Inbreeding

["Claudia Provin" <provincmk@fanninelectric.com>]

: >>>considered inbreeding, with all of  its attendant risks (if somebody
would like to discuss with me why the  underlying philosophy of how
inbreeding only makes sense for people  engaged in large scale breeding, I
am more than willing to discuss it,
                Perhaps it makes sense to us because we pay attention to the
quality of the animals we are inbreeding.   As should ANY breeder pay
attention to the quality of the animals to be bred (and I will admit, not
all breeders do this).    Also, the situation being discussed in the
previous post is called "linebreeding" by most breeders; "inbreeding" is
father/daughter, mother/son, full-siblings.   So, in the breeders' use of
the terms, both inbreeding and linebreeding, done wisely, work quite well.
The rule of thumb is that you get what you breed: breed "good to good, you
get good; breed bad to bad, you get bad".   (This is not to say an
occasional recessive gene won't crop out---but can you say that won't happen
with "regular" breeding?)

Especially since one of the  generally accepted traits of inbred individuals
is that they have a
> tendency to be "crazy" (to use a nice, non-scientific term).
        Accepted by whom???   The general public?    I have read numerous
articles by breeders; have talked first-hand with a number of breeders who
are *experienced* with inbreeding/linebreeding; and have done both
inbreeding and linebreeding MYSELF.   NONE of the offspring was ever
"crazy", or even inferior.    None of us has had to "throw away" animals nor
to "cull ruthlessly" -- not because we are not bright enough to recognize
our "errors" but because there is no need--the results are good.    I
repeat--we make sure we start with good stock--as any breeder should do.
     I am aware of all the tales about the horrors of inbreeding - and I
think that is what most of it is -- "tales".    Too many times the tales are
based on tales of People being closely related inbreeding   BUT,  how often,
even with People---is it not simply that the base stock was inferior to
start with???
    I was recently told (in another discussion of inbreeding) how said
stallion was bred to his daughters and again to their daughters--inbreeding
for more than one generation---and they all had terrible legs -- yes, the
did---they were JUST LIKE THE STALLION's legs!!!   So- - so he passed on his
own bad traits---but how many would just look at the resulting foals, see
their bad legs--and just blame it on inbreeding without ever having looked
at the original stock???
>    I found, when I first started looking into inbreeding, that many people
believed all of the things you have stated, and these things were told to
me---I also found that not one of them knew this from first-hand experience.
Then I talked with those with experience with inbreeding/linebreeding---not
one of them had experienced these horrors and had only good things to say
about it.   I went ahead with linebreeding and inbreeding-- again-- making
sure the base stock was good-- and could not be happier with the results.

Claudia
Texas
>