxes regularly and I wanted to make sure she/he did. [b]Cassie --- BRAVO! [/b]

Tifa --- I PM'd you concerning this topic. Please do not post reply, just PM me if you have any comments. Thanks.......

Lots may ohhhhh and ahhhhhh at the new puppies, but for me --- I have a HUGH problem with a breeder that KNOWINGLY continues to breed genetic defects! The sire of the litter is: CH Duwest I'm a Cowboy at Austlyn HSAa ---- he is also offered to approved bitches for stud. He is TYPE B/Carrier for PRCD (eye disease). They are knowingly and continuely breeding for this defect. The dam of the litter is Type A/Clear with an OFA rating of Fair (I feel fair isn't good enough for breeding stock). Her sire was a Carrier, her dam is clear. A litter mate to her is a Carrier. I see nothing wrong with breeding her to another TYPE A. This breeder has produced TYPE C/Affected offspring. She also has many offspring that were produced by known TYPE C/Affected dogs. Tell me where the logic is? She is continuing to breed genetic defects....knowingly, willingly and without malice...producing genetic defects at the expense of the dogs. Why? I bet the excuse is that her dogs are *Champions. I do not buy the crappy excuse for breeding TYPE B or TYPE C's because the gene pool is so limited.....according to the ACD website there are 48,355 listings. Some may be duplicates, some may be deceased, some may be not even listed. There is a "so what" attitude among ACD breeders concerning the breeding of dogs with this defect. They all seem to be more concerned with "but he's a Champion" then about the long term effects this breeding practice will cause. Take a look at some of the Silver Hills dogs --- the majority of those dogs are TYPE C/Affected --- AND tightly inbred. Hum.....there's that evil word..."INBRED". [url]www.cattledog.com/health/prcd.html[/url]

[quote name='Poofy']lastly: As for the site hobbit posted...while it was interesting...I will not put much weight in the value of private web pages. If its not published buy the scientific community I am not really interested in it. And its very difficult for me to put any stock into a web page that promotes the breeding and selling of mixed puppies using a bit of out of context fact to sell what they are breeding. I have plenty of books and online zines to read and keep me busy for the next year or so. Currently I am reading a DNA book by Berg and Howe which is very dry boring and I have fallen asleep on it a few times. It would be nice if these books would have some action scenes every once in a while (grin) :D I am currently looking for a good used copy of Cancer Chemotherapy in Small Animal. Practice by Jane M Dobson and Neil T Gorman, if any one has one they want to part with. <hint> There is supposed to be a good section on tumor biology. Any how...sleep tight...I am off to bed ;)[/quote] Because you don't understand it, that is why you poo-poo it off. If you DID understand, then you would see the significance in the meaning. If you want published works by the Scientific community --- I CAN surely give you lots and lots of information.

[quote name='Poofy']Woah: [color=darkred][b]I knew I would get sucked back into this vortex of never ending mis-information. I just can't let this go.[/b][/color] I am perfectly aware that gram positive has to do with Bacteria, but if you are dealing with the Genetic material of bacteria, and site specific transpondible elements...it has EVERYTHING to do with genetics. DNA exisists in bacteria. Bacteria are much more simple and often easier to deal with then looking at a more complex organism [color=red][b]Who is the heck was EVEN talking about bacteria in the first place?? No one, but you. [/b][/color] Transposons are hopping pieces of DNA shown to be present in the mamalian genomes only very recently, do you know where they came from, cause I do. Then I am suprised that you do not know that the first transposible elements to be used for genetic analysis was done in bacteria. The E coli bactiophages. [b][color=red]Bacteriophage(phage) is a virus that infects bacteria. A virus is a particle consisting of a nucleic acid (RNA or DNA) genome surrounded by a protein coat (capsid) and sometimes also a membrane, which can replicate only after infecting a host cell. A virus particle may exist free of its host cell but is incapable of replicating on its own. [/color][/b] That was over 50 years ago by Marbnara Mc Clintock. Transposons are not hopping genes, from the way I was taught, rather ther are genetic elements or units that can be "transposed" within the genome. [color=red][b]The pioneering work in the 1950/60's by Barbara McClintock on so-called jumping genes in corn where she identified transposible elements or transposons which are genetic signalling sequences that allow genes to move around within the genome. These studies made possible the techniques that are used today to insert genes into organisms. However they also show that there is a great deal of instability to gene modification and this leads to much uncertainty as to where genes locate and what they do once they are inserted. Thus, it is much too soon to know the affects that inserted genes will have either in the targetted crop plants or on consumers of those crop products. Are you sure it's NOT [i]Shigella[/i] that you are talking about? Transposible elements: Genetic elements characterized by their abilities to insert into and withdraw from a given location within the genome, resulting in movement from site to site within the genome over a period of time. Transposable elements may cause epigenetic changes in phenotype. [/b][/color] What the cr** is a pritien? Did you mean protein....that again is NEVER part of DNA. I would be willing to explain anything you want, but PLEASE speak real words not jibberish. Pritien was a type-o ...should have been protien. Sorry about that. Actually protien binds certain parts of Mu DNA thats why I was asking. Is it apart of that binding process/coding ? or what? As for protien not having any part of DNA... When DNA is coded into MRNA the MRNA is associated with the robisome where is undergoes translation into PROTIEN. Protien is HOW a genetic code is expressed. Almost all the possible codes in DNA specify one of the twenty amino acids, the chemical building blocks of protien.... [color=darkred][b]Messenger RNA (mRNA): An RNA molecule transcribed [u]from[/u] the DNA of a gene, and from which a protein is translated by the action of ribosomes. The basic function of the nucleotide sequence of mRNA is to determine the amino acid sequence in proteins. Ribosome: A complex organelle (composed of proteins plus rRNA) that catalyzes translation of messenger RNA into an amino acid sequence. Ribosomes are made up of two non-identical subunits each consisting of a different rRNA and a different set of proteins. The genome, is used to build and maintain cells, tissues, organs and organisms. In the flow of information from genome to organism, two steps require the copying of nucleotide sequence information into a different form. The first step, the copying of the DNA information [i][u]into[/u][/i] RNA, is designated transcription. After transcription and before translation the RNA transcripts are processed to produce mature messenger RNA (mRNA). The second copying step, in which amino acids are polymerized in response to the RNA information, is called translation. The products of translation, polypeptides, are also processed, producing the mature proteins. Each of the steps and the RNA and protein processing reactions rely on signal elements within the informational molecule to signal the correct copying or processing. Mature proteins contribute to phenotype in many ways: structural (membranes, fibers); catalytic (synthesizing other structural macromolecules, lipids, polysaccharides, etc.); regulatory (turning on and off various reaction paths) in response to environment or developmental plan. [/b][/color] And I am speaking real words thank you.[/quote]

[quote name='pei obssessed']I've been reading everybody's posts about the heartworm preventive--sorry to hear about your losses... I wanted to ask: does anyone use Revolution (selamectin topical solution)? It's a fairly new product that was recommended by my vet--it's supposed to be good for heartworm, fleas and ticks... It's applied on the skin (between the shoulder blades) once a month. On the prospect it says that they have tested it and that from 100 pure bred dogs, none had any side effects... But you can never know, I guess. I haven't started giving it to my Shar-pei because it's not mosquito season yet, but I wanted to know if anyone knows anything about this drug, anyone had any bad experiences?[/quote] It's from the Chemical group: Avermectin, (Macrocyclic Lactone), same as Ivermectin. Ivermectin has not been approved by the FDA for the use on small animals. [b]Selamectin[/b] Chemical group: Macrocyclic lactone Trade name: Revolution Mode of action: Binds to glutamate gated chloride channels in the parasites

ShadyLady -- here is a nice website for you to look at. This may be something you could use for your newsletter. [url]http://www.meekersheepdog.com/event.htm[/url] [url]http://www.agrihelp.com/dgtrain1.htm[/url] [url]http://www.agrihelp.com/dgtrain2.htm[/url] [url]http://www.agrihelp.com/dgtrain3.htm[/url] [url]http://www.agrihelp.com/stkdgfuture.htm[/url] [url]http://www.agrihelp.com/pickpup1.htm[/url] [url]http://www.agrihelp.com/pickpup2.htm[/url] [url]http://www.agrihelp.com/buzzwords.htm[/url] I don't know if you can use any of this, I just ran across it while looking for something else.

[quote name='Hmmmm']I do know that too much inbreding can cause problems. As I stated, linebreeding and cross breeding are important as well. If you know about the different families/lines of the APBT you know that each of these lines carry certain traits. You inbreed to keep the traits strong and outcross when needed. [b][color=darkred]You do not have to tightly inbreed to achieve this. [/color][/b] Some people inbreed too much, some not enough. Your books will not tell you when you get to either point unless there is physical proof you have gone too far. [b][color=red]Physical proof, at the expense of the dog --- I'm NOT willing to sacrifice my dogs because of an unwillingness to *hear* what has been proven. There is NO need for the sacrifice or severe culling that is done on a frequent basis by these *dogmen --- if a person has the knowledge to achieve what they are breeding for, these *mistakes* would occur less frequently. [/color][/b] I know when I need to bring another line in. Not from books but from experience. [b][color=red]IF you are leaning towards saying or implying that my knowledge of genetics is all book learning....you are sadly mistaken. I've been breeding livestock, dogs included, for almost 35 years.[/color][/b] Not only from my experience but from dogmen who have been breeding most of their lives and are well known. I may not know all the sceintific genetic terms and opinions but I know what these breeders have done, and they have done it better than anyone. [b][color=darkred]How do you test for mental instability in dogs? Better? If you call "better" at the expense of the dog, I guess so. [/color][/b] "Substandard" dogs, huh? I know several people who will [b]strongly[/b] disagree with you. And I guarantee anyone knowing about the bloodlines of my breed would love to have any of my dogs. And if you put someone with all this genetic knowledge and compare their dog to mine, mine will still be the dog most choose. [color=red][b]Your dog would be chosen by a person that had no knowledge of genetics. Someone that would not understand the mental damage that occurs from the continual practice of tightly inbreeding. Chosen by someone that would not understand how "fixing" a gene could/would hurt the breed in general. You are closed minded on this subject and it's fruitless for this conversation to continue. Your mind is made up, has been made up and you have NO idea how deeply you are hurting the dogs that you have --- you may not "see" what I'm talking about, understand what I'm talking about, but at the mental level, molecular level ---- You are playing a dangerous game at the expense of the mental stability of your dogs. [/b][/color]One thing you must remember with breeders of the APBT is that we cull, and cull hard. Culling is also a very important part of breeding. [color=darkred][b]AGAIN, if a person has the working knowledge of genetics and how to manipulate and use this knowledge in their breedings --- severe culling would not be a necessary factor as frequently as it's done in the APBT circle. I guess if a person doesn't mind knocking puppies in the head or killing young adults, then YOUR experienced way of breeding is for them[/b][/color].[/quote] Reread my post -- slowly --- I never called your dogs substandard. Tell me what feeling you have or how you know to outcross? What are the indicators?

[quote name='Malamum']Hey Hobbit, everything you have said makes perfect sense. I did however just notice on the link you posted for Shady Lady to look at under the heading of Herding Dog Breeds, both the Australian Shepherd and the Minature Australian Shepherd are listed :o[/quote] In order for anything to be a NEW breed it MUST be bred to another breed, different from the original breed. This has been my point about the "Mini-Aussie's". IF they are calling the Mini-Aussie's a "NEW BREED", then they can[b] NOT[/b] be fullblood Aussie's. They [b]MUST[/b] be crossed with another breed. This is a quote from the MASCA website: [i]"Dissatisfied with the limited show schedule offered by any one club, enthusiasts attempted to secure wider recognition. However, it soon became apparent that acceptance could not be gained under the new name because it implied a new breed. [b]In actuality, the mini Aussie remained a size variety of the Australian Shepherd, with a continuous genepool, and not a separate breed. [/b]Those concerned with maintaining Australian Shepherd heritage, instinct, temperament and type, and interested in pursuing further recognition formed a Miniature Australian Shepherd parent club in order to attain these goals". [/i]

Have you seen this website? Lots of good links. [url]http://www.dog-training.com/sheepdog.htm[/url]

[quote name='ShadyLady']Question I was looking for training tips on herding on the web for our clubs newsletter is it still the same deal?? :roll:[/quote] Personally, Shady -- if it said do not reproduce, copy, etc...without prior permission > I'd ask before I copied anything. I have seen instances where the author gives permission as long as he/she is acknowledged as the author.

Here is a coonhound website: [url]http://www.coonhoundcentral.com/index.html[/url]

I hadn't seen a Redbone in YEARS until the guy down the road got one. She is lovely. They are recognized by the AKC, they are in the Miscellanous Breed class. Here are two ads I found: Where Redbone pups get their best start. Top quality, healthy pups, outstanding pedigrees, champion bloodlines, no inbreeding. Family raised with children, in our home, not outside. Well socialized, friendly, intelligent, fast learners that are eager to please. Bred for excellent temperament to be great family pets and/or hunting/show/competition dogs. Personality like a Lab but not as hyper. Shots, dewormed, vet exam, health certificate, 1-year written health guarantee, puppy info/starter/training packet and registration papers. Experienced breeder. Shipping available. Credit cards accepted. Contact Pam at Redfern Kennel at 603-868-1211 or [email][email protected][/email]. Club Affiliations and Registries: UKC, AKC, CKC, OFA New Hampshire -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Redbone Coonhound Text Ads -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Redbone Pups-$400.00 picked up,$250.00 additional if shipped in 48 states. All pups are registered, from Championship bloodlines, wormed, with first shots. We are redbone breeders for 30 yrs.& have top quality hunting dogs which make great house pets-Intelligent, gentle, wonderful with kids. Email: [email][email protected][/email] Call Theresa 608-764-5984. Club Affiliations and Registries: American Redbone Coonhound Association, AKC, UKC Wisconsin

[quote name='Rosebud']:-? I understand that constantly inbreeding a line will eventually degenerate the line, but I would think that you would lose true structure by constantly outcrossing a line. [color=red][b]Structure would not be lost if a breeder was selective in chosing which sire or dam to breed with (speaking of breeding within the same breed). If you are speaking of breeding to another breed; you would want to breed to a breed of like structure, for the traits that you are wanting to incorporate into the original breed --- or for the traits which you want to dilute. Then take that offspring and breed back into the original line of original breed. Of course, if you are wanting to dilute a certain trait --- you must not breed back to the dog/bitch whose trait you are trying to get away from.[/b][/color] I also don't see how cross-breeding can really benefit anything other than creating a half-breed, if for only one generation. [color=darkred][b]Cross-breeding into another breed could be beneficial. You would, as stated above, also want to breed to a genetically sound dog. That "half-breed" pup, would then be bred back to the original breed; that offspring would then be bred back to the original breed, also. If a person is wanting to dilute a genetic defect; they could do so by NOT tightly inbreeding within the same breed. They could breed into another bloodline (one that is genetically sound) and select to keep ONLY genetically sound offspring and eliminate the defective ones. [/b][/color] Now my question is pertaining to out-crossing. - If inbreeding creates a genetic environment for good and bad diseases, ailments etc. to surface when normally they would not of, then wouldn't outcrossing make it a severly recessive gene? [b][color=red]No. When you inbreed there is a higher chance that the recessive genes will pair --- because the parents both have many of the same genes. Every offspring obtains a copy of half the sire and half the dam. If you are breeding brother to sister; then both may have some of the same recessive genes (genetic defects) that could pair. If you bred to an outside dog (same breed, different bloodlines) --- they have different gene pairs and the likelyhood that a recessive would pair is not very high.[/color][/b] I don't understand how if inbreeding brings a good or bad trait to the surface that outcrossing would get rid of it permanently, it seems to me that it would just become a recessive gene. [color=darkred][b]Breeding to an outside line would increase the chances that the recessive (defect) gene would be masked, because of the statement above. It is "hidden". Thru selective breeding, the defect would not surface because of dominant genes. A person would (MUST) have to have a working knowledge of genetics in order to achieve this. If a dog is a carrier for a certain disease --- you can, thru selective breeding (breeding to a dog that is not a carrier nor is affected), breed so the gene does not surface. In the long run, it would be better to eliminate the carrier from the gene pool altogether (neuter or spay) and not use that particular dog for breeding. Some genes are hidden that a breeder may not know is in his line. Breeding brother to sister will surely bring those "hidden" genes to the surface. If these are defects, an ethical breeder, would remove these dogs from his program, along with the offspring. This does NOT mean that this has eliminated the problem within the line (there could be other problems). Some genes can not be eliminated and MUST be dealth with accordingly. [/b][/color] [color=blue]Doc wrote: You are 100% wrong that outbreeding will not get rid of mutations within the population. When you outbreed you can ELIMINATE the bad allelel from the POPULATION by selective breeding, thereby ELIMINATING the disease. [b]What you are saying is that selective breeding is what is eliminating the disease not the outcrossing on it's own. Could this not also be achieved through selective line-breeding?[/color][/b] [color=blue]Are you aware how scientist established genetic disease models in rodents(before the age of molecular cloning, now we can engineer our diseases)? We inbreed them for generation after generation until something went wrong. That literally ment EVERYTHING and ANYTHING. [b]Were the rodents in these experiments tested to find the best representatives before breeding again, or was quality not an issue. Has there been an experiment where only the best representative of each litter was in-bred?[/color][/b] Thank you all for your genetics lessons. :angel:[/quote]

[quote name='Jerakeen'][quote name='Hobbit']Bec --- the reason so many people are against the crossing and calling it a NEW breed, is because --- it takes LONGER than 63 days for a breed to be established. YEARS of perfection, selective breeding and genetic manipulation to be able to consciously call the mixture of two breeds, a NEW breed.[/quote] I entirely agree but you shouldn't tar everyone with the same brush. [color=red][b]Please show me ON THIS THREAD where I tarred anyone?? [/b][/color] If someone wants to put the time and dedication in that is required to create a new breed then good luck to them. It's not responsible breeders who's dogs end up in rescue (and if they do they will try to get them back) it's the irresponsible that should be condemned whether they breed pure bred or otherwise.[/quote]

Forgotten? or not worth listing? Not enough room to list?

PEDIGREE STATISTICS IDOL'S ROCKETT SIRE: CHAN'S QUARTER BACK DAM: IABINET'S MOONSHINE JR. OFFSPRING: 2 FULL BROTHERS/SISTERS: 0 HALF BROTHERS/SISTERS (SAME SIRE): 4 HALF BROTHERS/SISTERS (SAME DAM): 0 BEFORE-NAME TITLED OFFSPRING (CH, GR CH, ETC...): 0 AFTER-NAME TITLED OFFSPRING (ROM, POR, ETC...): 0 4 GENERATION GENETIC CONTRIBUTION: CHAN'S QUARTER BACK 50% GARRETT'S FLOYD (2XW) 50% IABINET'S MOONSHINE JR. 50% CH CRENSHAW'S JEEP (4XW) ROM 25% IKE'S BLACK DICK (AKA RAZOR) 25% CHAN'S EVE 25% GARRETT'S BRIDGETT 18.75% CHAN'S ATHENA 12.5% CHAN'S CRICKET II 12.5% CHAN'S DICK 12.5% CHAN'S BLACK GIRL 6.25% CH CHAN'S CHECKER 6.25% SHADY HILL'S CRICKET 6.25% J.CRENSHAW'S DOLLY 6.25% CH FINLEY'S BO (6XW)(1XL) ROM 6.25% CH J.CRENSHAW'S HONEYBUNCH ROM 6.25% GARRETTS FLOYD (2XW). 6.25%

[quote name='bullygirl29532']now her sire would be INbred while the bitch would be LINEbred. which would make the bitch in question inbred due to her sharing Garrett's floyd so close. Did that make sense to anyone else? :)[/quote] Dam is from 1/2 brother to sister breeding; from father/daughter. Sire is from father/daughter breeding from a father that is 1/2 brother to sister offspring. Tightly inbred, both lines.

[quote name='bullygirl29532']this is one of them. not a dog i could buy but i just want to get a feel of what is to close. it seems to me in the APBT world In/Line breeding is a common thing. which alot of breeders aren't to clear in explaining why they did it that way. It's almost like they are trying to keep the recipe secret. [url]http://www.apbt.online-pedigrees.com/public/printPedigree.php?dog_id=51115[/url][/quote] Chan's Dick and Chan's Athena -- 1/2 brother and sister Garrett's Floyd (2XW) was bred to his daughter --- Chan's Eve. Garrett's Bridgett & Garrett's Floyd (2XW) --- 1/2 brother and sister. Garrett's Floyd was bred to his daughter -- Chan's Crickett II I would call this inbreeding, tightly inbred. Father to daughter is better (genetically speaking) than brother to sister --- IF inbreeding just has to be done. Personally, I would not breed this close --- the same results can be achieved without close inbreeding.

[quote name='Poofy']Thats really wild hobbit...as you would think farmers would want as high of a yield as possible...and the only way to achieve that would be a lower COI...really strange that they did not use that practice as I know many horse breeders and beef cattle people...do. I have seen beef cattle persons use frozen semen out of what ever bull was chosen as the best producer, sticking to COI of less then 2%. What kind of problems were they seeing? Just high mortality or what? do they know what was causing the still births? Seems like they would have brought in at least a few different bulls to decrease depression?[/quote] [b]Inbreeding has definite effects on all traits[/b], increases in inbreeding delays reproductive times and results in lighter weights at 120 and 360 days. Inbreeding coefficients should be considered when deciding on the mating of sires and dams, [b]in order to limit the possible negative effects of inbreeding on productive and reproductive traits[/b]. They were set in ways, because that typical breeding practice was practiced by their father and by his father. They had no knowledge of genetics or why their production was low. 90% of the calves borned had to be pulled. These were not first time heifers, they were 3rd calf cows. The bull was notorious for putting hugh heads and shoulders on the calves. The cows did not have the pelvic girdle to accomodate the large sized calves. Some of the calves only lived a few hours, unable to stand and nurse. Some cows simply did not produce enough milk, had no mothering ability, teats too large, prone to mastitis. Some cows did not conceive (low fertility). The bull had a low libido and would not cover all the cows in heat (even though the herd was small). [b]For those who are unfamilar with the meaning of Inbreeding coeffients:[/b] The standard definition of inbreeding is that it is any scheme which results in the sire and the dam having common ancestors. This common heritage is expressed by a parameter called the inbreeding coefficient, first proposed by Sewell Wright in 1922. Designated F by Wright (but more commonly IC or IBC by breeders), it can theoretically range from 0 to 100%, and indicates the probability that the two alleles for any gene are identical by descent. Though the primary consequence of inbreeding is to increase homozygosity, the IC is not a direct measure of homozygosity because the two alleles may be the same for other reasons. Within a breed, some proportion of all the genes will be the homozygous because there was only one allele to start with. In that sense, the IC may be regarded as indicating what proportion of the remainder have been made homozygous by inbreeding. The inbreeding coefficient is a function of the number and location of the common ancestors in a pedigree. It is not a function, except indirectly, of the inbreeding of the parents. Thus, one can mate two highly inbred individuals who share little common ancestry and produce a litter with a very low IC. (Because the potential number of ancestors doubles every generation, eventually you reach a point where the number of ancestors exceeds the number of individuals alive at that time. You are, therefore, bound to find some common ancestors if you go back far enough.) Conversely, it is possible to mate two closely related dogs, both of which have low ICs, and boost the IC substantially.

The vet we use is a wonderful person. If you bring in a stray dog or cat, he'll neuter or spay for free. His feeling on this, there are too many stray dogs that have no homes, but survive by their own mean. He gives them an extra chance at survival by neutering and spaying them. Even if they aren't adopted by the person that brought them in (some can't because of different reasons), he'll still neuter and spay them. He has about 15 dogs that stay at the clinic that he's adopted. They are kennelled at night and run around the property during the day. He has an assortment of breeds, size, color and cuteness.

Crested you could ask permission from the author to copy the information you are wanting. Or just do what Poofy said, rewrite it.

[quote name='bullygirl29532']this is one of them. not a dog i could buy but i just want to get a feel of what is to close. it seems to me in the APBT world In/Line breeding is a common thing. which alot of breeders aren't to clear in explaining why they did it that way. It's almost like they are trying to keep the recipe secret. [url]http://www.apbt.online-pedigrees.com/public/printPedigree.php?dog_id=51115[/url][/quote] It's mostly done because that's just the way it's been done for YEARS. They can't explain why --- because they dont' know why, all they know is that it's been done that way for years. No offense meant to anyone by this statement. An example: I was hired as a consultant for a Hereford Ranch. The old men were having calving problems, diminished birth weight, low rate of gain, small size at maturity, and an array of other problems. Looking at their herd sire -- he was the same sire for the last 7 years! Their bloodlines were the same inbreeding for the last 30 years. They never sold any of the heifers, nor did they ever change bloodlines for their sire. When the sire became old, they would keep a bull from the herd. A mess, to say the least. I asked them WHY they bred like this? Their response was, "because it's always been done like this. Our father and grandfather bred like this". I suggested they sell the entire herd and start over. I thought they'd bother drop dead from a heart attack right there on the spot in the pasture. They had NO working knowledge of genetics and refused to change their breeding practice. I was successful, after a year of 100% calf loss, in talking them into at least buying an outside bull from proven lines. Their problems are still there, and will continue and I told them so.