NLDA Forum for Working Lacy Dogs
http://www.nationallacydog.org/forum/

Animal Research Foundation - The First Lacy Registry
http://www.nationallacydog.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=746
Page 2 of 2

Author:  MisB [ Wed May 06, 2009 10:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Animal Research Foundation - The First Lacy Registry

That is NOT accurate and completely unfounded Kevin since the vast majority of Lacy Dogs trace back to Wilkes' lines (IF you go back over 5 generations. ) it is impossible to say his breeding practices are why there are Larger Lacy Dogs given that fact.

This conversation needs to be in the genetics and breeding section not the history.

Author:  Julie N [ Wed May 06, 2009 11:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Animal Research Foundation - The First Lacy Registry

Pretty much all of our dogs came from Wilkes at this point. Trace your Lacy's pedigree back to six or so generations and I guarantee you'll see Wilkes' name. According to people who knew him and his dogs, he did breed Blackmouth Curs to Lacys. If the dam was a BMC, he called them Blue Blackmouths. If the dam was a Lacy, he called it a Blue Lacy. And yes, he bred plenty of Lacys to Lacys. But it's impossible to really know what turned up where and how it has affected the gene pool. Which is why some breeders have been so adamant about tracking down older bloodlines.

As far as the Catahoulas are concerned, such is the history of cur dogs. Dogs were sorted and labeled by their working ability and general appearance, not by papers. I highly doubt that the cattlemen buying those dogs cared about registration as long as the dog worked. Considering that one research study showed 63% of Catahoulas had some degree of deafness, an out cross was probably necessary to recalibrate their genes so working was still feasible. But as Steve said, such programs are a slow process, and I wouldn't make assumptions about the Cat program based on a footnote in the Lacy description.

In the words of a very popular Catahoula site: "Cur breeds were developed first and foremost for their performance, with their working instinct being the first factor a breeder would consider ... Even though individual Cur breeds have been around since the early 1900's, many were not officially recognized with their own breed club until the 1950's because most of the breeders that owned these dogs were working people who were interested mainly in a working dog and not in registration papers."

And Mis, I agree, this conversation should probably be split out if we intend to continue discussing genetics. I can't believe that of all the interesting and controversial things in that ARF description, we are harping on Catahoula out crosses that had no impact on the Lacy breed.

Author:  MisB [ Wed May 06, 2009 11:25 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Animal Research Foundation - The First Lacy Registry

Hell I can't figure out how this turned into a Cat conversation anyway..since this is the Lacy history section but I went with it..just felt like modern genetic explanations might belong in breeding & genetics.

I agree there was so much more to that article that could have been brought up and discussed in length. Like the emphases on work ability..once the Lacy was truly a contender in the working breed world.
Or how about the color variations mentioned..the solid colors and then the black on the heads.
How those black & tan dogs said to be Lacys in pictures at the Marble Falls museum fit the ARF's "standard" or description. Though many have said there is no way they could be real Lacys because of their color. Yet here are records from within the original registry of the Lacy Dog stating they come in that color combination.

We may not like everything we read in our history but it doesn't mean it didn't happen or is not possible. Exploring those possibilities helps us insure a better future for the breed.
You have to know where you came from in order to get where you are going...

~Mis

Author:  SteveW [ Thu May 07, 2009 8:39 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Animal Research Foundation - The First Lacy Registry

Mis and I have the only two dogs in this association which I know with absolute certainty have ZERO Wilkes influence (Lucy and Mimzy). Jimmy may have one or two also. I have two more blood lines available to me with ZERO Wilkes influence. Other than that, every one of our dogs has Wilkes in their 10 generation pedigree.

Steve

Author:  AmberLowMiddleton [ Fri May 08, 2009 8:55 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Animal Research Foundation - The First Lacy Registry

Quote:
Other than that, every one of our dogs has Wilkes in their 10 generation pedigree.


All three of mine do (and they're all under 40 pounds).

Author:  MisB [ Fri May 08, 2009 1:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Animal Research Foundation - The First Lacy Registry

Amber
Trapper has Wilkes lines as well...and he is perfect hight & weight..AND work his ass off..
:-BD

Image
~Mis

Author:  Julie N [ Fri May 08, 2009 5:16 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Animal Research Foundation - The First Lacy Registry

From what I've seen, almost every (if not all) dogs with LGDR papers have Wilkes in them. I have yet to come across a single one of those pedigrees that couldn't be traced back to his yard. And yeah, he had plenty of pure Lacys, and the decedents of those crosses are still the right size and right color today. But you can definitely see a BMC or Catahoula influence in the larger lines and the red dogs with blue markings. Of course anyone with a good eye can see that. I just wish people would realize that if your dogs look like a BMC, I don't care what the papers say, don't breed it! But that would make too much sense 8-|

Mis, I've been thinking a lot about how the tris used to be the most common color. This isn't the first time I've read that. And talking about the creams got me thinking about it even more.

It seems to me that the decrease in tris could be traced to the elimination of black and increase in solid blues. And when you think about the rarity of creams, which require two sets of recessive genes, that makes sense. Blue tris also require two sets of recessive genes, atat and dd. So when the majority of Lacys were blue tris, you also had black tris, which meant there were two sources for that recessive gene. But if you start to concentrate on the blue part of the equation, you'd slowly eliminate the black tris because they may not carry the necessary dilution. By giving preference to one recessive, dd, you will see a decrease in the other, atat. You also see a decrease in red dogs.

Now that dd gene appears to be fixed in the breeding population, we may see an increase in tris again. But that will only happen if people don't strive for blues. A mix of colors is the healthiest thing for the breed as a whole. Each litter might not be diverse, but the overall population should be.

Author:  MisB [ Fri May 08, 2009 8:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Animal Research Foundation - The First Lacy Registry

That is exactly what I had been thinking!!
And what led to my original post in breeding & genetics for my latest "research" project.
Funny how this seemingly conflicting history added another piece to the puzzle.


~Mis

Author:  dhulsey [ Fri May 08, 2009 10:15 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Animal Research Foundation - The First Lacy Registry

Hello Julie, my female never threw a tri or a red ,red pup,when bred to 2 different males but always creams I talked to Brian Larremore he said his dogs did not throw tris either. I also have one of the lightest colored cream pups you will ever see. Steve, I think there are a lot more lacys that are not related to wilkes. Thing is people don t realize or plain don t care. I think it would be important to keep a line pure from wilkes if it was possible. People who fought fightin chickens did breed a little of this and a little bit of that, but they aways kept a pure strain in the yard some where. I do remeber seeing a black tri color on the web some where. A old man in Stephensville told me also that if you bred a lacy to anything else the pups would be black. He had some black crosses there. Those black ones from the past may have been crosses. Just something to chew on. Darren

Author:  MisB [ Sat May 09, 2009 2:01 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Animal Research Foundation - The First Lacy Registry

Unfortunately that is next to impossible in registered Lacy dogs. Notice I said next to..

I have a couple of Lacys that back in the 7th gen and further there are Wilkes lines. I have stacks of pedigrees (or copies) and somewhere in them you find Wilkes' lines. OR you find NO lines. The vast majority of those papers are TLGDR the others ARF.
I have mentioned before that there is a notable difference between two branches off of the Wilkes lineage, thats the Larremore lines and the Campbell lines.
To just say that Wilkes lines are not pure or something to avoid is some what unfair. I know Ambers Lacys work hard , mine are more than proved and I have known many a Wilkes' pedigrees that have proved to be solid working Lacys. AND they are of standards.
That is not to say that he didn't throw some crap as well...but somewhere he did something right. One should never throw the baby out with the bath water. (*)
I have a Lacy that has a very incomplete pedigree..I trust that she is a pure Lacy because the man we got her from said she is and I trust him.
She looks like a Lacy, works like a Lacy, she is a Lacy but I can't tell ya squat about her lineage.


Everyone needs to remember that this is a working breed, and that up until the 80's no real emphasis was placed on who was doing what with their Lacys breeding wise..as long as it worked and was the accurate size to get the job done it was a Lacy..because somewhere it got its roots from the original dogs of the Lacy ranch.
And there was the mentality, Looks like a Lacy, works like a Lacy..must be a Lacy.

~Mis

Author:  TedH71 [ Sun May 10, 2009 12:38 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Animal Research Foundation - The First Lacy Registry

I have had both lacys and catahoulas. I can state to you upfront that their personality traits are much different. Catahoulas are far more hard headed and more high energy and have a tendency to use their front paws much like hands while lacys are more quieter and listen much better and smaller in size. Catahoulas also take a while to be housebroken while lacys housebreak faster. Working styles are somewhat similiar but have been told that lacys don't do well at bayings while catahoulas don't care where they get to work hogs. I think lacys think more before they do things while catahoulas don't care as long as they get to do their goal in life. I prefer lacys in mentality but I admit I like the catahoula colors and eye colors....know why? Much easier to see in the heavy brush but that's a very slight preference. As for blackmouth curs, can't help ya there.

Author:  TedH71 [ Fri Sep 25, 2015 5:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Animal Research Foundation - The First Lacy Registry

Big time update: catahoula breeders have always known about the so-called deafness/blindness issues. They just culled them in the old days. They bred strictly working to working parents. Nowdays, it's not true and people will sell the culls to pet owners who fall over themselves to keep the poor deaf/blind pups who can also have heart or seizure issues. Too many breeders are breeding the dogs with lots of white on their heads because that's what sells. There are more catahoula breeders than lacy breeders out there.

Page 2 of 2 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/