Most anyone who knows Charles Craver
is aware that you rarely get a simple, uncomplicated answer
from him. His answers are usually as thought provoking as they
are modest. Despite his years of intense involvement with Arabian
horses, and his obvious success - or perhaps because of it -
he insists that he is no Guru, and feels that he has more questions
than pat answers. In keeping with this philosophy, many of his
following comments on strains, breeding and management provide
food for thought for all serious breeders, regardless of bloodline
interest or experience.
GENERAL
BACKGROUND
QUESTION:
When you first started gathering foundation
breeding stock in the early 1950's, none of the books such as
the RASWAN
INDEX,
THE
ARAB
AND
HIS
HORSE, by Carl
Raswan, and THE
BLUE
ARABIAN
HORSE
CATALOG by Jane
L. Ott had yet been published. Were you aware of any purist
movement within Arabian breeding?
CC: No,
there wasn't a purist movement, but there were a few purists.
There have been purist breeders in America since the very beginning
of Arabian breeding here. Primarily those that I knew were Jimmy
Wrench and Alice Payne, and they weren't within the
Al Khamsa context. Not
all purists have to be within that context. When I got
Tripoli,
the pedigree of Skowronek, as we now
know it, was not public yet. There was no reason to avoid him
in a pedigree. At that time, purists avoided certain other bloodlines.
QUESTION:
When and how did you first become
aware of Carl Raswan and what role did he play in developing
your early breeding program?
CC: I first
learned of Raswan in about 1949 through Carl Asmis, a prominent
early breeder in the East, and then of course through Alice
Payne and Jimmy Wrench on the West Coast. Raswan was considered
important by them and I respected those breeders. Beginning
in 1955, my relationship with Dr. Doyle reinforced what I had
learned in previous contacts with Payne and Wrench. Raswan material
formed part of the matrix of my thoughts in starting to breed
Arabian horses, along with standards from Asmis, Payne, Wrench,
Dr. Munson and Bazy Tankersley, along with a bunch of books.
Like any beginner, I was a sponge.
QUESTIONS:
When did you start corresponding with
Raswan and what were some of his comments about what you were
doing?
CC: A correspondence
had developed by at least 1958. I sent him photos of
Sir and Alaska.
His response was very cordial and encouraging with comments
that I was doing historical work. Of course he wrote nicely
to everyone, but without solicitation he used the photo of
Alaska along with pictures of *Nasr,
Mahroussa (MNL),
Ibn Mahruss, and Mesaoud
under the heading "Lest we forget the authentic, the pure Arabians"
when he published the real pedigree of Skowronek.
I have always felt that this statement showed what bloodlines
Raswan considered vital. I have worked in various ways to preserve
all of these, but especially, of course, the Davenports. We
continued to correspond until his death in 1966.
QUESTION:
Did you ever meet Raswan?
CC: Yes,
in 1965, through Alice Payne. Later, I was planning another
trip out there, and in fact even had my reservations, when word
came of his death.
QUESTION:
Why did you choose to breed Davenports
instead of some other bloodlines.
CC: I got
started with the purchase of Tripoli
in 1953 for the following reasons:
1) he was of interest to Alice
Payne as a breeding stallion, and I considered her to be
the foremost breeder of the time and her opinion was very
important;
2) I had decided that most
breeding programs go wrong because of limiting pedigree
factors, and Davenports were freer of those than other bloodlines
then available to me;
3) only two programs offered
future progress without such limiting factors - Egyptian
and Davenport;
4) I intended to cross with
intensely bred Skowronek horses;
5) Davenports blended so well
with everything (lines that didn't blend with *Raffles
were not well thought of at that time); and
6) Davenport outcrosses were
so successful at the time. Horses such as
Ankar, Hanida,
Garaff and Hanraff
were considered extraordinary as was the straight
Davenport Ibn Hanad and
7) the straight Davenports
were in the process of becoming extinct through their success
with other lines. (Note: I first learned of
Skowronek's real pedigree in April,
1955 from Dr. Doyle.)
ON
STRAINS AND
STRAIN
BREEDING
QUESTION:
What is your understanding of Carl
Raswan's strain breeding concept, especially as it applies today?
CC: First,
it is important to understand that in the 30's, 40's and 50's
when Raswan was writing about strains, the horses he knew were
close to desert breeding. The great grandparents of those horses
were consistent, and not mixed up in pedigree. The great, great
grandparents of today's horses were the living horses of Raswan's
time. It is extremely difficult to apply his strain ideas were
REAL, not mystical. Strain breeding is type breeding. (Having
a certain strain name does not guarantee that a given horse
will be of the type which was associated with that strain in
the desert.)
QUESTION:
What is your understanding of the
term "strain breeding" and how does "strain breeding" relate
to "generations bred in a stain"?
CC: Strain
breeding is simply using the knowledge of Arabian strains to
produce a desired type of horse. The breeding of one or more
generations in the same stain is a particular kind of strain
breeding. It is no better or worse than any other strain breeding
program. It is of value only if it produces the kind of horse
you want. Strain breeding and/or producing multiple generations
in the strain is only one of a whole group of things that a
breeder must consider.
QUESTION:
You have been utilizing strain-type
breeding longer than anyone else in Al Khamsa, can you describe
how the strains express themselves?
CC: I visualize
the strains we work with as a continuation from Kuhaylan to
Saqlawi. All of these horses are blends of the basic strains,
with some blends inclining one way or another. In the Davenports
we have a major population that inclines one way (ed. note:
Kuhaylan) plus a few individuals that stand out as being on
the other end of the continuum. We have something like
TRILL (Tripoli
x Moth by Tripoli)
on the Saqlawi side of the balance and a lot on the other end
of the continuum. You can slant things either way and you are
really talking about different varieties of nice horses...but
not the only nice horses. I think that sometimes this strain
thing is terrifically overemphasized. On the other hand we do
not get extreme examples of strain type from pedigrees that
do not call for them!
QUESTION:
Is there any particular value in breeding
multiple generations in a strain?
CC: Well,
there is the fun of assembling the pedigrees, the intellectual
exercise. The strains are of value only if they produce a certain
kind of horse. If you want that kind of horse, that is where
the value is. It is not a moral matter. It is a practical matter
in the production of a desired object.
QUESTION:
A basic part of Raswan's advice on
strain breeding Arabian horses dealt with breeding away from
Muniqi. Is this still valid today?
CC: Raswan
said to breed away from Muniqi, so it is automatic. Strain breeding
is type breeding. He was assuming that the classic TYPE Arabian
was sought (and that may not be true today for many breeders.)
He meant that really classic looking horses have Muniqi only
far back in the pedigree. He also wrote that if Muniqi was far
ENOUGH back, it would not be as significant -- many pedigrees
today are farther form the Muniqi elements than in his time.
QUESTION:
Does Muniqi type affect Arabians today,
considering the pedigree distance in generations?
CC: At
a show, pedigrees are generally so mixed up that Muniqi is less
important than other considerations. Muniqi horses were, after
all, Arabian horses. Within Al Khamsa that is a hot subject.
Within Davenports - and other Al Khamsa lines - one cannot assume
that the ancestors you know to be Muniqi strain were entirely
of that strain (ed. note: "pure Muniqi") OR that those of others
(classic strains) were entirely free of it. You really have
known Muniqi and unknown Muniqi and if you are looking for devils,
you can assign any problem to them, but devils are more a matter
of religion sometimes than fact.
QUESTION:
Within Al Khamsa, there are horses
of the Muniqi strain and in fact Jeanne Craver has a few Muniqi
Hedruj mares. Do these horses automatically exhibit the rangy,
angular, narrow type associated with the desert bred Muniqis
to any degree? How would Raswan's advice on breeding away from
Muniqi apply to these Al Khamsa horses?
CC: I don't
think they are real Muniqis today. The recorded strain name
is so far back that its associated type is not apparent. Where
there has been no effort to reinforce the type, it is just gone,
and no more influential than the Muniqi ancestors in horses
of other recorded strains. If you want to determine the actual
strain of these horses, you need to follow Raswan's procedure.
Determine the strains of all the animals in the 4th generation
and see which strain, if any, predominates -- and look at the
actual living horse to see which, if any, strain it most closely
resembles. Raswan was very clear on this.
QUESTION:
In the desert, new strains and especially
new substrains were constantly being created, while others died
out. Do you see this still happening?
CC: Sure!
Very strong substrains are being created and not just within
the Davenports. Major strains can and have been lost, which
is just a shame. The different breeding groups that we have
are really just different substrains of the same tail female
families. The problem is in recognizing new substrains and being
able to develop them. It
ON
CRAVER
BREEDING
PROGRAMS
& COMMENTS
APPLYING
TO ALL
BREEDING
VENTURES
QUESTION:
How many breeding stallions do you
currently have? How many mares of breeding age and condition?
CC: I have
about 20 to 25 breeding stallions and about 60 breeding mares.
QUESTION:
You usually have around 20 to 25 foals
annually, why don't you breed all your mares each year?
CC: I feel
that you get a better quality foal if the mares are not depleted,
and the mares keep in better health and looks and it's more
economical to keep them in good shape. It really seems to offer
better long-term and more economical foal production under our
conditions.
QUESTION:
Why do you maintain so many stallions
in proportion to the number of mares? And can you tell us something
about your ideas about your long term breeding programs?
CC: In
order to maintain a long-term breeding venture you have to allow
for future growth of the bloodlines; some stallions for now,
some for soon, and some for the distant future. Also, we have
divided the horses into breeding groups and each group requires
this sort of stallion resource, although some stallions can
be used in more than one breeding group. We will keep a stallion
for years and just for a few usages.
We use so many stallions because we emphasize
the importance of the mares. By using more stallions you give
an individual mare a better opportunity to express herself.
In a closed breeding herd you have two
options. You can put all your bloodlines in one pot and try
to produce the most perfect individuals you can, or you can
try to spread the genetic pool by letting each variation of
the bloodlines express itself. The trap is you can end up just
producing ingredients and never producing the end products,
but it doesn't shut off options for the future. I don't think
we are very doctrinaire about separating into breeding groups.
There is a place for crossing between the groups and we do that
too. We try to keep the groups separate but still interacting
with the other groups as a larger breeding venture.
Master breeders we are not. We are stubborn
and trying to figure things out but I don't feel we have all
the answers, or even most of them, just more questions!
QUESTIONS: Any comments on
inbreeding? Any comments on breeding in general?
CC: As
a tool, inbreeding is more powerful in a group than most people
realize, and less powerful in an individual than most realize.
We do quite a bit, depending on how you define it. We do it
as a pattern of breeding that increases the inbreeding coefficient.
It is, of course, a matter of degree in a herd such as the Davenports.
We try to arrange breedings between the most complimentary individuals,
then see what inbreeding is present secondarily. You don't have
to inbreed only with perfect animals. Alice Payne pointed out
that if you wait until you have perfect ones, you'll never accomplish
anything. Inbreeding is more apt to increase variations in individuals
produced than it is to produce similarity.
The biggest problem Arabian breeders
have is identifying their most worthwhile breeding stock. It
is not always what you think! You have to use all the stock
available to you. How you use the less perfect animals is the
telling thing.
You can't know a bloodline unless you
know all of the horses it has produced, not just the ones that
have survived, or the ones in the public eye.
An immense amount of variation in horses
is environmental, and in well established bloodlines maybe more
variation is from environment than heredity. This is especially
so when unfortunate individuals turn up and it is why some unsatisfactory
animals can produce beautifully. Environment begins at conception.
It is just as major a mistake to judge a foal harshly for environmentally
produced problems as it is to critique it for problems that
are inherited.
Breed the best to the best. Best what?
That's a breeding scheme that just might work fine if you could
just figure out what "best" is.
Does type follow color? I've thought
about this allot, can't prove it but I have a hunch the Monsoon
type Davenports are chestnut. If there is a linage between color
and type, it may not be the same for one bloodline as it is
for another.
Can you identify qualities in a foal
that will stay in the mature horse? Probably only within the
bloodlines and conditions with which one is very familiar --
then maybe.
I think that disposition is more hereditary
than leg structure, although there is no single "good" disposition.
Different strokes for different folks. By someone's definition,
and I concur, a good horse has to have a good disposition. No
matter whether stallions or mares, you will either watch them
or they will watch you. A human and a horse cannot successfully
occupy the same space. It is just a fact of life.
QUESTION: What
percent of your breedings are done by AI? (Artificial Insemination)
Why?
CC. Most
of them are by AI. I feel it's a more reliable method.
QUESTION:
What attributes do you look for in
a potential breeding stallion?
CC: I think
he will get good foals! Seriously, you can't tell by looking,
or past a certain minimum, even by pedigree. You have to use
them to see and the final analysis comes with his grand and
great grandchildren. My initial selection is by pedigree. Individuality
(overall or certain characteristics) has plenty to do with my
choices. The stallion here have it hard because they are no
better individually or more concentrated or powerful in pedigree
than the mares, and the mare has more influence than the stallion
anyway (this is a basic tenet of strain breeding -- emphasis
is on the female side). Almost any nice Arabian has a nice sire
and the quality of the mare is usually the variable.
QUESTION:
You personally train most of your
stallions under saddle. Why?
CC: Actually,
I think I've ridden every stallion I've used, some allot more
than others. You can't fully appreciate or understand a horse
until you ride it. If I could also ride all of the mares, I
would. Riding tests them not just physically but mentally as
well.
Unless you can view a horse in a riding
context, there is no point in having it -- you may not ride
that individual horse, but you should be able to view it that
way. You think of them as being from riding stock that will
produce riding stock.
QUESTION:
At the present time which horses are
you riding?
CC: Catalyst,
Brimstone, Plantagenet,
Javera Thadrian, Cathay,
Aspen, Lydian
and Ibn Alamein during the past year,
plus others that are on the back burner. I'm now doing the ground
work on Brigade and Brass
Band. Winter is when I can ride the most. I was also
riding Regency, but he is one of a kind
and totally irreplaceable. I would never hazard showing him
so I primarily ride the others.
QUESTION:
How do these horses compare to the
great Tripoli offspring such as
Aramis, Tybalt,
Monsoon and Fairy Queen,
which you trained and showed successfully in the past?
CC: I've
probably changed more than the horses have. They are like very
talented children in a family. Each has a different gift which
needs to be encouraged. I'm not a good enough rider to do it,
but I enjoy trying.
QUESTION:
Your method of teasing mares is somewhat
unusual. Will you describe it and tell us why you do it this
way?
CC: Well,
I usually ride the teasing stallion right into the herd of mares
and foals. Sometimes I lead him, but if you're going to get
a horse out, you might as well ride him. I do it this way because
I'd rather ride than walk. I can easily identify the breeding
status of the mares. And stallions, after all, should behave,
even in such a situation.
QUESTION:
You've been breeding Davenports for
over 30 years now. Do you have any plans for retiring? What
about 20 years from now?
CC: I have
no voluntary plans to retire from breeding horses. Twenty years
from now, I may be pushing up daisies and I understand that
is a full time occupation. If I'm able to, I'll still be breeding
Davenport Arabians.
