# Questions for Don Turnipseed



## Mike Di Rago (Jan 9, 2009)

I didn't want to post this on the other thread, but I wanted to ask these questions following the different posts as I think this topic is very interesting and that you are one of the few that actually talk about long term breeding plans.

Did you have specifics in mind as far as the working abilities,health standards,or even looks, that you were looking for at the begining of your program that you would change knowing what you know now?
Are there things that were more difficult to control in the breeding process and that you would do differently or not at all?

Mike


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

Mike Di Rago said:


> I didn't want to post this on the other thread, but I wanted to ask these questions following the different posts as I think this topic is very interesting and that you are one of the few that actually talk about long term breeding plans.
> 
> Did you have specifics in mind as far as the working abilities,health standards,or even looks, that you were looking for at the begining of your program that you would change knowing what you know now?
> Are there things that were more difficult to control in the breeding process and that you would do differently or not at all?
> ...


The biggest set back I had was believing the breed standard was meant for a working dog. The next obstacle was the general attitudes of people. The dogs are the easy part most of the time. It is the beliefs that you are ruining the breed, puppy milling, abusive because the dog are all born and raised outside....and the list goes on. That is the tough part of breeding good dogs. 

As far as the dogs, you don't have to have a degree in genetics or veterinary medicine. You are actually better off if you don't think you know it all. You have to have common sense and be observant and ignore the nay sayers because they have never bred like this and don't have a clue. The dogs will tell you whch way things are going. The first lesson I learned was YOU CAN"T CULL PUPS THAT ARE SITTING NEXT TO YOUR EAST CHAIR DAY IN AND DAY OUT. Immade all the mistakes. I saves some in the beginning and that was the first really good lesson I got in breeding. I noticed the ones I saved were never half the dog as the others. I quit raising them in the house right then. I realized at that point, good healthy dogs are crawling and crying when they hit the ground. No intervention is the only policy that will work if you are going to breed like this. The hardest part for me was to separate the wheat from the chaffe as far as available info. There is no good info to go by. You have to realize, inbreeding causes nothing that wasn't already there. It just brings it to the surface. 

The easy part was changing the conformation. Theree generations and they went from short legged, boxy 23" males to 27 1/2 in males, long in the back that could run. The learning curve is steep when you get into it. I realized at that point, form really does follow function. I could take just about any sporting breed and run them over the same course and select with the same criteria and they would all be built the same. As I said in the other thread. When you are not breeding for looks and one day you realize they all look the same, you can bet what you are breeding for is right in there.

Now, we get to the point I am at now, bringing in new blood. I thought a lot about this and picked a dog/line I thought would maintain the one thing I did not want to lose. Social Dominance. I have come to believe, right or wrong, that they are the apex in the dog world. They walk the walk and they can and will back it up. Social domiinant dogs are the most confident dogs in the dog world in my opinion. That was my sole criteria for picking the line I did. I told the breeder, I didn't want the bully, I don't want the bullied, I want the one that gets along but the bullies stay away from.


----------



## Don Turnipseed (Oct 8, 2006)

Mike, I reread your post and will add, I bred for a single function dog in the beginning. Translation for that is "unbalanced". I had a yard full of airedales that may as well have been hounds for a while. I changed my selection criteria. I thinkmyou have to be flexible. I had the hunt, but I lost the airedale. I started adding balance at that point. I would brred in exceptionally smart dogs, more social dogs. In short, I wasn't happy with what I was seeing even though they were what I originally selected for. Objectivity is tough at times but, when you see traights less than ideal, you have to re-examine your criteia and be flexible.


----------



## Mike Di Rago (Jan 9, 2009)

Thanks Don,
I don't think we have many opportunities to get feedback from long time breeders on their visions and their results. I appreciate=D>
Mike


----------

