Lurchers and stalking

[Bowland blades]

Aye whatever.
Spoken like someone who know hee haw about lurchers.

Just put my last Hancock done the other month.
Was a great dog , regardless of the ribbing for having a Hancock lurcher

Gosh i always find those that assume to be a special kind of daft, especially to do on line . Ok its been maybe 20 plus years maybe more? most likely is - certainly i stopped before the Ban and my bitch was the last of a very long family line back into my own Gt Grandparents and their dogs . Just cannot see any point even with legitimate and legal work with lurchers your pretty likely to get pulled - up around here

 

[Rake Aboot]

Gosh i always find those that assume to be a special kind of daft, especially to do on line . Ok its been maybe 20 plus years maybe more? most likely is - certainly i stopped before the Ban and my bitch was the last of a very long family line back into my own Gt Grandparents and their dogs . Just cannot see any point even with legitimate and legal work with lurchers your pretty likely to get pulled - up around here

No idea what your on about now
Happy to continue with that to be honest.
To be fair, your ramblings are getting worse , it’s not just about dogs.

 

[Bo Diddley]

No idea what your on about now
Happy to continue with that to be honest.
To be fair, your ramblings are getting worse , it’s not just about dogs.

Completely agree Mr Aboot ^^.
On another note, is the Avatar you are using actually you? It's always nice to put a face to a person...

 

[Rake Aboot]

lol. Yes it is . Not sure where the fox hat ends and the beard begins mind

 

[VSS]

. Not sure where the fox hat ends and the beard begins mind

It is indeed difficult to tell anything from a photo that is mostly beard and fur. I had to look a few times at that picture just to make sure it wasn't me in my winter hat. The only thing that gave the game away was that my granddaughter has red hair.

 

[Keith Edmunds]

Back to the thread ........TBH it is impossible to talk about the canine attributes of a 'lurcher' because the type is so infinitely variable. It would be like using the word 'gundog' or 'terrier' - would you compare a Cocker with a Chessie? Or an Airedale with a Plummer? There is no way you could compare a first cross Saluki/Greyhound with a first cross collie/greyhound - completely different animals. Chuck into the mix just about any other blend and it is, quite frankly, impossible to refer to the 'lurcher' and discus its merits or otherwise. There is enough variability in pure breeds never mind cross breeds.

 

[Klenchblaize]

Back to the thread ........TBH it is impossible to talk about the canine attributes of a 'lurcher' because the type is so infinitely variable. It would be like using the word 'gundog' or 'terrier' - would you compare a Cocker with a Chessie? Or an Airedale with a Plummer? There is no way you could compare a first cross Saluki/Greyhound with a first cross collie/greyhound - completely different animals. Chuck into the mix just about any other blend and it is, quite frankly, impossible to refer to the 'lurcher' and discus its merits or otherwise. There is enough variability in pure breeds never mind cross breeds.

That’s why we’ve fixed on discussing the aesthetics of the Lurcher, or rather how those willowy legs and pinched waist is viewed by many country folk!

K

 

[Bo Diddley]

Lurchers fall into roughly three camps;

Camp #1, with owners called Tarquin or Rupert, usually large and rough of coat, they roam about the family estates sometimes catching a Muntjac which is the talk of the house for many weeks and the tale gives hours of laughter when recounting it to the dinner guests...

Camp #2, with owners called Ned or Jack, usually small-medium sized dogs with a cunning & sly way with them, usually seen mooching home down the country lanes early in the morning or late into the evening with a rabbit dangling from its jaws, often the curse of the local farmers, who love to moan that they have too many rabbits, but hate the thought of a lurcher catching one.

Camp #3, with owners like Kaven O'Brien & Patrick Mohan, usually looking like a pure Saluki, but possibly with a little Greyhound in the mix, often found squashed in the back of a cheap 4x4x4 with a few other very similar running dogs and driving around the large fields of East Anglia as soon as the harvest is over... causing mayhem wherever they choose to go...

I doubt I would choose a lurcher as a tracking dog, but then I'm risk averse so I'm told

 

[Bowland blades]

Back to the thread ........TBH it is impossible to talk about the canine attributes of a 'lurcher' because the type is so infinitely variable. It would be like using the word 'gundog' or 'terrier' - would you compare a Cocker with a Chessie? Or an Airedale with a Plummer? There is no way you could compare a first cross Saluki/Greyhound with a first cross collie/greyhound - completely different animals. Chuck into the mix just about any other blend and it is, quite frankly, impossible to refer to the 'lurcher' and discus its merits or otherwise. There is enough variability in pure breeds never mind cross breeds.

Correct ! First cross pups you cannot honestly predict the physical attributes even if the breeding is pure both sides it might go the wrong way around to what the breeder hoped for
Cocker x Chesapeake ?Good Lord its hard to even think how that could come out LOL. Chessie x Lab , well i have known a few and they seem to come out really well.

 

[VSS]

Correct ! First cross pups you cannot honestly predict the physical attributes even if the breeding is pure both sides it might go the wrong way around to what the breeder hoped for
Cocker x Chesapeake ?Good Lord its hard to even think how that could come out LOL. Chessie x Lab , well i have known a few and they seem to come out really well.

The outcome of a first cross between purebred parents is generally predictable.
It is subsequent crosses that are not.

 

[John Gryphon]

The outcome of a first cross between purebred parents is generally predictable.
It is subsequent crosses that are not.

Correct.

 

[SikaSeeker]

The outcome of a first cross between purebred parents is generally predictable.
It is subsequent crosses that are not.

I would disagree with you on that, because the first x breeding is just two breeds involved. First x change throw to one or the other parents. When you breed 2nd 3rd generation, you get a “type”. This is from my experience. Even better if you keep the breeding tight. You nearly know what you’re getting temperament and physicality.

 

[VSS]

I would disagree with you on that, because the first x breeding is just two breeds involved. First x change throw to one or the other parents. When you breed 2nd 3rd generation, you get a “type”. This is from my experience. Even better if you keep the breeding tight. You nearly know what you’re getting temperament and physicality.

No, it doesn't work like that. You have to breed for many generations, and cull hard, in order to fix consistency of "type" in a crossbred strain (at which point you've effectively created a new breed).
First crosses, on the other hand, are very consistent and predictable. We see it all the time in livestock breeding. (And plant breeding too, I believe).
Basically, if the parents are 100% purebred the outcome of the cross will be predictable. Subsequent crosses between crossbred parents involve an ever increasing number of variables, and are not predictable.

Look at how consistent these sheep are. Like peas in a pod. Thousands of them. All first cross. The most popular commercial type of breeding ewe in the UK:

 

[SikaSeeker]

No, it doesn't work like that. You have to breed for many generations, and cull hard, in order to fix "type" in a crossbred strain.
First crosses, on the other hand, are very consistent and predictable. We see it all the time in livestock breeding. (And plant breeding too, I believe).
Basically, if the parents are 100% purebred the outcome of the cross will be predictable. Subsequent crosses between crossbred parents involve an ever increasing number of variables, and are not predictable.

Look at how consistent these sheep are. Like peas in a pod. Thousands of them. All first cross. The most popular commercial type of breeding ewe in the UK:
View attachment 356607

I don’t need lessons in keeping families of dogs. What wrote is from my experience, first crossing dogs is not predictable when it comes to traits, temperaments and physicality.

 

[VSS]

I don’t need lessons in keeping families of dogs. What wrote is from my experience, first crossing dogs is not predictable when it comes to traits, temperaments and physicality.

More predictable than 2nd crosses. It's basic genetics.
A first cross will have 50% genetics from each of 2 parent breeds. That's predictable.
In a 2nd cross you have 4 parent breeds, and they will be represented in varying proportions in the offspring. Even litter mates may be completely different. It's not predictable.

Take lurchers for example. A collie × greyhound is a known cross with a predictable outcome, as is a Bedlington x whippet. However, if you were to cross the collie/greyhound with the Bedlington/whippet, the 4 parent breeds would not be equally represented in the offspring. Some pups could be more-or-less collie x Bedlington (so not lurchers at all), some could be more-or-less greyhound x whippet, and some could be somewhere in the middle. And you might find all those variants in one litter.

 

[SikaSeeker]

More predictable than 2nd crosses. It's basic genetics.
A first cross will have 50% genetics from each of 2 parent breeds. That's predictable.
In a 2nd cross you have 4 parent breeds, and they will be represented in varying proportions in the offspring. Even litter mates may be completely different. It's not predictable.

Take lurchers for example. A collie × greyhound is a known cross with a predictable outcome, as is a Bedlington x whippet. However, if you were to cross the collie/greyhound with the Bedlington/whippet, the 4 parent breeds would not be equally represented in the offspring. Some pups could be more-or-less collie x Bedlington (so not lurchers at all), some could be more-or-less greyhound x whippet, and some could be somewhere in the middle. And you might find all those variants in one litter.

Ok, now I get you. I’m talking about breeding similar dogs together, let it be, working ability, temperament, physicality etc…
Like black terriers, bull x just examples. Similar before you breed them.

 

[Bo Diddley]

So, if you bred a litter of lurchers, both the sire and dam being first cross collie greyhounds, would the outcome be 50% would be first cross collie/greyhound types, 25% would favour the greyhound type, and 25% would favour the heavier collie type ..

 

[VSS]

So, if you bred a litter of lurchers, both the sire and dam being first cross collie greyhounds, would the outcome be 50% would be first cross collie/greyhound types, 25% would favour the greyhound type, and 25% would favour the heavier collie type ..

That would be the theoretical outcome, but in practical terms each litter would be a random selection.
You could potentially end up with the whole of one litter being collie types, and the whole of the next litter being greyhound types, with none being the "middle of the road" lurcher type that you wanted. Or you could strike lucky and find that the whole litter are exactly what you wanted. That's why 2nd cross matings are such a lottery.
But if you keep the ones that are the type you want, and mate them together, and cull everything that isn't exactly what you want, and keep on doing that over several generations, you will eventually end up with a type that breeds true. Which is how new breeds are created. But you also risk losing hybrid vigour, and inadvertently selecting for negative traits (such as reduced fertility) that aren't immediately apparent.

 

[Keith Edmunds]

The outcome of a first cross between purebred parents is generally predictable.
It is subsequent crosses that are not.

That is 100% correct - but the predictability is 'relative' in the same way the two purebred dogs can throw significant variable character traits - as anyone that has owned siblings from a litter will testify.

 

[Ratel]

I had Border terriers for 30 years and every one would do their job above and below ground. They all tracked deer well and would train easily to track deer. Some were steady some not, running in to shot was common.
Now my Teckel is somewhat different with a much better nose, unfortunately if she sees deer close up she thinks she should go grab em. If they run she will hunt them for miles., But as the saying goes at present " I wouldn't swap her for a gold pig."