|
| THE "OLD FAMILY RED NOSE" DOGS By E.L. Mullins.First of all, this is not a review. I cannot possibly say anything concerning the "Old Family Red Nose" dogs that has not already been repeated a hundred times before. This, therefore, is simply another record of what history has already given us and a re-introduction to the very significant part of the history of the American Pit Bull Terrier.When we discuss the origin of the "Old Family Red Nose" dogs, we are really discussing the original dogs bred by such men as William J. Lightner and Con Feeley. It was around 1914-1916 that Red Howell, Al Dickson and Joe Peace had dogs from the first litters off of Lightner's "Vick" and Lightner's "Pansy". When the first World War came along, Joe Peace and Al Dickson were drafted and Red Howell was left with the dogs. Red Howell sold some of the dogs, however, most of the dogs he placed in capable and reliable hands of those he knew he could trust. During this time they were known as just food pit dogs. The name "Red Nose", at the time, had never been used to describe a particular line of dogs. It would be Dan McCoy who would later be credited as the first man to coin the phrase, "Old Family Red Nose" dogs to describe and distinguish these dogs as an individual line or strain of the American Pit Bull Terrier. History later gave us the litter of Ferguson's "Centipede", Hemphill's "Golddust", Morris' "Pinkie", and Howell's "Banjo", as well as their close relative, William's "Cyclone".Robert H.(Bob) Hemphill, along with Red Howell, went to the kennel of Harvey and Owens in Amarillo, Texas and together they purchased "Golddust". "Golddust", of course, later went to Harry Clark and then to D.A. McClintock, where he died. Earl Tudor obtained "Centipede". "Centipede" was then loaned to Red Howell. Later, Earl Tudor sold "Centipede" to Dave Ferguson. Earl Tudor was also the man who owned the dog called "Cyclone" and eventually sold him to Jim Williams's. It is felt that if Earl Tudor and Red Howell had not won such great battles with these dogs mentioned above, as well as other, that made this particular line so popular. This was the first time you really began to hear about "Red Nose" dogs as a strain.Now, not all of the offspring were whelped "Red Nose" from this stock. Some people still feel that the blood in the Con Feeley dogs was much more "Red Nose" then that of the Lightner dogs. It is said W.C.(Bill) Roper bred some of the best "Red Nose" dogs, sent to him by Jim Williams and Bob Wallace. I.D. Cole of Arizona also bred some extremely high caliber dogs, bred down from Slattery's "Mike" and William's "Blade". I.D. Cole also owned Cole's (Fulkerson's) "Spook", a direct grandson of the old Lightner's "Spook". However, the "Red Nose" dogs were never controlled by any one individual or select group of individuals. Many of the "Red Nose" dogs were produced through different crosses. In fact, there were many breeders and fanciers of the "Old Family Red Nose" dogs. There were men such as W.J. Lightner, Con Feeley, J.P. Colby, D.A. McClintock, Dan McCoy, Harvey and Owens, Ferguson, Ferrel, Conklin, Anderson, Bourgeous, Plemmons, Dickenson, Hanson, Williams, Roberts, Cole, Leo Kinard, Ed Crenshaw, Joe Beal, Jake Wilder, just to name a few. However, two of the leading breeders into the late 1960's and the man more often associated with the "Old Family Red Nose" dogs were Robert H.(Bob) Hemphill Jr. and Robert Forster (Bob) Wallace.Robert Hemphill had been friends with Earl Tudor as early as 1914. Hemphill became personally interested in the Lightner dogs and in the 1920's began an extensive search to locate and obtain high caliber dogs from this line.It was Dan McCoy who recieved word of the frenchman who lived in Louisiana by the name of Bourgeous. Bourgeous had received several dogs directly from Mr. William Lightner and for many years had bred and raised these dogs strictly for his own personal satisfaction. Bourgeous was extremely successful in preserving the "Red Nose" strain. Robert Hemphill went with Dan McCoy to Louisiana and aided by Gaboon Trahan, they purchased several dogs from Bougeous. Hemphill's kept only the highest caliber of these "Red Nose" dogs and began to form his foundation stock from them. Hemphill's early advertisements refelect that he had been raising "Old Family Red Nose" dogs since 1927. Thoughout his life, Robert Hemphill remained dedicated to the breed and faithful to the "Old Family Red Nose" line. Old advertisements throughout his life reflected his great devotion to keeping the line pure. Until 1966 he advertised strictly "Old Family Red Nose" dogs. After that time, his ads began to refect the adage of 1/8th to 1/16th "Dibo" breeding.Concerning the Lightner dogs, some fanciers and under the false assumption that W.J. Lightner bred only "Red Nose" dogs because of his overwhelming association with them. Those who have really done their homework know that this is not the case at all. He also raised great blacks and dark colored dogs as well. The pinnacle of Lightner's success as a breeder is demonstrated through two dogs; Hall's "Searcy Jeff", owned through time by Jim Searcy, Bob Hemphill and Dr. Hall and then Bob Wallace, was reputed as being the best of the "Red Nose" blood that could ever be bred. The second dog was "Colorado Imp", owned by Jeff Runyon and said to be the best of the black and/or dark blood that could ever be bred. Both of these dogs being bred from the same basic foundation dogs of the same man, William J. Lightner. When these two dogs met each other at Medicine Park, Okahoma in 1937, they proved William J. Lightner to be one of the greatest breeders of all time. After this meeting, Bob Wallace told Hemphill that he was going to buy this dog, "Searcy Jeff", even if it costs him a thousand dollars! Later, in 1937, when Hemphill left that part of the country, he divided up up the dogs with Red Howell and Dr. Hall. Dr. Hall received "Searcy Jeff" and Bob Wallace did eventually buy "Jeff" from him. Also in 1937, Robert Hemphill sent a young dog back to William Lightner, that dog now appears in many of the "Old Family Red Nose" line of today, that dog is known as Lightner's Pumpkin.Bob Wallace is also remembered in history for his association and great success with "Old Family Red Nose" dogs. However, there are two main misconceptions concerning Mr Wallace that should be cleared up at this point. One is that Hemphill and Wallace were partners. They were not. They both shared a deep respect of the "Red Nose" dogs and were both dedicated to keeping the line pure. They were both successful breeders in keeping the line pure, strong and beautiful. They even shared common breedings and interbred their dogs within each others line, but they were not partners.At the age of thirteen, Bob Wallace met and became friends with the "Old Timer", Ben Flannery. Throughout his teens, Bob Wallace owned many outstanding Bulldogs. He later obtained dogs from bloodlines of Dugan's "Pat". The second misconception concerning Bob Wallace was that he bred primarily "Red Nose" dogs. His original was quiet variable in color and were extremely talented dogs. Though these dogs did not show it, they carried a large amount of the "Red Nose" blood. One of the first foundation females of Bob Wallace was the famous Shipley's "Penny". Shipley's "Penny" was a direct descendant of the old Corcoran dogs. Wallace had always considered Corcoran to be one of the great breeders of all time. Other great dogs that are considered part of the foundation of the Wallace dogs were ones such as, Ferguson's "Centipede", Hall's "Searcy Jeff" and the famous Wallace's "Tony". "Tony" was said to be Wallaces' pride and joy. Wallace bred Shipley's "Penny" to "Centipede" and produced these three great dogs, "Stinger" "Scorpion" and "Spider". He later bred "Searcy Jeff" to "Spider" and produced Wallace's "Madam Queen". When he bred "Madam Queen" to "Tony" he produced the ever famous Wallace's "King Cotton". Other famous dogs appear in many of the popular "Old Family Red Nose" dogs of modern times are Wallace's "Red Rustler", "Red Rock" and "Red Rube", as well as the famous producing female Wallace's "Red Raven".The old advertisements of Bob Wallace during the 1940's clearly refect the breeding and maintenance of the old Corcoran and Lightner Line of dogs. Most of the advertisements were stated in bold print. During the 1940's Bob Wallace began to look "Red Nose" dogs to outcross his own with. At this time he felt that his own dogs were getting as tight as could be productively bred. When he began his search he found that the pure "Old Family Red Nose" dogs were almost extinct. Most of the lines were ruined or contaminated through careless breeding. However, he was finally able to locate and obtain seven pure "Red Nose" dogs of high caliber, whose pedigree he could authenticate.Bob Wallace was a man of character and honesty and often stated that there is no "magic" to the "Old Family Red Nose" dogs, that they are just one good line of many. The "red Nose" dogs have the intelligence, talent and personality to stand on their own merit. Bob Wallace has gone down in history as one of the greatest breeders of his year. Over the years as a breeder, Bob Wallace was known to sell less than a dozen dogs. He stated that he never sold dogs as a matter of personal principle. The results of his dedication to the breed is still apparent and appreciated in the modern day American Pit Bull Terrier.This has been a short narrative introduction to the "Old Family Red Nose" dogs and few of the men dedicated to their preservation. It is by far complete or conclusive. Their significance cannot be finalized in a few short paragraphs. Entire volumes could be written on the "Old Family Red Nose" dogs and their place in the history of the American pit Bull Terrier. |
| Norrod's "Hemphill Maude" | |
![]() | Here's a fine example of an OFRN, which appeared on the cover of Richard F. Stratton's "The Book of the American Pit Bull Terrier". |
| Take Note this part concerns Red Devil dogs. | |
| Now, not all of the offspring were whelped "Red Nose" from this stock. Some people still feel that the blood in the Con Feeley dogs was much more "Red Nose" then that of the Lightner dogs. IM | |
| Gameness | |
Gameness in APBT's is a canine virtue that is most akin to the human virtue of unflagging courage. It is a determination to master any situation and never back down out of fear. It was developed in pit bulls by many generations of selective breeding. It is what allows a pit bull to keep fighting non-stop for two or more hours, in spite of broken bones, torn muscles, blood loss, dehydration, and exhaustion. But it is also valued by APBT owners who would never think of fighting their dogs. It is manifested in the can-do attitude of pit bulls toward any type of challenge, whether agility competitions, climbing up trees, or protecting their family against an armed attacker, etc. (Yes, check out Richard Stratton's books for photos of pit bulls actually climbing up the trunk of a big tree in order to nestle in the branches 15 feet off the ground.) Generally speaking, a game dog is an emotionally stable, easy-going dog, especially good with kids. Gameness should not be confused with aggressiveness. There are plenty of aggressive dogs that are not game, and there are game pit bulls who are not aggressive toward other types of dogs. Aggressiveness will propell a dog into a fight but will only sustain him for the first few minutes. Gameness, on the other hand, will not necessarily make a dog fight-happy; but if the dog has no other choice but to fight, a game dog will fight until it wins or dies trying, and will keep going as long as necessary. Gameness is an inner quality of pit bulls. There is no way you can tell by looking at a pit bull whether it is deeply game or not. The only test--and for many years the main criterion for selecting a dog for breeding purposes--is actually fighting the dog to see how it stands up to other dogs that have likewise already proven their gameness in the pit. Dogs that are emotionally unstable, or that fear-bite human beings are generally not game. If you want a nice pit, you're generally better off getting one that has been game-bred. These dogs represent the truest exemplars of all the best qualities in the breed. Your questions about my post on the nature of "gameness" posed a couple of very good questions that I would like to try to answer. > If it is indeed the case that the only way that you > can be sure that your dog is truly "game" is to have > a fight to (almost) the death, what is really the > point of having a game dog ? Many APBT owners like myself have no interest whatever in fighting our dogs, yet we appreciate the quality of gameness in our breed. I am quite content to know that just about any APBT, even one with only mediocre gameness as far as APBT's go, is still going to be far more game--that is, far more courageous and determined to succeed against any challenge he may confront--than the gamest individuals of just about any other breed. Thus, without ever having to match your dog against another, you can be confident that your dog is game simply by virtue of the fact of being an American Pit Bull Terrier. Of course not all pit bulls are equally game. It has been pointed out in a previous posts that there is a range in the variation in the *DEGREE* of gameness among individual pit bulls. If you plotted a distribution graph, you would get a classic bell curve, with a handful of dogs exhibiting dead gameness, another handful of dogs who are afraid of their own shadow, and the bulk of the dogs concentrated around the average in between these two extremes. If you then plotted the bell curves of gameness for other breeds, you would find that there is little overlap between the APBT's bell curve and those of all the rest. Your second question, Wilf, relates to whether the degree of a particular pit bull's gameness can be assessed by some test other than fighting; I'll return to this question below. All dog owners think there is something unique and superlative about their own dog's breed. Gameness is what I, as an APBT chauvanist, think is so special about pit bulls. Actually, let me modify that. What I love best about my own dog is how cute and cuddly and friendly she is with everyone. She's a dog I am proud to bring anywhere. She makes everyone laugh with her insane kissing compulsion. But these two qualities are not unrelated. As I mentioned in my prvious post, gameness seems to go hand in hand with a lovable, outgoing, licky disposition toward people. I have to say that I don't know and don't really care exactly *how* game my dog is relative to others of her breed. I imagine she's no great shakes, since her parents were weight-pullers, not fighters, and you'd have to go back to her great-grandparents to find dogs that were game-tested. But I can tell you that she is known, among more than a few neighborhood dog owners, as "the friendliest dog in Hyde Park." She is beside herself with happiness--literally leaping up and down for joy--whenever a passerby so much as smiles at her. It's important for people to understand the paradoxical truth that she, like all the other nice, human-loving pit bulls out there, is the way she is BECAUSE OF--NOT IN SPITE OF--her breed's history of selective breeding for fighting purposes. Until about 15 years ago, there were only a small handful of dedicated breeders who maintained this breed, and I would guess that nearly all of these breeders bred for gameness and game-tested their dogs in order to choose the ones to be bred. During all that time, you never heard of pit bulls mauling 5-year old kids. It was only when the breed became immensely popular in the 1980s--i.e., when lots of ignoramuses suddenly became backyard breeders--that you began to read stories (at least some of them must have been true) about man-eating pit bulls. These monster dogs were not "fighting dogs," but just the opposite. The scrupulous criteria that old-time breeders had used for selecting or culling dogs in breeding programs were thrown out the window--along with plain common sense. The backyard breeders didn't know the difference between gameness and aggressiveness. Many of them didn't grasp the fact that a champion fighting dog is born, not made; so they tried to make their dogs into "fighting dogs." How? Through abuse, teasing, "practice" on non-fighting dogs, etc.--all sorts of things that knowledgeable pit enthusiasts would find cruel and abhorrent--and counterproductive as preparation for pit contests. I read a story not long ago that was enough to turn my stomach; it was about the arrest of an 18-year old kid in Philadelphia on charges of animal abuse; he was keeping his wretched pit bull isolated in a tiny feces-covered kennel. The dog's only contact with the outside world was when this jerk would "feed" it live cats and dogs that he had stolen from neighobrs' homes. He thought he was preparing the dog to be a good fighter. Needless to say, it is this sort of person, rather than the old-time dedicated breeders, that the public--thanks to the mass media--associates with the breed. Speaking of the mass media, I wouldn't be surprised if this particular jerk got his bizarre ideas about schooling a pit dog from watching the sort of distorted, sensationalistic news coverage that purports to "expose" what pit fighting is all about. In the hands of ignorant breeders, the gentle, affectionate qualities that were so crucial to the old-time breeders also went out the window. You began to see idiotic ads in the classified section announcing "Pitbull pups for sale. Big-boned. Big heads. Excellent attack dogs. No papers. $250" From the old-time breeders' point of view, the gentle qualities were an absolutely indispensable safety precaution to be bred into a fighting dog, since no dog could be fought if it couldn't be safely handled by its owner during a pit contest. These breeders bred for a type that was extremely easy-going and docile around people and would NEVER think of biting a friendly hand, even amid the fury of a fight. A well-bred pit bull is so reliable in this respect that even if he is badly hurt in an automobile accident and is in extreme pain, he won't snap at his owner who tries to pick him up--unlike most dogs in that situation. Well-bred pit bulls are like labs in that they will never try to dominate their owners through threats, such as growling or baring teeth or snapping. Sure, they will try to dominate you--by outsmarting you, by doing something sneaky to get their way when they know you're not looking. But it is a very rare pit bull that will growl when you pick up his food dish or reach into his mouth to take a bone away. The analogy to labs is fitting because both of these breeds were selectively bred for tasks that demanded an extreme level of generosity toward people. Can you imagine a lab that snarled when you tried to take the duck from his mouth? Such a dog would have been culled from a serious performance-based breeding program. Likewise, any APBT that showed the least sign of aggression toward people was culled as unsuitable for breeding. Whether true or not, it was an article of faith among old-time breeders that a human-aggressive dog simply could not be dead game. In any case, such a dog would have been unsuitable for fighting purposes: no one would volunteer to be its handler or to referee the match. As a result of this careful breeding history, the APBT is an extremely easy-going, human-loving dog. This isn't just a personal, impressionistic perspective of mine. The American Canine Temperament Testing Association is an organization that titles dogs for passing its temperament test. The test consists of putting the dog into a series of unexpected situations, some involving strangers. The dog fails the test if it shows any signs of unprovoked aggression or panic around people. Of all dogs that take the test, 77% on average pass. But among pit bulls who take the test, 95% on average pass--one of the highest passing rates of all breeds. One wonderful thing about APBTs is that they have an uncanny ability to size up a potentially threatening situation correctly and decide whether or not it is actually something to get agitated over. This is related to their fearlessness and unphasability. Let me relate three stories about my dog Ruby that illustrate this point. (Please note: I'm definitely not claiming that Ruby is exceptionally game; all I'm saying is that she has a typical pit bull personality). This past summer, my wife had Ruby out in the back yard of our apartment building. Out of nowhere a little kid about 6 years old came charging at Ruby, swinging a big plastic sword over his head and screaming. He was pretending to be a Ninja turtle. Before my wife could cut him off, he ran right up to Ruby and whacked her right in the middle of the back with his sword. Ruby responded as she always does to the approach of little kids: celebratory dancing. She thought it was all a big game, just like tag. She was prancing up and down and straining at the leash to get close enough to lick the kid's face. A similar event occured this summer when my wife and I went out, with Ruby, to visit her brother in Portland, OR. My brother-in-law has an 8-year old kid, Ben, who is clinically diagnosed as suffering hyperactive/attention-deficit disorder. He's a nice kid but completely out of control. He acts impulsively without thinking of the consequences of his actions. He and Ruby fell in love instantly, but we vowed not to let him be alone with Ruby unsupervised. Not that we didn't trust Ruby, we didn't trust Ben. Well, one day the two of them somehow got out alone in the back yard. I was walking up the stairs inside the house when I glanced out the back window and, to my amazement, I saw Ben hauling off and repeatedly slugging Ruby in the face! I yelled out the window for him to stop it, and he did. But the incredible thing was Ruby's reaction: she was jumping up and down for joy as if getting punched in the face was the funnest game on earth. There was nothing Ben could do to her that she would see as threatening. She followed Ben right in the back door of the house. My brother-in-law sent Ben to his room for punishment. Ruby knew something was wrong. She stood outside the closed door of Ben's room, crying forlornly for her buddy to come back out and play. I told my brother-in-law, "Ben's lucky that the dog he decided to torment was a pit bull, and not a cocker spaniel or bichon. Otherwise, he might be missing a limb!" On the other hand, Ruby has growled only once in her life, and it was in an appropriate context. We live in the south side of Chicago, which has one of the highest crime rates in the country. 5 of the 9 apartment units in our building have been burglarized in the last two years; a foreign grad student was held up at gunpoint in the foyer of our building last year. There have been 4 fatal shootings in a three-block radius of our apartment since we moved in two years ago. You can hear gunfire most nights. So we're always a little anxious when we go out after dark, even just to take Ruby out to pee. Well, one night my wife took Ruby down to pee at about midnight. My wife noticed a guy walking down the other side of the street muttering to himself and shadow-boxing the air. He seemed to be drunk or on drugs. When he saw my wife, he crossed the street, still shadow-boxing and muttering, and approached her. Ruby didn't like the looks of this one bit. Her hair went up on her back, her whole body began shaking, and when this guy got within about 15 feet, she began to snarl in a deep, menacing tone. The guy backed off, muttering, "Whoa, pit bull, pit bull, pit bull," and crossed back over to the other side of the street and continued on his way, no doubt looking for an easier victim. We were pleasantly surprised to find out that Ruby actually had it in her to be protective; we had always thought she was just too goofy and too overly trusting of strangers to act the way she did. > If gameness manifests itself as climbing trees, > (etc etc) then aren't all these legitimate tests for gameness? Pit bulls will generally excel in activities that require sustained determination and that test their bodies' ability to endure pain and exhaustion to an extreme. But the fact is that there are very few activities that will test a dog's gameness to its limits, or that will provide a basis for comparing one dog's degree of gameness to another's. For example, wild boar hunting, in spite of the high level of risk to the dog involved, doesn't really test the limits of a dog's gameness. The tangle between boar and dog is fast, furious, and generally quite short (compared with a pit contest). Athletic ability, agility, explosive power, strength of bite, and smarts are of a higher priority here than gameness, which never really has a chance to come into play in so brief an encounter. The dog will either take the boar down or be killed before the depth of his gameness can make much of a difference. Several larger breeds of dogs--American Bulldogs and Argentine Dogos--seem to be at least equally adept at boar hunting as pit bulls. But this doesn't make them as game as pit bulls. Just because a game disposition will aid a dog in excelling at many different activities--such as agility competition, flyball races, tree-climbing, etc.--doesn't mean that these activities are sufficient tests for gameness. Gameness is multi-dimensional; the above activities do not stress all of these dimensions simultaneously to their extreme limits . Gameness is, in positive terms, a happy eagerness to pursue a challenge; but it is also, in negative terms, the stubborn refusal to heed the cries of the nervous system to stop struggling and and to flee the situation that is causing so much pain. None of the activities above can fully assess this second dimension. Unfortunately,the only activity that really tests the full extent of a dog's gameness is pit contests. It's a pity that this is the case. Personally, I don't much like the idea of dog fighting, especially when money is involved and takes precedence over the well-being of the dogs. If I knew of another method--say, a DNA test--which could determine gameness, I'd be happily promoting that method right now. But genetic research has a long way to go before it could provide such a test. And with slightly more imporant concerns, such as preventing cancer, I don't expect many research dollars to flow into DNA game -testing. As a result, I'm left in the rather hypocritical position of celebrating a canine virtue that is only made possible by a human vice. So be it. I still prefer game dogs. I said at the beginning of the post that I am uninterested in finding out just how game my own dog is. You might ask, "Why would anyone be interested in knowing exactly how game their dogs are?" Well, I'm not a breeder. Understandably, breeders only want to choose the very best exemplars of the breed in their breeding programs. If you breed APBTs without regard for their degree of gameness, their gameness will gradually be lost with each succeeding generation. This is essentially what has occurred with Am Staffs and Staffy Bulls, which for many generations have been selectively bred for appearance rather than for the invisible inner quality of gameness. (Furthermore, I should add, less than scrupulous selection of all these breeds also risks the loss of the breed's excellent dispostion toward people.) In order to maintain a high degree of the desired qualities, a breeder must carefully select only those dogs that have them in the highest degree. Gameness was an extremely difficult trait to develop; it took more than a century of tiny, incremental improvements through selective breeding to produce today's APBT. Though achieved only with great difficulty, gameness is easily lost, sometimes even in the hands of good breeders. If you mate two grand champions, you will be lucky if just one or two of the pups is of the same quality as the parents. Traditonally, the job of breeders was to identify these offspring and use only them to continue the breeding program. Sometimes it's the case that two great dogs will not produce any offspring who are their equals. You are right, Wilf, in the sense that the presence of gameness in a dog has nothing to do with making the dog fight. Fighting a dog obviously will not improve the genes it was born with. But if you were a breeder interested in *maintaining* the gameness of your line, well, that's a different story.
| |