# What's driving the increasing popularity of Designer Breeds?



## Sandor Fagyal (May 16, 2018)

*Hybrid breeds, designer breeds or simply mutts?*

Over the past couple of years there is an every increasing popularity of mixing all sorts of breeds with one another. I cannot see the deeper benefits and purpose to it? There are already over 350 FCI and AKC recognized dog breeds (called purebreds). Why would we need more of these?

Is it just a marketing "_*bull-shit*_" (just mix Bulldog with Shi-Tzu ?

Who is driving this trend?

"breeders" - without judging them, but cannot really call them breeders, sorry
innocent dog buyers
I know that purebred dog breeders are very loud and are against these mixes, but I would like to hear opinions that are not just simply biassed but have real life experience on this topic. Don't be afraid to share your point of view and please respect others' opinions.

Thanks,
Sandor


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Money is the big one. For some designer crosses you can make more money than the purebred crosses, which makes no sense to me whatsoever but it is what it is.

Novelty factor. The ‘cute’ names. The idea of owning something ‘unique’ but that also has fashionable status.

The myth factor. The idea that they are healthier, that they shed less, that they have more balanced temperaments due to the blending of the genes - all false of course.


----------



## magpie (Jan 3, 2009)

I think lots of people like to believe they have something 'rare' or unusual, so this leads to the breeding of more & more strange and often unsuitable crosses. It's probably the same reason we seem to be seeing lots of different colours of purebreeds these days too.

And sometimes people just see a dog that they like and want one the same. I don't see anything wrong with that, so long as they do their research and make sure that what they want is suitable for them, and also find a good breeder. We ended up with a cockapoo because my mum knew someone who had one and fell in love with it, years later my sister got a cockapoo because she fell in love with ours, and in the last year or so two of her friends have got cockapoos because they fell in love with hers!


----------



## tabelmabel (Oct 18, 2013)

Yes, I think it is the idea of having something unusual yet fashionable and also, these days, people want a dog that fits their lifestyle and are often not prepared to work round the characteristics of the dog. They want a dog that is quite happy left alone 5 days a week but enjoys family walks at weekends. Non -shedding and great with kids. 

I believe the man responsible for 'inventing' the labradoodle totally regrets crossing the 2 breeds. He was looking to breed a hypoallergenic guide dog. And let a genie out of a bottle.


----------



## Northpup (Apr 22, 2018)

Puppies are cute, people fall in love with the first one they see (its hard not too!!) and they push aside any doubts they may have about the ethics etc as they just adore this pup. 
People should definately do their research and be educated in this before buying a pup but I definately believe greedy and ignorant byb are to blame. You cannot be ethical and grab your pet chihuahua you bought from a random breeder who put her chihuahua together and breed her with your friends Pomeranian and sell puppies for £1000 calling them Chi poms or something of the like and say you are ethical. It’s just untrue.
The scary thing is it tends to be the cutesy breeds (chihuahua Pom pugs frenchies) etc and these seem to be the breeds that can have most trouble with Whelping etc. You never seem to see lurches, dobermann or my breed vizslas. I suppose it’s because people who impulse buy are more attracted to the tiny fluffy creatures. However I feel wolf look alike dogs eg malamutes and sarloos wolfdogs face a lot of random breeding together so people can sell “wolfdogs” 
However I would say people who breed their purebred but unregistered, untested pets together are almost as bad as these.
I would prefer people who breed health tested well thought out crosses infrequently to those who breed their pedigree pets constantly.


----------



## tabelmabel (Oct 18, 2013)

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/lifestyle/pets/10626590/Breeders-regret-over-creating-labradoodle.html

For anyone interested.


----------



## Jamesgoeswalkies (May 8, 2014)

They have actually been around for a while - the Cockerpoo since the early 1960s although i think they were actually around in the States in the 1950's. And as I child I knew a guy who bred Springer x Labrador crosses specifically for the combination of those breeds. 

But yes, Conron did regret his part in the phenomenon by creating the Labradoodle. But I actually think it was bound to happen, he was just in the wrong place at the wrong time.

What would i see as the factors present in the rise of popularity of the designed crosses -

The general sway against Pedigree or Purebred dogs culminating in the TV programme of the 1990's Pedigree Dogs Exposed. There was a terrific downer on buying KC Registered dogs for a long time.

The belief that crossing the breeds somehow makes them healthier or less prone to inherent diseases. The only reason (some) crossbreeds were healthier back in the day, was that their gene pool was so vast. But you will still hear the "Cavaliers are unhealthy so get a Cavipoo instead" comments. 

The desire for so called hypoallergenic dogs - posters still come on here and want a dog who doesn't moult. The only dog who doesn't loose hair is found in a toy shop.

I actually don't think the Cockerpoo is a bad cross when bred correctly. They are generally engaging and active little dogs. I'm not so keen on the Labradoodle as i think it amazingly bares no resemblance to the intelligent Labrador from which it takes it's name and some of it's genes. Springadors are actually quite sound in my experience too. 

I don't like crosses that put two opposing (physical or drive) breed types together though. That's when I get cross but that is just bad breeding and education needs to be done to prevent people buying into such things.

I really don't think that breeders who breed pure bred dogs are automatically 'better' than those who don't though. The Pedigree debate continues over many breeds (Frenchies for example) and there is still a lot of work to be done before any higher moral ground can be claimed. 

J


----------



## Silly cats and dogs (Jun 29, 2018)

We have two crossbreeds that are actually registered as a purebred in the USA. They are actually amazing dogs tbh, I’ve never had to pay the vet more than 40€ just for check ups as they have no health problems whatsoever apart from being spayed. They are also very intelligent and great with other people/dogs. I think we got very lucky with them. We paid nothing for them either.


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

I am far more concerned about the trend for extreme brachy breeds than I am about doodles. 
A lot of the opposition to them is pure snobbery. 
The relationship between people and dogs has changed, ideas about the perceived 'value' of dogs has changed, there is also the fad factor but like I said the fashion for Frenchies is imo far more damaging to dogs in general and for the individual animals.


----------



## Sandor Fagyal (May 16, 2018)

tabelmabel said:


> Yes, I think it is the idea of having something unusual yet fashionable and also, these days, people want a dog that fits their lifestyle and are often not prepared to work round the characteristics of the dog. They want a dog that is quite happy left alone 5 days a week but enjoys family walks at weekends. Non -shedding and great with kids.
> 
> I believe the man responsible for 'inventing' the labradoodle totally regrets crossing the 2 breeds. He was looking to breed a hypoallergenic guide dog. And let a genie out of a bottle.


Hi, 
Just out of curiosity, why do you believe it was a mistake to breed those two breeds? They are one of the oldest and most popular hybrid breed


----------



## tabelmabel (Oct 18, 2013)

@Sandor Fagyal - i wasn't saying that I thought it was a mistake - it was wally conran that has regrets. Maybe this is a better link than the one above to explain why:
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....4/designer-dog-maker-regrets-his-creation?amp


----------



## tabelmabel (Oct 18, 2013)

Whoops! Mods - i don't think i should have posted that link without permission! Pls remove if needbe


----------



## ApolloStorm (May 21, 2012)

picaresque said:


> I am far more concerned about the trend for extreme brachy breeds than I am about doodles..


I agree with this for the most part, its much worse seeing a bulldog who can't breathe than a crossbred dog! 
However, what I do have an issue with is seeing the adverts on facebook for the designer crosses- for instance I saw a " cavapoochon" for £800!!
And I think cockapoos for stupid money, where they claimed on the advert "hypoallergenic" and were charging in excess of £1000 because the poodle stud had been cleared of PRA. I'm all for health testing but one parent having one test doesn't make it if you ask me! 
But I honestly think its Joe public driving the popularity- they're only charging so much for the puppies because they CAN. I think they're so popular partially because of the distain for pedigree dogs in the media, and partially from a total lack of knowledge and research about existing breeds that would fill in the gap- and probably just as rare!


----------



## kirksandallchins (Nov 3, 2007)

Most of the designer dogs make good pets, the majority of the people I know who have got them didn't get them on a whim or because a celebrity owns one. 

The originator of the Labradoodle may be dismayed at the current fad for designer dogs, but I bet the founders of the Kennel Club are looking down and thinking the same. Jack Russell was a KC founder member and bred Fox Terriers and was horrified at the way the show version of the breed had developed. The Parson Russells recognised by the KC look more like the original Fox Terriers than Fox Terriers do.

A lot of breeds have health problems due to exaggerated features and/or coat. People have jumped on the band waggon with cross breeding, but like the KC it was started to get an improved, fit for purpose dog. Like the show scene, bad breeders looking for cash (and prizes/pride for show breeders) have taken over.


----------



## magpie (Jan 3, 2009)

It doesn't help that it is SO hard to find good breeders, it is a total minefield and most people just don't know what to look for. I think there is also a perception of some breeders of pure breeds being a bit snobby, and people not wanting to jump through hoops for a puppy when there are an abundance of litters being advertised every day with no or very few questions asked.

And on the subject of people believing cross breeds are healthier... to the average lay person who sees some unhealthy-looking pure breed winning Crufts every year... the idea that they'd be better off with a cross doesn't seem so far-fetched.


----------



## Smalldogs (Sep 11, 2012)

I think the main reasons for crossbreed popularity are intensive marketing ("if it costs that much, it must be good!") and the public perception of purebreds (Joe Public has taken on board the fact that some breeds are badly affected by exaggeration, and doesn't distinguish between a sound health-tested pup and a backyard-bred one).

Having previously owned pedigrees (mostly rescues, so some well-bred and some not), I currently have three crossbreds, purely by chance. The Chihuahua-Pug was bought by a yuppie couple as a fashion item, and rejected as faulty when it turned out the baby puppy widdled in the house while they were at work. She is something of a physical disaster, having a massive Pug body on frail Chihuahua legs, needed two operations for luxating patella, and, despite a longer nose, has some breathing problems. The Yorkie-Poodle-Chihuahua is beautiful, neurotic, and has a heart murmur. The Scottie-Bichon-Poodle is physically and temperamentally perfect, though he has a massive coat which would be a problem to anyone not committed to coat care. All three are good-looking and unusual, and attract a lot of attention from admirers when they go out, so I can see why someone would think, "Ooh, I want one like that!" I should add that we adore all three, and, apart from avoiding Pug crosses in the future (yes, I have met some sound ones), wouldn't be put off crossbreds in the future. Or well-bred pedigrees, if it comes to that.

To be honest, my favourite breed, which I have loved since the late 1950s, has genuinely been ruined by show breeders. Once athletic, it is now a lurching cripple; its beautiful, easy-care coat is now a fleece so massive as to affect the dog's movement; the beautiful but functional head has become so exaggerated as to be distressing to look at; and few specimens can breathe comfortably. The wonderful character is still there, trapped in a disabled body. Having, sadly, abandoned the breed, I am now thinking that the flood of designer crossbreeds may make it possible for me to find a cross with the breed temperament and a recognisable but unexaggerated body type - but am aware that this may just be a dream.


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

Most if not all of the 'pedigree' breeds were designed for various purposes in much the same way as 'designer' crosses are now, a couple of hundred years ago - mostly for work of a type that people no longer have a need for their dogs to do. Most dogs these days have the job of being a pet or companion so the dogs bred for hunting, herding, flock guarding or whatever aren't what people are looking for. Also the closed gene pools within many of the breeds have led to health problems - the horrendous increasing rates of cancer in breeds such as Golden Retrievers, Dobermans, Rottweillers for instance. Add on to that what's been done in the name of showing - producing massively coated dogs that can't breathe or walk properly and it's hardly surprising that people are looking elsewhere for the sort of dog that fits into their life style. Also the issue of housing - houses used to be bigger and have bigger gardens. With the smaller house/flat sizes, many without gardens, a large dog couldn't fit in so easily.
Sad that many 'breeders' are cashing in on it.



magpie said:


> And on the subject of people believing cross breeds are healthier... to the average lay person who sees some unhealthy-looking pure breed winning Crufts every year... the idea that they'd be better off with a cross doesn't seem so far-fetched.


My vet says he sees far fewer health problems in cross-breeds or mongrels.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

labradrk said:


> The myth factor. The idea that they are healthier, that they shed less, that they have more balanced temperaments due to the blending of the genes - all false of course.


Yet at a basic level, the idea of that they are healthier is not a myth. Obviously depends on breeds concerned.



ApolloStorm said:


> I'm all for health testing but one parent having one test doesn't make it if you ask me!


Depends on the illness in question, what genes are involved and if the dog is going to be bred which could lead to problems down the line. PRA is a good example. 2 different breeds may have problems with PRA. Doesn't mean descendants will as there are different types of PRA and you need two the same type to develop problems. Even one parent being tested could mean the children wouldn't develop it although they could be carriers.

I will throw out something which hasn't been mentioned previously. The impression that pedigree breeders are snobs and people are rebelling against the snobbery. I say that with my latest dog being a pedigree  To further examine the OP's question I would like to ask a simple question, to which I have my own answer. How many of these dogs would be bred and sold if people simply called them a crossbreed or mutt? Things like the advantages of health etc still apply after all. I think if you answer that you find the true answer to the OP's question.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Goblin said:


> Yet at a basic level, the idea of that they are healthier is not a myth. *Obviously depends on breeds concerned.*
> 
> Depends on the illness in question, what genes are involved and if the dog is going to be bred which could lead to problems down the line. PRA is a good example. 2 different breeds may have problems with PRA. Doesn't mean descendants will as there are different types of PRA and you need two the same type to develop problems. Even one parent being tested could mean the children wouldn't develop it although they could be carriers.
> 
> I will throw out something which hasn't been mentioned previously. The impression that pedigree breeders are snobs and people are rebelling against the snobbery. I say that with my latest dog being a pedigree  To further examine the OP's question I would like to ask a simple question, to which I have my own answer. How many of these dogs would be bred and sold if people simply called them a crossbreed or mutt? Things like the advantages of health etc still apply after all. I think if you answer that you find the true answer to the OP's question.


Which lies the issue  the three main breeds that you generally see with these crosses (Cocker/Lab/Cavalier) have lot's of potential issues especially when pet bred, which most of them are.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

labradrk said:


> Which lies the issue  the three main breeds that you generally see with these crosses (Cocker/Lab/Cavalier) have lot's of potential issues especially when pet bred, which most of them are.





labradrk said:


> The myth factor. The idea that they are healthier ... - false of course.


There was a study done a while back (_2013 Prevalence of inherited disorders among mixed-breed and purebred dogs) _and maybe you can explain the following..

The incidence of 10 genetic disorders (42%) was significantly greater in purebred dogs.
The incidence of 1 disorder (ruptured cranial cruciate ligament; 4%) was greater in mixed breed dogs.
For the rest of the disorders examined (16 disorders), they found no difference in incidence between mixed and purebred dogs or they failed to find a statistically significant difference,
That first one means that health cannot be simply dismissed as a myth. There's a reason genetic diversity is encouraged. This is only a limited selection of possible genetic disorders of course and yes, does depend on breeds concerned. My point is not to dismiss the health aspect in general pretending it's a myth as that only makes it appear you are defending pedigrees dismissing the evidence. One of the most damaging things about Pedigree Dogs Exposed was the obvious denial that the problems existed. As a result people switched off listening to those in denial and, more damaging those associated with them. Far better to qualify your point as not necessarily healthier which anyone concerned with pet health can agree with.


----------



## Annie Yates (Jul 4, 2018)

Sandor Fagyal said:


> Hi,
> 
> 
> Burrowzig said:
> ...


----------



## Annie Yates (Jul 4, 2018)

At the end of the day these cocker whatsit's and labra whatevers ect are all mongrels. Stupid people ridiculous amounts of money them and are convinced they have some sort of " super designer dog" when what they have is a mongrel, I have nothing against a good old mongrel by the way.The thing I find quite amusing is that I have a pure bred 100% Show Type Orange Roan Cocker Spaniel, the amount of people I have come across out with their with cockerpoos or cocker whatever yet ask me what breed my dog is, most of them can't even hazard a guess,,, they just have no idea about true breeds.


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

Annie Yates said:


> they just have no idea about true breeds.


But a couple of hundred years or so back, your 'true' cocker wouldn't have been the way they are now, or perhaps even considered a decent example of what that sort of game flushing dog was supposed to be. Things evolve - look at the difference now between show cockers and the working variety; heaviness and length of coat, head shape, body shape - and I reckon the show type today couldn't do half the day's work the working type can. Same goes for show border collies; they'd collapse under the weight of their coats before they could bring in a big flock of sheep. In a couple more hundred years all the labradoodles, cockerpoos or whatever - I have no doubt - will be established breeds


----------



## magpie (Jan 3, 2009)

Annie Yates said:


> At the end of the day these cocker whatsit's and labra whatevers ect are all mongrels. Stupid people ridiculous amounts of money them and are convinced they have some sort of " super designer dog" when what they have is a mongrel, I have nothing against a good old mongrel by the way.The thing I find quite amusing is that I have a pure bred 100% Show Type Orange Roan Cocker Spaniel, the amount of people I have come across out with their with cockerpoos or cocker whatever yet ask me what breed my dog is, most of them can't even hazard a guess,,, they just have no idea about true breeds.


Nice. Calling people stupid because they prefer a different type of dog to you  
What amuses me is how some people get so wound up about what kind of dog other people choose to have!


----------



## Annie Yates (Jul 4, 2018)

magpie said:


> Nice. Calling people stupid because they prefer a different type of dog to you
> It's not a case people preferring different breeds to me, I have a wide range of breeds over the years, it's that a lot of these people and I didn't say everyone have no idea about dogs they buy them because they think they are getting something that no-one else has...What amuses me is how some people get so wound up about what kind of dog other people choose to have!


Well if someone pays stupid money for a dog they know nothing about then yes I think it stupid. I'm not saying every one that bus a mongrel is stupid but so many people just have no idea and don't deserve to be dog owners


magpie said:


> Nice. Calling people stupid because they prefer a different type of dog to you
> What amuses me is how some people get so wound up about what kind of dog other people choose to have!


So why are you getting wound up? It has nothing to do with people preferring different breeds to me, I have had a wide range of breeds over the years breeds you have probably never even heard of and loved every one of them. What I'm saying is stupid is that people buy what they think is a "designer dog" when they have no idea that what they actually have but what is commonly know as a mongrel and they have paid stupid amounts of money for it and at the end of the day know nothing about what breeds have been used to create it. Some people don't deserve to be dog owners because so many end up having to be rehome because people have not done their homework....they are not toys to be discarded when they are no longer cute puppies. It's the poor dogs I feel sorry for no the owners.


----------



## magpie (Jan 3, 2009)

Annie Yates said:


> Well if someone pays stupid money for a dog they know nothing about then yes I think it stupid. I'm not saying every one that bus a mongrel is stupid but so many people just have no idea and don't deserve to be dog owners
> 
> So why are you getting wound up? It has nothing to do with people preferring different breeds to me, I have had a wide range of breeds over the years breeds you have probably never even heard of and loved every one of them. What I'm saying is stupid is that people buy what they think is a "designer dog" when they have no idea that what they actually have but what is commonly know as a mongrel and they have paid stupid amounts of money for it and at the end of the day know nothing about what breeds have been used to create it. Some people don't deserve to be dog owners because so many end up having to be rehome because people have not done their homework....they are not toys to be discarded when they are no longer cute puppies. It's the poor dogs I feel sorry for no the owners.


You have no idea about my knowledge of other breeds, and I really can't see how that matters anyway?

Some people I'm sure will get a dog without knowing for sure what it is, and some people will get a known crossbreed. Neither automatically makes someone stupid.

Plenty of people end up rehoming their dog because they weren't prepared for how it would turn out, that goes for people who have bought pure breeds as much as it does for those who have bought crosses.

I'm not worked up, I just don't understand why you felt the need to be insulting.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

I have to say it is quite funny that you get a lot of people that wouldn't be seen dead with a Poodle but cross it with something else and it's suddenly desirable. I genuinely don't know why you'd buy a purpose bred cross breed if you didn't love both breeds in the cross?


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

magpie said:


> You have no idea about my knowledge of other breeds, and I really can't see how that matters anyway?
> 
> Some people I'm sure will get a dog without knowing for sure what it is, and some people will get a known crossbreed. Neither automatically makes someone stupid.
> 
> ...


Well said @magpie 
Would love to know these breeds that have been owned before a show cocker came into @Annie Yates life that no one would know.

You only have to take a quick look round the forum to see behaviour problems in toy breeds because people buy them unaware and believe stereotypes that they are snappy and yappy they shouldn't be. It's just so much easier to pick them up than to treat them as dogs then problem behaviour sets in

Oh and Yorkies whose owners can't understand why they are obsessed with sheds or recall is sketchy in woodland. Forgetting they are terriers after all.

Let's just hope and pray this pure bred cocker has been bred carefully and RG has been taken in to account because it doesn't matter how good the pedigree. RG runs riot in so many lines and can escalate so easy if you don't know what you are doing


----------



## magpie (Jan 3, 2009)

And if we're going to call people 'stupid' for getting a dog where they don't know what it is or what breeds are in it's history... what does that say about anyone who rescues a total mongrel??  Or is it ok to get a complete unknown, so long as you haven't paid a breeder for it?


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

lullabydream said:


> Well said @magpie
> Would love to know these breeds that have been owned before a show cocker came into @Annie Yates life that no one would know.
> 
> You only have to take a quick look round the forum to see behaviour problems in toy breeds because people buy them unaware and believe stereotypes that they are snappy and yappy they shouldn't be. It's just so much easier to pick them up than to treat them as dogs then problem behaviour sets in
> ...


Took me a while to get what this meant, had visions of people taking their Yorkies along with them to ensure they made good shed buying decisions

Much as I think there are a lot of very poor breeders of crosses out there, I think there are just as many awful purebred breeders as well, a few good & a handful of excellent breeders.

Some of the most sought after dogs right now are purebreds; a lot of those dogs have very flat faces & no end of health issues.

The making of any breed or mix 'trendy' inevitably enables the unscrupulous to cash in.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

Annie Yates said:


> I have a pure bred 100% Show Type Orange Roan Cocker Spaniel,


Yeah. I think we're all aware that you have a "purebred 100% Show Type Orange Roan Cocker Spaniel" as you mention it in virtually every post you make.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

Annie Yates said:


> At the end of the day these cocker whatsit's and labra whatevers ect are all mongrels. Stupid people ridiculous amounts of money them and are convinced they have some sort of " super designer dog" when what they have is a mongrel, I have nothing against a good old mongrel by the way.The thing I find quite amusing is that I have a pure bred 100% Show Type Orange Roan Cocker Spaniel, the amount of people I have come across out with their with cockerpoos or cocker whatever yet ask me what breed my dog is, most of them can't even hazard a guess,,, they just have no idea about true breeds.


Not everyone who doesn't buy a purebred 100% Show Type Orange Roan Cocker Spaniel is stupid you know.


----------



## mrs phas (Apr 6, 2014)

The only crossbreeding I would support is for health reasons
For example maybe a *serious *team effort in improving the lives of pugs, frenchies, Boston's et al
Or
With mastiff breeds, no more melting neos, English mastiffs that can run for miles, bull mastiff weight and breathing problems (pretty much like frenchies just bigger) breeding boxers whose hearts don't explode
Those sort of x breedings are important, breeding for cuteness and money are just, IMHO, immoral


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

.

from the initial "TODAY Show" appearance of a Lab x Poodle --- touted as a '*hypoallergenic, non-shedding, trainable* BREED' & in fact, actually an F1 crossbreed --- to the 1st surrendered dog of that mix in our local municipal shelter, there was a time-span of a mere 90-days.

Let's face it, pet-dog buyers are often sloppy & lazy - they take statements by the breeder / seller as factual rather than as sales-pitch, do virtually no research, & often fall for a photo of a darling puppy. It's pathetic. It leads to a lot of unhappiness. 

F1 crossbreeds from purebred parents can be recognizable as types - a *Pug x Beagle* is generally fawn, with or w/o a mask which may or may not reach the eyes; most have sable tipping over the shoulders / cape, some have shading on the edges of their ears, & so on; put 20 of 'em in the same room, all about the same age, & most owners couldn't pick out their own pup unless s/he could come when called. :shrug:
Take any cross past F1, & things are far-more random; last i heard, the Guide Dogs of Aus breeding program STILL to this day, despite consistent screening & conscientious S/N of dogs who don't meet criteria, has pups who fail their selection check-list.

Dogs can shed 2 ways: into the environs, or into their own coats. The ones who shed into their own coats are *mandatory grooming breeds*, who create mandatory grooming progeny - whether purebred or crossbred.
Hypoallergenic doesn't exist - which person reacts to which potential allergen is highly idiosyncratic. MANDATORY GROOMING & some rules about contact / access to furniture / household furnishings [bare floors vs carpet, avoid upholstered pieces other than leather...], access to the sufferer's BEDROOM, etc, can help minimize symptoms.

Owners like to brag about their dogs - & in some cases, that includes how much they paid, how 'rare' the dog is, & so on. 
There are more than 600 breeds & landraces of dogs around the world - many unknown outside their home country.

- terry

.


----------



## Annie Yates (Jul 4, 2018)

Rafa said:


> Not everyone who doesn't buy a purebred 100% Show Type Orange Roan Cocker Spaniel is stupid you know.


Didn't say they were, but I have met so many people that have no idea what breeds have been used to produce their mongrel


----------



## Annie Yates (Jul 4, 2018)

Burrowzig said:


> But a couple of hundred years or so back, your 'true' cocker wouldn't have been the way they are now, or perhaps even considered a decent example of what that sort of game flushing dog was supposed to be. Things evolve - look at the difference now between show cockers and the working variety; heaviness and length of coat, head shape, body shape - and I reckon the show type today couldn't do half the day's work the working type can. Same goes for show border collies; they'd collapse under the weight of their coats before they could bring in a big flock of sheep. In a couple more hundred years all the labradoodles, cockerpoos or whatever - I have no doubt - will be established breeds


I am well aware of that but we are talking 2018 not the stone age.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Annie Yates said:


> Didn't say they were, but I have met so many people that have no idea what breeds have been used to produce their mongrel


A pure mongrel though is just that can have many many breeds in them

At the end of the day you work with the dog in front of you.

Even in a litter a specific breed there will be variations so good breeders usually help new owners to choose the right dog to fit in the new home rather than a new owner pick on looks or from a snap shot from visiting.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

Annie Yates said:


> Didn't say they were, but I have met so many people that have no idea what breeds have been used to produce their mongrel


Well, that doesn't matter.

Many people rescue dogs of unknown parentage, (my own Son included), and manage to end up with a lovely dog.


----------



## Annie Yates (Jul 4, 2018)

Rafa said:


> Well, that doesn't matter.
> 
> Many people rescue dogs of unknown parentage, (my own Son included), and manage to end up with a lovely dog.


You are not getting my point are you, all dogs are lovely it's the owners that can be the problem when they have no idea what they are dealing with.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

Annie Yates said:


> You are not getting my point are you, all dogs are lovely it's the owners that can be the problem when they have no idea what they are dealing with.


That applies to some owners whether they own a Crossbreed or a Purebred.

Sadly, not all dogs are lovely.

I have seen good dogs ruined by bad owners and I have seen knowledgeable and dedicated owners struggle with a dog that has issues.


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

Annie Yates said:


> I have had a wide range of breeds over the years breeds you have probably never even heard of .


Try us. 
Having more unusual breeds isn't special and doesn't make you better than anyone else.


----------



## Annie Yates (Jul 4, 2018)

picaresque said:


> Try us.
> Having more unusual breeds isn't special and doesn't make you better than anyone else.


I didn't say it was, I was just stating a fact.


----------



## Annie Yates (Jul 4, 2018)

tabelmabel said:


> Yes, I think it is the idea of having something unusual yet fashionable and also, these days, people want a dog that fits their lifestyle and are often not prepared to work round the characteristics of the dog. They want a dog that is quite happy left alone 5 days a week but enjoys family walks at weekends. Non -shedding and great with kids.
> 
> I believe the man responsible for 'inventing' the labradoodle totally regrets crossing the 2 breeds. He was looking to breed a hypoallergenic guide dog. And let a genie out of a bottle.


You have hit the nail right on the head.


----------



## Annie Yates (Jul 4, 2018)

Any good groomers honest groomer will tell you that Cockerpoos are one of the hardest dogs to groom because of their "double coat" but people get these poor dogs thinking they are easy to maintain because the don't shed naturally and end up with a badly matted dog.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

Annie Yates said:


> Any good groomers honest groomer will tell you that Cockerpoos are one of the hardest dogs to groom because of their "double coat" but people get these poor dogs thinking they are easy to maintain because the don't shed naturally and end up with a badly matted dog.


What strange circles you move in.

How many Cockapoo owners do you know personally who have ended up with a badly matted dog?


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Am still waiting on these dog breeds we would never know...

I worked at a groomers and as cockerpoos are crossbreeds the coats could be very different. Never knew they all had double coats. All though did see matted spaniels because owners bought them naively as they thought coats didn't need brushing...just like other dog breeds too.

Think it's mighty unfair to breed bash especially when the person who is breed bashing seems to have a thread about resource guarding with their cocker spaniel who they should have been aware this may have been a problem if they had throughly researched the breed before buying.


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

I totally get what you're saying @Annie Yates and unless I'm missing something really obvious not really sure why you're getting so much hostility for saying what people on this forum have mostly said about the various 'designer' mixes themselves over the years.

Do I begrudge people buying/wanting one? Not at all. But as long as the same amount of time and consideration goes into choosing a good breeder as it does any other breed.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

Dogloverlou said:


> I totally get what you're saying @Annie Yates and unless I'm missing something really obvious not really sure why you're getting so much hostility for saying what people on this forum have mostly said about the various 'designer' mixes themselves over the years.
> 
> Do I begrudge people buying/wanting one? Not at all. But as long as the same amount of time and consideration goes into choosing a good breeder as it does any other breed.


I agree but, what she was saying is that anyone who gets a dog without an in depth knowledge of the Breeds involved in the cross, is stupid.

Surely, that includes anyone who has ever rescued a dog of unknown parentage?


----------



## mrs phas (Apr 6, 2014)

Annie Yates said:


> , all dogs are lovely it's the owners that can be the problem when they have no idea what they are dealing with.


so you believe that the dog is never the problem, only the owners


----------



## Northpup (Apr 22, 2018)

Dogs can sometimes be difficult and have fantastic owners that couldn’t have done more
Owners can sometimes be rubbish and have dogs that couldn’t be better.
It really depends, although obviously good owners tend to statistically end up with better behaved etc dogs by logic it’s not always the case
People with mongrels and cross breeds aren’t all stupid. Just as people with purebreeds aren’t all well researched and intelligent!! 
People come across mongrels and mixes for all sorts of reasons, not all of them negative. 
It seems silly to point the finger at people who end up with crosses and say you clearly don’t know anything about dogs.
Person A could have easily looked into her cockerpoo from a health testing breeder and decided it was what was right for her and made a much more rational decision than person B who saw a husky puppy one day and picked one up the next week off an ad of gumtree. It works both ways.
I agree the irresponsible breeding of dogs must stop. I think we can all agree on this, but this lies with both pedigrees and crosses.
Crosses tend to be more prevalent with irresponsible and backyard breeders than pedigrees which is probably why these dogs and owners get a worse rep however its not a blanket case one size fits all and it can’t be treated as such so calling cross owners stupid is idiotic for this precise reason.
What about people with a purebreed and a cross? What does that make them? 
There’s a line between fact based opinion and plain snobbery and it’s very important we distinguish our argument for each case carefully and reply with respect to everyone.


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

Rafa said:


> I agree but, what she was saying is that anyone who gets a dog without an in depth knowledge of the Breeds involved in the cross, is stupid.
> 
> Surely, that includes anyone who has ever rescued a dog of unknown parentage?


I can't speak for her, but I read it as a general term...like 'oh silly people who pay hundreds of pounds for what is essentially a crossbreed' kind of statement. Not actually declaring people are stupid or targeting anyone in this thread. But again similar has been said before in regards to the crazy prices people pay. Each to their own & all that though


----------



## mrs phas (Apr 6, 2014)

Personally id like to know what ever happened to a good old fashioned mongrel
was a time that, in reality, you couldnt get a better family dog, than one of unknown mixed heritage
now they all have to be labra whatnots or thing me doodles and often cost more than a good healthy specimen of one of the breeds in the mix anyway
now, before anyone jumps, im not looking back with rose tinted glasses and longing for a return to times when few dogs were desexed and most were latchkey dogs or a bitch had to have a litter before speying etc
just wondering where now one would go for a good unpretentious family pup of unknown history, other than a rescue, and, i notice, more and more rescues are now calling their mongrel pups these high falluting hybrid names, rather than calling them mixed breed, mongrel or unknown heritage

i dont think you can beat a decent mongrel dog

edited because i really need to clean my keyboard out


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

mrs phas said:


> i dont think you can beat a decent mongrel dog


Proper mongrels are indeed wonderful dogs and in many ways it's a huge shame that they don't really exist anymore in this part of the world (although I accept that we couldn't and shouldn't go back to how things were).

I do think it's ironic that some dog people rage at owners of labradoodles (or whatever) for daring to act like their crossbreed is something special and then go on at length about their super-duper expensive purebred with champion breeding. Most people with pedigree dogs have them purely for companionship, meaning they chose their breed because they wanted one. Same as the person who wanted a cockapoo. But one of these is supposed to be the morally superior choice?
Doodles and poos and chons aren't even my cup of tea at all (I don't 'do' fluffy or curly coated dogs) but in their defence, although unfortunately there is unethical breeding going on this is a widespread issue amongst all dogs both mixed and purebred, just look at the French bulldog crisis (please forgive me if I'm sounding like a broken record). Crossbreeding in itself shouldn't be a bad thing, except maybe for the fanatical breed purist.


----------



## Annie Yates (Jul 4, 2018)

mrs phas said:


> so you believe that the dog is never the problem, only the owners


Did I say that?


----------



## Annie Yates (Jul 4, 2018)

picaresque said:


> Proper mongrels are indeed wonderful dogs and in many ways it's a huge shame that they don't really exist anymore in this part of the world (although I accept that we couldn't and shouldn't go back to how things were).
> 
> I do think it's ironic that some dog people rage at owners of labradoodles (or whatever) for daring to act like their crossbreed is something special and then go on at length about their super-duper expensive purebred with champion breeding. Most people with pedigree dogs have them purely for companionship, meaning they chose their breed because they wanted one. Same as the person who wanted a cockapoo. But one of these is supposed to be the morally superior choice?
> Doodles and poos and chons aren't even my cup of tea at all (I don't 'do' fluffy or curly coated dogs) but in their defence, although unfortunately there is unethical breeding going on this is a widespread issue amongst all dogs both mixed and purebred, just look at the French bulldog crisis (please forgive me if I'm sounding like a broken record). Crossbreeding in itself shouldn't be a bad thing, except maybe for the fanatical breed purist.


I agree with you, there is far too much cross breeding going on which is producing some very bad results for the poor dogs. A lot of people just have no idea about what they are dealing with when they get a so called designer dog which at the end of the day is a mongrel but not a good old fashioned mongrel like you said as they used to be, a lovely Heinze Varity as we used to call them. I specifically chose my well bred pedigree because I wanted to know exactly what I was getting. Did my homework and spent 18 months looking for my right dog meeting both his parents, gran and a sister from previous litter so I had a good idea what mine was going to be like....that was my choice and I'm very very happy with my well spent cash.


----------



## Annie Yates (Jul 4, 2018)

Rafa said:


> What strange circles you move in.
> 
> How many Cockapoo owners do you know personally who have ended up with a badly matted dog?


Far to many, but every one I come across says the same thing.....do you have one?


----------



## Annie Yates (Jul 4, 2018)

lullabydream said:


> Am still waiting on these dog breeds we would never know...
> 
> I worked at a groomers and as cockerpoos are crossbreeds the coats could be very different. Never knew they all had double coats. All though did see matted spaniels because owners bought them naively as they thought coats didn't need brushing...just like other dog breeds too.
> 
> Think it's mighty unfair to breed bash especially when the person who is breed bashing seems to have a thread about resource guarding with their cocker spaniel who they should have been aware this may have been a problem if they had throughly researched the breed before buying.


I certainly didn't buy my Cocker Spaniel naively, I have had them in the past plus I did my homework before getting him. I knew perfectly well the amount of thorough brushing and grooming they need and I was fully aware of resource guarding as I have had cocker spaniels in the past, it is just that I never had the guarding issue with my other cocker only this one but as it is a trait it is hard to break.


----------



## Annie Yates (Jul 4, 2018)

Rafa said:


> What strange circles you move in.
> 
> How many Cockapoo owners do you know personally who have ended up with a badly matted dog?


I'd rather move in strange circle than be a troll


----------



## Annie Yates (Jul 4, 2018)

Goblin said:


> Yet at a basic level, the idea of that they are healthier is not a myth. Obviously depends on breeds concerned.
> 
> Depends on the illness in question, what genes are involved and if the dog is going to be bred which could lead to problems down the line. PRA is a good example. 2 different breeds may have problems with PRA. Doesn't mean descendants will as there are different types of PRA and you need two the same type to develop problems. Even one parent being tested could mean the children wouldn't develop it although they could be carriers.
> 
> I will throw out something which hasn't been mentioned previously. The impression that pedigree breeders are snobs and people are rebelling against the snobbery. I say that with my latest dog being a pedigree  To further examine the OP's question I would like to ask a simple question, to which I have my own answer. How many of these dogs would be bred and sold if people simply called them a crossbreed or mutt? Things like the advantages of health etc still apply after all. I think if you answer that you find the true answer to the OP's question.


I'm sure that people would certainly not be so willing to pay the silly prices asked if these "designer" dogs with all their problems were they sold under their correct name of mongrel.


----------



## BlueJay (Sep 20, 2013)

In my eyes at least, a mongrel would be a right mix up, especially one that you can't pinpoint the breeds involved.... Though it seems to be thrown around as an insult nowadays.
While the fancy names can be silly, as long as people dont take them as getting something they aren't, there is no harm in them. And saying *specific breed* crossbreed or boodledoodle or *specific breed* mix or whatever at least gives people an idea of what makes up the dog.
Different breeds can have wildly different traits, and while you could call both mongrels all you like, something like a husky x malinois or a dane x mastiff is going to be worlds apart from a pug x cavalier.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

Jamesgoeswalkies said:


> They have actually been around for a while - the Cockerpoo since the early 1960s although i think they were actually around in the States in the 1950's. And as I child I knew a guy who bred Springer x Labrador crosses specifically for the combination of those breeds.
> 
> The desire for so called hypoallergenic dogs - posters still come on here and want a dog who doesn't moult. The only dog who doesn't loose hair is found in a toy shop.
> 
> J


Not with you on this. Having owned collies for all the earlier part of my life and had dog hair carpets, hair balls in every corner, hair covered furniture and now when visiting friends with moulting dogs and coming away with my clothes covered in hair I can most definitely assure you that poodles do not shed hair in any way or form. Of course you can comb hair out of the in just the same way your can comb hair out of your own head but they DO NOT shed on carpet, furniture or clothes. what is wrong with wanting to own a dog that does not involve a huge amount of housework and make you look an absolute mess all the time with dog hairs stuck to your clothes. As for the crossbreeds, obviously some take after the poodle and do not shed and some breeders are doing a good job at making this a little bit more guaranteed but a lot do shed heavily and some have double coats that are the groomers nightmare- as do some pure breeds of course.



Goblin said:


> There was a study done a while back (_2013 Prevalence of inherited disorders among mixed-breed and purebred dogs) _and maybe you can explain the following..
> 
> The incidence of 10 genetic disorders (42%) was significantly greater in purebred dogs.
> The incidence of 1 disorder (ruptured cranial cruciate ligament; 4%) was greater in mixed breed dogs.
> ...


That is interesting and of course the 10 genetic disorders that are reduced by careful crossing are recessive genes which need both parents to be carrying the gene. If you cross 2 breeds which can carry the same recessive gene then you are gaining nothing but if one of the breeds do not suffer with the condition then it will not be passed on. At the same time if breeders of pure breeds were more careful then 2 dogs both carrying the same gene would not be bred in the first place.



Annie Yates said:


> Any good groomers honest groomer will tell you that Cockerpoos are one of the hardest dogs to groom because of their "double coat" but people get these poor dogs thinking they are easy to maintain because the don't shed naturally and end up with a badly matted dog.


I will agree with you that some poodle crosses have horrendous coats that owners cannot cope with and become a groomers nightmare. But a lot have short coats and moult normally and a lot have poodle coats and are easy to keep under control.



mrs phas said:


> Personally id like to know what ever happened to a good old fashioned mongrel
> was a time that, in reality, you couldnt get a better family dog, than one of unknown mixed heritage
> now they all have to be labra whatnots or thing me doodles and often cost more than a good healthy specimen of one of the breeds in the mix anyway
> now, before anyone jumps, im not looking back with rose tinted glasses and longing for a return to times when few dogs were desexed and most were latchkey dogs or a bitch had to have a litter before speying etc
> ...


The obvious reason is because most pet dogs are neutered and are not allowed to wander. At one time a huge amount of dogs were wandering the streets and bitches would come home pregnant. People do often put photos up of their real true mongrels asking what breeds are in them so they are still around but not in the same numbers. My first two dogs as a child were good old mongrels and were great family pets but one of them had puppies that were mostly given away to friends and every single one of them was put to sleep at a young age as they were aggressive. I think the father was a scottie that used to lay in wait on the pavement opposite our house and try and bite us as we went past, got my sister once. So there were even less guarantees with the good old mongrel than with a pure bred dog that you can check up on parents temperaments and health status.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

So you have owned cocker spaniels...and not breeds no one had heard of. So what was the point of saying that!

So you knew about RG in cockers but couldn't recognise it? Even after researching it and had to ask on a forum. It's an easy enough fix if you are dog savvy enough. However you can make it worse if left and treated the wrong way. Which am sure any research would show you this 

Some crossbreeds have been bred for purpose for many many years such as lurcher's and long dogs because they make excellent working dogs. They also make good flyball dogs too.

Nearly all pedigree dogs with KC registered will have championship lineage. It doesn't make one pet dog more special than another because of this. It's not something special


----------



## Annie Yates (Jul 4, 2018)

Blitz said:


> Not with you on this. Having owned collies for all the earlier part of my life and had dog hair carpets, hair balls in every corner, hair covered furniture and now when visiting friends with moulting dogs and coming away with my clothes covered in hair I can most definitely assure you that poodles do not shed hair in any way or form. Of course you can comb hair out of the in just the same way your can comb hair out of your own head but they DO NOT shed on carpet, furniture or clothes. what is wrong with wanting to own a dog that does not involve a huge amount of housework and make you look an absolute mess all the time with dog hairs stuck to your clothes. As for the crossbreeds, obviously some take after the poodle and do not shed and some breeders are doing a good job at making this a little bit more guaranteed but a lot do shed heavily and some have double coats that are the groomers nightmare- as do some pure breeds of course.
> 
> That is interesting and of course the 10 genetic disorders that are reduced by careful crossing are recessive genes which need both parents to be carrying the gene. If you cross 2 breeds which can carry the same recessive gene then you are gaining nothing but if one of the breeds do not suffer with the condition then it will not be passed on. At the same time if breeders of pure breeds were more careful then 2 dogs both carrying the same gene would not be bred in the first place.
> 
> ...


Nice to have someone I can totally agree with.


----------



## Annie Yates (Jul 4, 2018)

lullabydream said:


> So you have owned cocker spaniels...and not breeds no one had heard of. So what was the point of saying that!
> 
> So you knew about RG in cockers but couldn't recognise it? Even after researching it and had to ask on a forum. It's an easy enough fix if you are dog savvy enough. However you can make it worse if left and treated the wrong way. Which am sure any research would show you this
> 
> ...


 Even a professional ie doctors & vet don't know everything and ask questions so what is so wrong in me asking questions about RG.....and why are you so interested in which breeds dog I have had? do you want the full list or just those that are an unusual breeds..... Maremma for one and a Kuvasz both rescue dogs does that help or have you got to go a google them to find what they are?


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Annie Yates said:


> Even a professional ie doctors & vet don't know everything and ask questions so what is so wrong in me asking questions about RG.....and why are you so interested in which breeds dog I have had? do you want the full list or just those that are an unusual breeds..... Maremma for one and a Kuvasz both rescue dogs does that help or have you got to go a google them to find what they are?


There is no need to be so patronising.

I am surprised you had a rescued Kuvasz given there were none registered with the KC in the last 10 years.


----------



## Northpup (Apr 22, 2018)

Annie Yates said:


> Even a professional ie doctors & vet don't know everything and ask questions so what is so wrong in me asking questions about RG.....and why are you so interested in which breeds dog I have had? do you want the full list or just those that are an unusual breeds..... Maremma for one and a Kuvasz both rescue dogs does that help or have you got to go a google them to find what they are?


Eek, I'm not sure if you are aware but your replies are coming off slightly snippy/ a bit rude occasionally. If that's what you were going for then it's up to you as it's a public forum but I just thought I'd warn you that's how some of them read in case you were unaware


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

Annie Yates said:


> You are not getting my point are you, all dogs are lovely it's the owners that can be the problem when they have no idea what they are dealing with.





mrs phas said:


> so you believe that the dog is never the problem, only the owners





Annie Yates said:


> Did I say that?


Clearly, yes, you did say that.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

Annie Yates said:


> Even a professional ie doctors & vet don't know everything and ask questions so what is so wrong in me asking questions about RG.....and why are you so interested in which breeds dog I have had? do you want the full list or just those that are an unusual breeds..... Maremma for one and a Kuvasz both rescue dogs does that help or have you got to go a google them to find what they are?


Wow, you do have a whopping great ego, don't you?

The very fact you consider a Maremma Sheepdog to be rare or unusual is telling.

I've seen many of them being shown over the years.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

labradrk said:


> There is no need to be so patronising.
> 
> I am surprised you had a rescued Kuvasz given there were none registered with the KC in the last 10 years.


Could quite possibly be a mongrel that had been passed off as a breed...

Have seen many rescues name breeds which really aren't said breed...

Good rescues don't usually give paperwork as far as I know. It's not just to prevent dogs breeding but in certain circles paperwork can be used by scammers...or byb breeders/ puppy farmers etc


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

Annie Yates said:


> At the end of the day these cocker whatsit's and labra whatevers ect are all mongrels. .


Actually Cockerpoos, Labradoodles and the like are cross breeds and you will find most people will know the two breeds that made up their mix...mongrels are a mix of 3 or more unknown breeds 

-mod hat on-
Can we please keep things civil and stop with the patronizing comments - thanks


----------



## Annie Yates (Jul 4, 2018)

labradrk said:


> There is no need to be so patronising.
> 
> I am surprised you had a rescued Kuvasz given there were none registered with the KC in the last 10 years.


I never said I had her registered with the Kennel Club, she was about 8 years old when I got her and had her for another 3 years.


----------



## Annie Yates (Jul 4, 2018)

Rafa said:


> Wow, you do have a whopping great ego, don't you?
> 
> The very fact you consider a Maremma Sheepdog to be rare or unusual is telling.
> 
> I've seen many of them being shown over the years.


so you actually knew what it was before you googled it did you......doubt it...plus I didn't say he was a rare breed you said that not me


----------



## Annie Yates (Jul 4, 2018)

StormyThai said:


> Actually Cockerpoos, Labradoodles and the like are cross breeds and you will find most people will know the two breeds that made up their mix...mongrels are a mix of 3 or more unknown breeds
> 
> -mod hat on-
> Can we please keep things civil and stop with the patronizing comments - thanks


Good idea, why can we not have our views without being cross examined by a person who know nothing about me and my dogs.


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

I have seen tons of matted doodle coats posted all over Facebook. The coats of these dogs does tend to cause some issue for people, especially those who have no idea what kind of coat they're dealing with.

I think it was @labradrk who posted earlier in the thread about how so many of these doodle owners would scoff at owning a purebred poodle, but yet will quite happily own their crosses. I think it's a case of supply & demand and the ever popular 'I want a dog right now' mentality. Doodles are often available 'right now'


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

A Maremma would be a considered a rare breed, yes  

Only 44 registrations last year.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

Annie Yates said:


> well you need to go back to school and learn to read
> 
> but have you owned one....or even know anyone that has....NO so yes they are a rare breed then


One of my neighbours owns a GR dog and a Maremma bitch.


----------



## Annie Yates (Jul 4, 2018)

Dogloverlou said:


> A Maremma would be a considered a rare breed, yes
> 
> Only 44 registrations last year.


well there you go then,


----------



## Annie Yates (Jul 4, 2018)

lullabydream said:


> Could quite possibly be a mongrel that had been passed off as a breed...
> 
> Have seen many rescues name breeds which really aren't said breed...
> 
> Good rescues don't usually give paperwork as far as I know. It's not just to prevent dogs breeding but in certain circles paperwork can be used by scammers...or byb breeders/ puppy farmers etc


Why are so many people doubtful and miss believing of others,


Rafa said:


> One of my neighbours owns a GR dog and a Maremma bitch.


Why are you so doubting of others? My dog was not a mongrel passed off as a breed, I had all the paperwork as it was handed to the rescue centre by the original owner who got the dog from a breeder albeit not in the UK.


----------



## Jamesgoeswalkies (May 8, 2014)

Blitz said:


> Not with you on this <<>> I can most definitely assure you that poodles do not shed hair in any way or form.


Oh yes they do. They may not shed as much and for this reason they are useful for those will allergies but they do shed dead hair which gets bound in their tight curls and then you can brush it out - so it doesn't fall, but they do shed. Thus the need for regular grooming at the salon.They also of course collect dander.

J


----------



## Annie Yates (Jul 4, 2018)

Rafa said:


> One of my neighbours owns a GR dog and a Maremma bitch.[/QUOTE
> I wonder why I doubt you this time, bit of a coincident


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

After weeding some unnecessary posts i will ask again for the bickering and patronizing comments to stop please.
Any more and I will close the thread :Locktopic


----------



## magpie (Jan 3, 2009)

I actually agree that there is too much cross breeding going on, and unfortunately often with two completely incompatible/unsuitable breeds and rarely with any health tests done. And there are a lot of people buying dogs (both mixes and pure breeds) without doing their research first. It is a shame.

However, not everyone who buys a crossbreed is some kind of idiot who has no idea about the breeds their dog is made up of, and no idea about how it is going to turn out. 

I knew what to expect when I bought my cockapoo. I expected a mix between a cocker spaniel and a miniature poodle, and though it seems hard for some people to believe, that's exactly what I got. On the other hand, I didn't really know what I was getting when I adopted my rescue mongrel, but that lack of knowledge didn't cause any problems and he's fit in beautifully.

(Also, cockapoos don't all have double coats, in fact I don't think I've ever met one that does? No, they don't all end up a matted mess, and no, groomers will not all say that they are the hardest dogs to groom  )


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

magpie said:


> I actually agree that there is too much cross breeding going on, and unfortunately often with two completely incompatible/unsuitable breeds and rarely with any health tests done. And there are a lot of people buying dogs (both mixes and pure breeds) without doing their research first. It is a shame.
> 
> However, not everyone who buys a crossbreed is some kind of idiot who has no idea about the breeds their dog is made up of, and no idea about how it is going to turn out.
> 
> ...


I think most groomers would agree that shih Tzu's have hard coats to deal with and it's not necessarily fault on the owner. Underneath can cobweb after a good night's sleep after being beautifully brushed out from skin to the ends. Especially worse when changing from puppy to adult coat

Even in the world of pedigree dogs. Not every breed is being health tested as many are just recommended so some breeders think that means we won't bother. Chihuahuas are not thin on the ground and 4 soon to be 3 breeders health test. Yorkies, you would be hard pushed to find any. Both popular breeds very common with toy breeds.

Then there are those that health test and breed regardless of results too..

@MontyMaude you were dog savvy enough to work with the dog you have that is all any of us can do
My chihuahuas are like chalk and cheese although they both have chihuahua traits.


----------



## Ceiling Kitty (Mar 7, 2010)

I've heard of a Maremma, but I've never seen one AFAIK. I've never heard of the other one BUT I've been here long enough to know that the people on this forum know their dogs; I doubt Google was employed as heavily here as one user seems to think...


----------



## Ceiling Kitty (Mar 7, 2010)

I'm trying to pinpoint in my mind when the CKCS crosses really started to become popular... so far I personally haven't been seeing the large numbers of Cavapoos and Cavachons with MVD that one might expect, but maybe the population of these crosses hasn't aged enough yet - or maybe others' experiences are different.

I don't recall seeing any particularly matted ones. I'm not a fan of the curly-coated types either but that's just a cosmetic preference.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

Ceiling Kitty said:


> I've heard of a Maremma, but I've never seen one AFAIK. I've never heard of the other one BUT I've been here long enough to know that the people on this forum know their dogs; I doubt Google was employed as heavily here as one user seems to think...


During the 1990s, Maremma Sheepdogs became quite popular amongst those showing, mainly at the Open level, and a class of 9 or 10 wasn't unusual.

They don't seem to have become popular as pets though. As I said, a neighbour of mine has a bitch, but she is the only one I see around.

I believe they are a Guardian Breed originally.


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

Rafa said:


> During the 1990s, Maremma Sheepdogs became quite popular amongst those showing, mainly at the Open level, and a class of 9 or 10 wasn't unusual.
> 
> They don't seem to have become popular as pets though. As I said, a neighbour of mine has a bitch, but she is the only one I see around.
> 
> I believe they are a Guardian Breed originally.


They are still used as guardians in parts of Italy. A friend of mine was holidaying somewhere remote and saw quite a number of them in with sheep and got furiously barked at. 
I read something that ouesi posted last year sometime that Maremmas were being used in Australia protecting sheep and even chickens on ranches and also on an island protecting some rare penguins when they were nesting


----------



## mrs phas (Apr 6, 2014)

most people, on the streetm would see both those breeds and exclaim PYRANEEAN ! (sp?)
I know that until i became interested in LGB and then came here, I wouldve believed the same
and
due to certain saturday morning tv, when i was a child, I actually believed all giant/large white breed dogs were called Belle 
My point being, 
anyone who is really interested in a breed or a 'family' of breeds, will educte themselves, 
but
because these 'designer' dogs ( theyre not recognised breeds, yet) are a comparitavely new phenomenon, theres not that much out there to educate oneself
hence people come here, and other places likeminded people group together,trying to do so


----------



## mrs phas (Apr 6, 2014)

Siskin said:


> They are still used as guardians in parts of Italy. A friend of mine was holidaying somewhere remote and saw quite a number of them in with sheep and got furiously barked at.


I may be sufferring from brain fog,
but
wasnt there a person either here, or here in a former life, that lived up in the italian mountains for a while and one of the reasons she came back was because she was worried her two GSD would get into trouble because the maremmas lived out with the sheep flocks and would/might regard her dogs as wolves


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

You got me there @mrs phas i don't remember that one, sounds a good story though hope it's real


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

I don't remember that either...but recognition would be on scent rather than just sight...so confused here!


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

Maremmas do originate from Italy.


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

Wasn't there a series of programs on dogs recently and on one of the programs there was a short piece on guardian breeds. They watched the dogs during the night with night vision cameras. The dogs worked as a team. The nervy ones were very alert and would bark at the slightest thing, noises and smells as I doubt they could see much despite having better night vision then us. The dogs that were more confident would only react if they were sure there was something there otherwise they just lazed about. So I suspect you are right that at night smell would be the usual way of identifying predators, but during the day anything out of the ordinary will get a reaction


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

mrs phas said:


> I may be sufferring from brain fog,
> but
> wasnt there a person either here, or here in a former life, that lived up in the italian mountains for a while and one of the reasons she came back was because she was worried her two GSD would get into trouble because the maremmas lived out with the sheep flocks and would/might regard her dogs as wolves


This rings a bell, they posted on Dogpages, possibly elsewhere too but I'm not sure if they were on PF.


----------



## mrs phas (Apr 6, 2014)

picaresque said:


> This rings a bell, they posted on Dogpages, possibly elsewhere too but I'm not sure if they were on PF.


yes, I was on dogpages, and a few others, before i found here and set down my roots ( much to the chagrin of some)


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

mrs phas said:


> yes, I was on dogpages, and a few others, before i found here and set down my roots ( much to the chagrin of some)


I was there briefly, was more of a lurker though. Sadly Dogpages is no more


----------



## Magyarmum (Apr 27, 2015)

Siskin said:


> Wasn't there a series of programs on dogs recently and on one of the programs there was a short piece on guardian breeds. They watched the dogs during the night with night vision cameras. The dogs worked as a team. The nervy ones were very alert and would bark at the slightest thing, noises and smells as I doubt they could see much despite having better night vision then us. The dogs that were more confident would only react if they were sure there was something there otherwise they just lazed about. So I suspect you are right that at night smell would be the usual way of identifying predators, but during the day anything out of the ordinary will get a reaction


This is a very interesting video about LGD's which I've seen before, but can't remember where.






Years ago I owned a Great Pyrenee which is one of the more moderate breeds of LGD's. Lovely dogs but the downside is that like all LGD's they're nocturnal. We were fortunate because living on a 50 acre farm in a warm climate she could spend the night outside and woof to her heart's content! (I should point out that owning an LGD is very different to owning a Guardian breed).

LGD's are quite popular in Hungary.and are mainly used for security purposes. My Mini Schnauzer's breeder owns a Kangal and our previous trainer a Central Asian Ovcharka. I live in a remote area where the Kuvasz is the most popular LGD for guarding small flocks of goats or cattle.. At one time in my tiny village we had three and in my local town they're used as security dogs to guard business premises at night.

I have to admit I've never seen any of the designer crossbreeds that seem so popular in the UK but maybe that's just because of where I live. If our training classes are anything to go by people either have pure breds or mongrels. I have noticed though that English Bull Terriers for some reason have become popular over the past two years and I know at least four people who own one.


----------



## Annie Yates (Jul 4, 2018)

magpie said:


> I actually agree that there is too much cross breeding going on, and unfortunately often with two completely incompatible/unsuitable breeds and rarely with any health tests done. And there are a lot of people buying dogs (both mixes and pure breeds) without doing their research first. It is a shame.
> 
> However, not everyone who buys a crossbreed is some kind of idiot who has no idea about the breeds their dog is made up of, and no idea about how it is going to turn out.
> 
> ...


I have a lot of friends who have cockerpoos and they all say the same thing that they didn't realise how much hard work it is to keep their coat groomed properly and they have been told by professional groomers that they do have double coats and they can be a hard dog to groom so I guess you have been lucky.


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

Thanks for the video @Magyarmum, very interesting and informative


----------



## magpie (Jan 3, 2009)

Annie Yates said:


> I have a lot of friends who have cockerpoos and they all say the same thing that they didn't realise how much hard work it is to keep their coat groomed properly and they have been told by professional groomers that they do have double coats and they can be a hard dog to groom so I guess you have been lucky.


And that's where I agree with you, that people should do their research first and understand that they will end up with a dog that requires a fair bit of grooming. If the coats are long then they need brushing at least every other day if not daily and my dog is no different, his fur is quite woolly when it's long, but the coats will only mat if they are not brushed. In this weather though I keep him short, I clipped him about 2 weeks ago and apart from his ears, muzzle & tail he's not been brushed at all since then!


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

Annie Yates said:


> I am well aware of that but we are talking 2018 not the stone age.


Who said anything about the stone age? Only you!
I made it clear the time parameters I was talking about were a couple of hundred years.


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

Siskin said:


> Maremmas were being used in Australia protecting sheep and even chickens on ranches and also on an island protecting some rare penguins when they were nesting


I remember reading about the island ones, last year I think?


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

Blitz said:


> if you cross 2 breeds which can carry the same recessive gene then you are gaining nothing but if one of the breeds do not suffer with the condition then it will not be passed on


The recessive genes would also have to be at the same locus in order to pair up, and they aren't always. For instance PRA in Labradors isn't at the same locus as PRA in Border Collies.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

magpie said:


> And that's where I agree with you, that people should do their research first and understand that they will end up with a dog that requires a fair bit of grooming. If the coats are long then they need brushing at least every other day if not daily and my dog is no different, his fur is quite woolly when it's long, but the coats will only mat if they are not brushed. In this weather though I keep him short, I clipped him about 2 weeks ago and apart from his ears, muzzle & tail he's not been brushed at all since then!


Absolutely this...

It's not just the designer breeds that get matted...many dogs coats get matted. Like I stated earlier shih Tzu coats are not the easiest coat to care for...it matts and cob webs due to no fault of the owner at time....

After helping/working in a pet shop with a groomers for 5/6 months and a groomer who was willing to try to attempt to sort out dematted I was appalled.

Am usually the first here to say to new puppy owner regardless of breed start grooming.

Most dogs walked into the groomers looking immaculate. It wasn't till you felt them that you felt the horrendous matts underneath.

Oh and not all dogs were fluffy that had matted coats either.

Were these people bad owners..am not sure. They were given advice by the groomer and they would come in the following session dog in the same state that quite frankly it would have been kinder to dematt the dog at the vets.

Maybe they tried the hardest with the wrong tools, or shampooed the dogs which was already matted making things worse. Kept jumpers on in cold weather without checking the fur and brushing regularly as it will felt badly if left. Maybe just naive mistakes trying to help their dog in certain circumstances.

Yes people will buy dogs on a whim not thinking about coat care. Plus if am honest coat care isn't as easy as people think. Certain brushes suit certain coats and using the wrong tool does very little. Good groomers educate so do breeders. Not just say said dog needs brushing X amount of times in a week.


----------



## Annie Yates (Jul 4, 2018)

lullabydream said:


> Absolutely this...
> 
> It's not just the designer breeds that get matted...many dogs coats get matted. Like I stated earlier shih Tzu coats are not the easiest coat to care for...it matts and cob webs due to no fault of the owner at time....
> 
> ...


When I got my dog as a 12 week old puppy I was well aware of what I was taking on. he is brushed and combed EVERY day which he loves. I have never allowed his coat to become matted or knotted. It is a something I have done with all my dog regardless of there breed. As we have both so rightly said a lot of people don't understand how much maintenance dogs need and they should do before embarking on being a dog owner.


----------



## Magyarmum (Apr 27, 2015)

Over the years I have owned a Great Pyrenee, a Springer Spaniel, a Kokoni, a GSD, a Tibetan Spaniel and now a Miniature Schnauzer. All have long coats that need daily brushing but only the Schnauzer needs three monthly trips to the groomer to be hand stripped.

I would love to say that none of the above dogs ever had a matted coat, but that would be a lie. No matter how religiously you groom it's almost inevitable there will be matts from time to time.

My Springer Spaniel and Tibbie for example both used to get matts behind the ears which had to be cut out and in the autumn my Tibbie used to come home from a walk with the furnishings on her backside looking like a bird's nest, full of burrs which were impossible to remove.

Quite frankly if you want a dog whose coat doesn't get matted then buy a short haired breed - my Shar-Pei is an absolute delight as all she needs is a weekly brush which is over and done with in 5 minutes!


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Magyarmum said:


> Over the years I have owned a Great Pyrenee, a Springer Spaniel, a Kokoni, a GSD, a Tibetan Spaniel and now a Miniature Schnauzer. All have long coats that need daily brushing but only the Schnauzer needs three monthly trips to the groomer to be hand stripped.
> 
> I would love to say that none of the above dogs ever had a matted coat, but that would be a lie. No matter how religiously you groom it's almost inevitable there will be matts from time to time.
> 
> ...


I think the matts on spaniel types ears are caused by mother nature from blowing in the wind...or rather momentum of running wildly. Any parent whose child has long hair will tell how easy knots appear from kids being kids if hair is often left down.

Dogs scratching ears can also lead to matts, armpits are hot spots from simple movement too and I'll fitting harnesses.


----------



## Magyarmum (Apr 27, 2015)

lullabydream said:


> I think the matts on spaniel types ears are caused by mother nature from blowing in the wind...or rather momentum of running wildly. Any parent whose child has long hair will tell how easy knots appear from kids being kids if hair is often left down.
> 
> Dogs scratching ears can also lead to matts, armpits are hot spots from simple movement too and I'll fitting harnesses.


No matter how they're caused they're still matts!


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Magyarmum said:


> No matter how they're caused they're still matts!


Yes but like I tried to point out and you the onus isnt always on the owner...

Don't get me wrong I have seen some terrible sights that yes the owner could have tried harder...but not always the owner at fault per se


----------



## mrs phas (Apr 6, 2014)

even puffs, who have the finest silkiest baby hair, get matted, which is why you see so many cut back to be faux hairless
a puff in full coat is a sight to behold, but ive seen to many pictures of them, come into groomers or rescue, where they havent been groomed, for as little as a week, to ever want one

I actually defy any, even the most fastidious of owners, of dogs that need persistant grooming, to say theyve never found a knot in there dogs hair, and, its that teeny tiny knot, that, if overlooked, suddenly becomes a huge mass of tangled webbed coat within days


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

The two places Isla gets any matts are the silky hair round her ears occasionally but more often in her fluffy bum areas usually about where she sits upon the fluffy bits. All of my retrievers are not keen for you to brush much there so I keep the area fairly short or have a matt hacking session every now and again


----------



## magpie (Jan 3, 2009)

magpie said:


> If the coats are long then they need brushing at least every other day if not daily and my dog is no different, his fur is quite woolly when it's long, but the coats will only mat if they are not brushed.


I feel I should clarify, that when I talk about mats I'm thinking of a solid mass of hair that is tight to the body and difficult to even get a clipper blade through, not the knots & tangles any long haired dog will no doubt get at some point. When I worked in a vet practice we would regularly get very matted animals in that needed to be sedated to be shaved off, the fur often came off in one solid piece and it took hours. That's what I think of when I hear the word 'matted'!


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

QUOTE, *Burrowzig*:

_The recessive genes would also have to be at the same locus in order to pair up, and they aren't always. 
For instance, PRA in Labradors isn't at the same locus as PRA in Border Collies._
______________________________________
.

Then, theoretically, if a Lab [who is a PRA-carrier / unaffected] & a BC [also a carrier / unaffected] would produce a litter, 
* some pups could be carriers at the *BC* locus, 
* some could be carriers at the *Lab* locus,
* some could be carriers at *BOTH* loci, & ... last but not least,
* some could be clear at both loci.

So if we assume the test for each locus is breed-specific [it may not be], that litter would need 2 tests - the *BC test *for PRA, *& *the *Lab test* for PRA -- in order to determine carriers / clear re both parental breeds.
Without KNOWING the carrier / clear status of each pup, a back-cross to either of the parental breeds [F1 BC x Lab mated to a Lab, or F1 BC x Lab mated to a BC], affected pups could result.

Very, very interesting, @Burrowzig ! - thanks for that genetic tidbit. 
Another example of the possible complications of what, from the viewpoint of a pet-owner, would be a simple cross-breed.

- terry

.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

Jamesgoeswalkies said:


> Oh yes they do. They may not shed as much and for this reason they are useful for those will allergies but they do shed dead hair which gets bound in their tight curls and then you can brush it out - so it doesn't fall, but they do shed. Thus the need for regular grooming at the salon.They also of course collect dander.
> 
> J


I am very happy to have dogs that put NO hair on the floor or clothes or furniture. And 9 times out of 10 nothing in the brush or comb, occasionally I have to pull a bit of hair out particularly if I have not brushed them for a while just as I do with my own hair brush. Rather different from dogs that coat everything with hair and leave a dog sized pile after being groomed. If you want to nit pick then of course they moult just as humans do but they do not shed their hair. And mine are clipped at home, not because they shed dead hair but because their hair grows rather than falling out so it gets longer and longer if left till it reaches the ground.



lullabydream said:


> Absolutely this...
> 
> It's not just the designer breeds that get matted...many dogs coats get matted. Like I stated earlier shih Tzu coats are not the easiest coat to care for...it matts and cob webs due to no fault of the owner at time....
> 
> ...


I was judging at a local dog show and was horrified to feel an immaculate looking sheltie belonging to a local breeder that was just one solid matt beneath the brushed surface coat.



magpie said:


> I feel I should clarify, that when I talk about mats I'm thinking of a solid mass of hair that is tight to the body and difficult to even get a clipper blade through, not the knots & tangles any long haired dog will no doubt get at some point. When I worked in a vet practice we would regularly get very matted animals in that needed to be sedated to be shaved off, the fur often came off in one solid piece and it took hours. That's what I think of when I hear the word 'matted'!


That is matting, did many a dematt when I worked for a vet, tbf more cats than dogs back then.


----------



## kirksandallchins (Nov 3, 2007)

The major problem with most loncoated breeds (and their crosses) is that the show ring has bred for more and more profuse coats. Some people may think an Afghan or Spaniel with loads of hair looks glamorous but it not practical for most people, and defnately a hindrance in a working dog.

If you look at early Cocker Spaniels they had less coat than now, but to me looked just as smart if not more so. Some modern Cocker owners can't cope with the coats and have them cut so short they look smooth coated.


----------



## SpicyBulldog (Jun 30, 2012)

mrs phas said:


> The only crossbreeding I would support is for health reasons
> For example maybe a serious team effort in improving the lives of pugs, frenchies, Boston's et al
> Or
> With mastiff breeds, no more melting neos, English mastiffs that can run for miles, bull mastiff weight and breathing problems (pretty much like frenchies just bigger) breeding boxers whose hearts don't explode
> Those sort of x breedings are important, breeding for cuteness and money are just, IMHO, immoral


I definitely support responsible cross / mix breeding, including outcross projects. It has been successful with Dalmatians and some people are working on Doberman, but getting parent clubs and kennels clubs behind such things can be difficult even when done responsibly and trying to save a breed by reducing serious health issues and lack of diversity.



Goblin said:


> There was a study done a while back (2013 Prevalence of inherited disorders among mixed-breed and purebred dogs) and maybe you can explain the following..
> The incidence of 10 genetic disorders (42%) was significantly greater in purebred dogs.
> The incidence of 1 disorder (ruptured cranial cruciate ligament; 4%) was greater in mixed breed dogs.
> For the rest of the disorders examined (16 disorders), they found no difference in incidence between mixed and purebred dogs or they failed to find a statistically significant difference,
> That first one means that health cannot be simply dismissed as a myth. There's a reason genetic diversity is encouraged. This is only a limited selection of possible genetic disorders of course and yes, does depend on breeds concerned. My point is not to dismiss the health aspect in general pretending it's a myth as that only makes it appear you are defending pedigrees dismissing the evidence. One of the most damaging things about Pedigree Dogs Exposed was the obvious denial that the problems existed. As a result people switched off listening to those in denial and, more damaging those associated with them. Far better to qualify your point as not necessarily healthier which anyone concerned with pet health can agree with.


Less than half the diseases had a greater prevalence in pure breds. Genetic diversity helps combat some issues, that's true enough, but for some issues it doesn't matter. A true mutt with a highly diverse background is probably going to be generally healthier and less likely to have certain diseases, designer dogs however are cross breeds and all too often people are commonly crossing breeds that have the same diseases, the puppy mills and byb are not health testing so when crossing the breeds there isn't going to be less likelihood of those specific diseases found in both breeds. Inbreeding is often associated with lower fertility, higher puppy mortality rates, higher cancer rates and mutts can get cancer too but clearly certain breeds are prone to certain types highly likely to have it vs a different breed or a cross breed, shorter lifespan, immune issues all these things can be seen in some breeds as diversity is reduced and crossing can be a quick fix for that, but again specific genetic diseases found in both parent breeds are still very possible. I also think a lot more research needs to be done into designer dogs to come to any conclusions on them, very few health test so not much data is available.



Blitz said:


> That is interesting and of course the 10 genetic disorders that are reduced by careful crossing are recessive genes which need both parents to be carrying the gene. If you cross 2 breeds which can carry the same recessive gene then you are gaining nothing but if one of the breeds do not suffer with the condition then it will not be passed on. At the same time if breeders of pure breeds were more careful then 2 dogs both carrying the same gene would not be bred in the first place.


All I can say is spot on!



Burrowzig said:


> The recessive genes would also have to be at the same locus in order to pair up, and they aren't always. For instance PRA in Labradors isn't at the same locus as PRA in Border Collies.


Even if they are at the same locus if it is a different mutation having both wouldn't cause an issue if a true autosomal recessive.

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't PRA found in Border Collie's a sex linked mutation? So breeding Lab male that carries PRA and Border Collie bitch carrying PRA, puppies wouldn't be affected by PRA found in Labs (only carriers), but some males could inherit PRA mutation from mom and being males are hemizygous they would be affected, the females would need 2 copies and be unaffected.

What I more commonly see is is breeds that carry the same type bred together with no health testing, Lab x Golden, Lab x Poodle, Golden x Poodle, Yorkie x Poodle, Cocker x Poodle



leashedForLife said:


> Then, theoretically, if a Lab [who is a PRA-carrier / unaffected] & a BC [also a carrier / unaffected] would produce a litter,
> * some pups could be carriers at the BC locus,
> * some could be carriers at the Lab locus,
> * some could be carriers at BOTH loci, & ... last but not least,
> ...


If the Border Collie is a known carrier it seems unethical to breed her due to the risk of producing affected puppies.

As far as I know there isn't a test. Steer clear of females that are known to produce it or be carriers (sired by male with PRA) or possible carriers (brothers with PRA) and don't breed until at least age 3 after eye exam and recertify annually.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

.

test for Border Collie type PRA -
https://www.genomia.cz/en/test/pra-rcd2

test for PRA in Labrador Retrievers -
http://www.optigen.com/opt9_test_prcd_pra.html

.


----------



## SpicyBulldog (Jun 30, 2012)

leashedForLife said:


> .
> 
> test for Border Collie type PRA -
> https://www.genomia.cz/en/test/pra-rcd2
> ...


I said *Border* Collie as that was the breed we are discussing, not Collie there is test for Collies and never implied otherwise.
From the very link you posted

_In Border Collies, there is assumed existence of a gene responsible for X-bound form of PRA, so-called XLPRA3, for which the molecular genetic basis is not know at this time (Vilboux et al. 2008)._

Border Collies with PRA test clear for PRA found in Collies. So testing a BC for PRA RCD2 is pointless.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

.

I *SEARCHED FOR* Border Collie genetic tests - i am HORRIFIED to discover that i posted a link per "other Collies". 

in any case, there are a whopping great number of dog-breeds whose eye-issues lack DNA tests, even now.

http://www.animalabs.com/progressive-retinal-atrophy-pra-genetic-testing/

QUOTE,
_ "PRA shows several modes of transmission (autosomal recessive being most common, then autosomal dominant, & finally X-Linked) involving a large number of genes and mutations.
Each PRA disease generally occurs in only one or a few breeds, depending upon the associated mutations. PRA- Progressive rod-cone degeneration is a notable exception, affecting more than 20 breeds.
The first described case of PRA in dogs was in the early twentieth century; today, more than 100 breeds have had cases of retinal degeneration. *At least 22 mutations in 19 genes have been identified, associated with different forms of PRA, in over 50 breeds.* The mutations causing PRA in some dog breeds remain uncharacterized."_
______________________________________
.

HTH,
- terry

.


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

kirksandallchins said:


> The major problem with most loncoated breeds (and their crosses) is that the show ring has bred for more and more profuse coats. Some people may think an Afghan or Spaniel with loads of hair looks glamorous but it not practical for most people, and defnately a hindrance in a working dog.
> 
> If you look at early Cocker Spaniels they had less coat than now, but to me looked just as smart if not more so. Some modern Cocker owners can't cope with the coats and have them cut so short they look smooth coated.


Agree. If the people who originally developed the Cocker Spaniel saw the show version today, they'd be saying 'what the hell is that?'


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

SpicyBulldog said:


> Less than half the diseases had a greater prevalence in pure breds.


Still proven to be more in purebreeds however. The basic premise, as a generalisation, that crosses and mutts are more healthy is true, not a myth.


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

Goblin said:


> Still proven to be more in purebreeds however. The basic premise, as a generalisation, that crosses and mutts are more healthy is true, not a myth.


I would say it's more nuanced than that - purebred = unhealthy, mutt = more healthy. 
Sure, a true mutt is likely going to start morphing away from physical and temperamental extremes which generally helps the health aspect, but that's not what's happening with these designer breeds and crosses. 
You don't take a dysplastic doodle, cross it with another dysplastic doodle and magically get rid of the dysplasia. You get rid of the dysplasia by breeding dogs who are structurally sound and don't carry the genetic potential for joint issues. Whether those structurally and genetically sound dogs are crosses or purebreds is irrelevant as long as you're testing that entire line so you can see where things are cropping up in that pedigree. 
That's kind of the whole point of health testing, to have a record of what is and what is not present in those lines, and then if/when something does come up, you have the data to investigate and potentially identify carriers and eventually the genes. If everyone is just breeding whatever to whatever because "cross breeds are healthier" then you don't have any data and no way of actually doing something about all these genetic conditions.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

O2.0 said:


> I would say it's more nuanced than that - purebred = unhealthy, mutt = more healthy.


Yet that is not what people here are saying is it.



> That's kind of the whole point of health testing, to have a record of what is and what is not present in those lines, and then if/when something does come up, you have the data to investigate and potentially identify carriers and eventually the genes. If everyone is just breeding whatever to whatever because "cross breeds are healthier" then you don't have any data and no way of actually doing something about all these genetic conditions.


So tell me, what % of genetic diseases can be tested for? What physical deformities are tested for due to the fact breeder's like their look? How many new potential problems are going to develop due to limited gene pools? Health testing is good, it's useful as part of the toolbox. It's not the be all and end all many make it out to be. The idea it is, is just as faulty as saying designer breeds are automatically more healthy than purebreeds.


----------



## Julie Webb (Jul 15, 2018)

Excellent topic!
What I would like to add is that many people choose to have designer breed solely for the purpose of having the uniquest breed possible. For them it's just having the most unusual breed there is, but small number of those people is actually aware how to take care of such dogs. I think that the biggest example of this are so-called teacup dogs. Puppies of all kind are sweet , but let's face it, all of them grow up eventually, so why play with nature?
I have no doubts that there are people who are satisfied with their unique dogs, but for me *over 350 FCI and AKC recognized dog breeds* is really more than enough for everybody to find an adequate dog.


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

Julie Webb said:


> I have no doubts that there are people who are satisfied with their unique dogs, but for me *over 350 FCI and AKC recognized dog breeds* is really more than enough for everybody to find an adequate dog.


Is it permitted to not want a purebred dog? Some people actually like mutts and crossbreeds.


----------



## Julie Webb (Jul 15, 2018)

You took me wrong, or I didn't express myself well. What I said refers to those designer breeds, not mutts.
If nature likes to play itself creating new breeds/mutts, whatever you want to call it, that's fine, but my point is people shouldn't play too much, I believe some limits should be respected.
Just for the record, some of the dogs that I loved the most when I was kid were actually mutts!


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

Julie Webb said:


> You took me wrong, or I didn't express myself well. What I said refers to those designer breeds, not mutts.
> If nature likes to play itself creating new breeds/mutts, whatever you want to call it, that's fine, but my point is people shouldn't play too much, I believe some limits should be respected.
> Just for the record, some of the dogs that I loved the most when I was kid were actually mutts!


Nature has nothing to do with it, we are the ones responsible for what's happening to dogs. Agree wholeheartedly that we shouldn't 'play' too much with creating ever more weird and exotic looking dogs, not that that is so much a crossbreeding issue, it's largely confined to the pedigree world... not to say all pure breeds are disasters and all crossbreeds are better off of course, I mean people are breeding 'Frugs' ffs.


----------



## Julie Webb (Jul 15, 2018)

picaresque said:


> Nature has nothing to do with it, we are the ones responsible for what's happening to dogs.


This is totally true, and I am sorry to say that where I live you have so many stray dogs that it's impossible to count them, and like you said, it's people who are responsible for that! Each and every one of them could be someone's pet, and it's not only that, but all the potential problems that may occur, both to dogs and other people, particularly kids. But commenting more on stray dogs would get me off topic, I assume.


----------



## SpicyBulldog (Jun 30, 2012)

Goblin said:


> Still proven to be more in purebreeds however. The basic premise, as a generalisation, that crosses and mutts are more healthy is true, not a myth.


I don't believe these designer crosses are healthier. It also does nothing for individuals even if it is true overall. "Mutts are healthier than pure breds" really did nothing to help the designer dog I know with hypothyroidism and luxating patella nor does it cause my pure breds to be unhealthy. So even if we're speaking statistically pure breeds have a higher incidence of genetic diseases there are obviously going to be mixes that fall into the unhealthy category and pure breeds that are healthy. As well designer dogs and true mutts are different, as I said before people often cross breeds that share the same diseases. That isn't always the case but popular designer dog crosses often are, so it doesn't reduce the likelihood of the offspring having such diseases. If you have a general idea of the allele frequency in each breed you can calculate the likelihood of the parents being carriers and producing affected offspring. Even some of these multi breed creations are seem like a health nightmare Frenchie/StaffyBull/English Bulldog just as one example.

Mutt and pure breds are also two broad classes so it's not that simple. 
Random bred mutt more likely to be healthier than many pure breds 
Designer cross probably not in many cases
Designer breeders need to health test and keep data and actually prove their crosses are healthier than pure breds or at least the parent breeds.


----------



## SpicyBulldog (Jun 30, 2012)

leashedForLife said:


> .
> 
> I *SEARCHED FOR* Border Collie genetic tests - i am HORRIFIED to discover that i posted a link per "other Collies".
> 
> ...


When searching it can often give results that are not correct, it happens, but always best to vet any info.

Here are eye diseases with test available, there is possibly more and I probably need to update and more breeds might also need tested than what's listed. I'd love to have a counterpart list of the diseases without test available?

*some diseases might have different names with different labs or when researching, sometimes they are alreadyi renamed or have more than one name.

Recessive

Achromatopsia GSD 
German Shepherd Dog

Achromatopsia (type 2)
Australian Cobberdog and Labrador Retriever

Basenji type 1 PRA 
Basenji

Cone Degeneration 
Alaskan Malamute and Australian Shepherd

Cone Degeneration
German Shorthaired Pointer

Congenital Stationary Night Blindness
Briard

Canine multi focal retinopathy (type 1)
American Bulldog, American Bully, American Working Red, Australian Shepherd, Boerboel, Brazilian Terrier, Bullmastiff, Cane Corso, Dogue de Bordeaux, English Mastiff, Finnish Lapphund, Great Pyrenees, Presa Canario and Working Pit Bulldog.

Canine multi focal retinopathy (type 2)
Coton de Tulear

Canine multi focal retinopathy (type 3)
Finnish Lapphund and Lapponian Herder

Collie Eye Anomaly / Choroidal Hypoplasia
Australian Shepherd, Beared Collie, Berger d'Auvergne, Border Collie, Boykin Spaniel, Collie, English Shepherd, Farm Collie, Hokkaido dog, Lancashire Heeler, Mini American Shepherd, Nova Scotia Duck Tolling Retriever, Shetland Sheepdog, Silken Windhound and Whippet.

Cone Rod Dystrophy type 1
American Bully, American Staffordshire Terrier and Working Pit Bulldog

Cone Rod Dystrophy type 2
American Bully, American Pit Bull Terrier, American Working Red and Working Pit Bulldog

Cone Rod Dystrophy type 3
Glen of Imaal Terrier

Cone Rod Dystrophy type 4
American Bully, American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, American Working Red, Australian Cobberdog, Beagle, Boykin Spaniel, Carlin Pinscher, Chihuahua, Dachshund, English Springer Spaniel, Field Spaniel, French Bulldog, Labrador Retriever, Portuguese Podengo Pequeno, Shorty Bull and Working Pit Bulldog

Cone Rod Dystrophy Cord1 
Beagle, Chihuahua, Curly Coated Retriever, Dachshund, English Springer Spaniel,
Field Spaniel, Papillon and Pug

Day blindness / retinal dysplasia / achromatopsia
Standard Poodle

Early Onset PRA 
Portuguese Water Dog

Golden retriever PRA type 1 
Golden Retriever

Golden retriever PRA type 2
Golden Retriever

Hereditary Cataracts type 1 
American Bully, Boston Terrier, French Bulldog, Shorty Bull and Staffordshire Bull Terrier.

Hereditary Cataracts type 2
Australian Shepherd and Miniature American Shepherd

Italian Greyhound PRA (possible incomplete dominance or 2nd type with unknown mutation) 
Italian Greyhound

Macular Corneal Dystrophy 
Labrador retriever

Mini Schnauzer type A PRA 
Miniature Schnauzer

Mini Schnauzer type B PRA 
Miniature Schnauzer

Oculoskeletal Dysplasia 
Labrador retriever and Samoyed

Papillon PRA
Papillon and Phalene

Primary Lense Luxation 
American Eskimo Dog, American Hairless Terrier, Australian Cattle Dog, Chinese Crested, Chinese Foo Dog, Jack Russell Terrier, Jagd Terrier, Lakeland Terrier, Lucas Terrier, Lancashire Heeler, Miniature Bull Terrier, Norwich Terrier, Parson Russell Terrier, Patterdale Terrier, Rat Terrier, Russell Terrier, Sealyham Terrier, Teddy Roosevelt Terrier, Tenterfield Terrier, Tibetan Terrier, Toy Fox Terrier, Volpino Italiano, Welsh Terrier, Wire-haired Fox Terrier and Yorkshire Terrier.

Primary Open Angle Glaucoma B
Beagle

Primary Open Angle Glaucoma NE
Norwegian Elkhound

Primary Open Angle Glaucoma 
Petit Basset Griffon Vendeen

Progressive Retinal Atrophy type 3 (PRA)
Tibetan Terrier and Tibetan Spaniel

Progressive rod-cone degeneration (PRA)
American Eskimo Dog, American Hairless Terrier, Australian Cattle Dog, Australian Cobberdog, Australian Shepherd, Australian Stumpy Tail Cattle Dog, Barbet, Black Russian Terrier, Bolognese, Bolonka Zwetna, Chesapeake Bay Retriever, Chinese Crested, Chihuahua, Cocker x poodle, Cocker Spaniel, Coton de Tulear, Dwarf Poodle, English Shepherd, Entlebucher Mountain Dog, Field Spaniel, Finnish Lapphund, German Spitz, Giant Schnauzer, Golden Retriever, Golden x Poodle, Jack Russell Terrier, Japanese Chin, Karelian Bear Dog, Kuvasz, Lab x Golden, Lab x Poodle, Labrador Retriever, Lagotto Romagnolo, Lancashire Heeler, Lapponian Herder, Manchester Terrier, Markiesje, Mi-Ki, Miniature & Toy Poodles, Miniature American Shepherd, Moyen Poodle, Norrbottenspitz, Norwegian Elkhound, Nova Scotia Duck Tolling Retriever, Plott Hound, Pomeranian, Portuguese Podengo Poqueno, Portuguese Water Dog, Puli, Russian-European Laika, Serbian Hound, Silky Terrier, Schipperke, Spanish Water Dog, Sprocker Spaniel, Standard Poodle, Swedish Jamthund, Swedish Lapphund, Tibetan Terrier, Xoloitzcuintle, Yorkshire Terrier and Yorkie x Poodle.

Rod Cone Dysplasia Type 1 (PRA)
Irish Setters and Irish Red & White Setters

Rod Cone Dysplasia type 1a (PRA)
Sloughi

Rod Cone Dysplasia Type 2 (PRA)
Collie

Rod Cone Dysplasia type 3 (PRA)
Cardigan Welsh Corgi, Chinese Crested and Pomeranian

Rod Cone Dysplasia type 4 (PRA) 
Australian Cattle Dog, Danish Pointing Dog, English / Llewellyn Setter, Gordon Setter, Irish Setter, Irish Red & White Setter, Japanese Spitz, Miniature Poodle, Polish Lowland Sheepdog, Tibetan Terrier, Small Munsterlander and Standard Poodle.

Shetland Sheepdog PRA
Shetland Sheepdog

White Doberman Pinscher Oculocutaneous Albinism
Doberman

Dominant PRA 
Bullmastiff and English Mastiff

Sex linked PRA type 1
Samoyed and Siberian Husky

Sex linked PRA type 2
Miniature Schnauzer


----------



## Jamesgoeswalkies (May 8, 2014)

O2.0 said:


> If everyone is just breeding whatever to whatever because "cross breeds are healthier" then you don't have any data and no way of actually doing something about all these genetic conditions.


Which is a good point.

The old 'mutts are healthier' hardly really applies now because there are so few true mutts being bred. Most of our true mutts (or what we used to call mongrels) come via rescues and often from Romania or Cyprus. They are often street dogs and are certainly no healthier than their home bred counterparts. As a kid mongrels were commonplace, a litter of pups was advertised in the paper or by word of mouth and you went and got a puppy. You didn't ask it's breed or get a DNA test done. It was a mongrel bred from mongrels. Everyone had one. And as the gene pool for such dogs was so large they did tend to be healthier that their pedigree counterparts, who at that time before the understanding of health tests were being bred from a small pool of often carrier dogs.

But times have changed and health tests *are* giving us an understanding of how to improve the health of lines of dogs. However it would be completely counterproductive if we quoted the 'mutts are healthier' as a reason to breed an untested Cavalier with an untested Bichon. A 'Cavachon' is not a mutt. It's a cross of two not always healthy breeds.



Julie Webb said:


> I think that the biggest example of this are so-called teacup dogs.


I agree. This is another area of designer dogs that I find unpalatable. Tiny dogs bred from already small breeds have a high chance of health issues including bones that dislocate. There was mention on here recently of breeding a 'Shorkie' - and using a 'Toy' Yorkie.

J


----------



## Magyarmum (Apr 27, 2015)

SpicyBulldog said:


> When searching it can often give results that are not correct, it happens, but always best to vet any info.
> 
> Here are eye diseases with test available, there is possibly more and I probably need to update and more breeds might also need tested than what's listed*. I'd love to have a counterpart list of the diseases without test available?*
> 
> ...


I can give you one where there's no testing available ....

Entropion in Shar-Pei

http://wvc.vetstreet.com/entropion-in-shar-pei

Thankfully after 15 years of research, from February 2016 a test for SPAID has been available which should make a tremendous difference to the health of this wonderful breed. I've been fortunate in that neither of mine have suffered from any autoinflamaitory disease due I think to their being bred in Central/Eastern Europe where SPAID is quite rare.

https://www2.vet.cornell.edu/news/2...ng-new-test-shar-pei-autoinflammatory-disease


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

picaresque said:


> Is it permitted to not want a purebred dog? Some people actually like mutts and crossbreeds.


Some purebreed breed clubs deliberately do not want to be on registers like the KC or AKC for various reasons.



SpicyBulldog said:


> I don't believe these designer crosses are healthier. It also does nothing for individuals even if it is true overall.


Again show me where on this thread people have said all designer dogs are healthier.



Jamesgoeswalkies said:


> Health tests *are* giving us an understanding of how to improve the health of lines of dogs. However it would be completely counterproductive if we quoted the 'mutts are healthier' as a reason to breed an untested Cavalier with an untested Bichon. A 'Cavachon' is not a mutt. It's a cross of two not always healthy breeds.


So tell me.. what % of KC breeders do all possible tests? What will be the impact long term of reducing the possible genetic diversity due to removing variation as they failed a test?

There's a reason why the people who collect most data on dog breeds and their health, insurance companies, have pedigree dogs as more expensive to insure. It's from raw data about costs for health. Of course it would be great if the "breeder" and if they were good rather than a BYB were taken into account. Then there may be a slight shift.


----------



## Peggypegs (Jul 16, 2018)

I personally think what breeds are popular today is driven by fads and modern lifestyle. People want smaller, lazier dogs beause they have smaller houses and work long hours but still want a dog. Combined with people wanting to do as little grooming as possible while keeping the cute puppy look forever, they choose pugs, frechies, bulldogs and poodle crosses. You only have to see the number of people that don’t groom their poodle cross thinking that no shed means no brush.
You only have to see what celebrities to see what people will be influenced however unconsciously to also get. All social media is covered in adds and images full of these types of dogs so of course the general public is going to buy into the product forgetting not every dog will actually suit them. Combined with the ease of getting one quickly from all those free add sites feeds into the want it now culture that we live in.
On the other point of breeding for health I do now think the majority of kennel clubs just don’t do enough to ensure health. You only have to go on the hard to find list of all tests available for all breeds and see there are many more then advised by the KC. I think it should now be that to be registered the tests they reconend should have been carried out to an acceptable score; this would give puppy buyers the confidence their puppy has met a better standard then one that isn’t.
I do also think breeds stud books should be reopened to give breeders the chance to outcross without the threat of being excommunicated and told they don’t love their breed. This could give so many smaller breeds a chance to continue into the future. Eg field spaniels using cockers with good results to help improve scores or bring much needed new blood. So many breeds are just too small to maintain yet have many closely related breeds that would add much needed diversity without loosing too much of that presious type. You can’t improve a breeds health within a closed gene pool if all the individuals are sub par to begin with.


----------



## Jamesgoeswalkies (May 8, 2014)

Goblin said:


> There's a reason why the people who collect most data on dog breeds and their health, insurance companies, have pedigree dogs as more expensive to insure. It's from raw data about costs for health.


The cynical in me might also say Insurance Companies charge more for pure bred dogs because they can. If you have paid out for a pedigree dog and maybe hope to show (or breed) then paying out high insurance cover is considered part of the cost. Many folk who buy a cross-bred mongrel on line would probably not feel inclined to pay so much. Insurance companies know this.

I'm afraid I feel the blanket idea that 'mutts are healthier' is something out of the past and may not hold true today.

Pedigree Dogs as Healthy as Mongrels, say Vets - Telegraph

J


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

Peggypegs said:


> I personally think what breeds are popular today is driven by fads and modern lifestyle. People want smaller, lazier dogs beause they have smaller houses and work long hours but still want a dog. Combined with people wanting to do as little grooming as possible while keeping the cute puppy look forever, they choose pugs, frechies, bulldogs and poodle crosses. You only have to see the number of people that don't groom their poodle cross thinking that no shed means no brush.
> You only have to see what celebrities to see what people will be influenced however unconsciously to also get. All social media is covered in adds and images full of these types of dogs so of course the general public is going to buy into the product forgetting not every dog will actually suit them. Combined with the ease of getting one quickly from all those free add sites feeds into the want it now culture that we live in.
> On the other point of breeding for health I do now think the majority of kennel clubs just don't do enough to ensure health. You only have to go on the hard to find list of all tests available for all breeds and see there are many more then advised by the KC. I think it should now be that to be registered the tests they reconend should have been carried out to an acceptable score; this would give puppy buyers the confidence their puppy has met a better standard then one that isn't.
> I do also think breeds stud books should be reopened to give breeders the chance to outcross without the threat of being excommunicated and told they don't love their breed. This could give so many smaller breeds a chance to continue into the future. Eg field spaniels using cockers with good results to help improve scores or bring much needed new blood. So many breeds are just too small to maintain yet have many closely related breeds that would add much needed diversity without loosing too much of that presious type. You can't improve a breeds health within a closed gene pool if all the individuals are sub par to begin with.


I like your post, but just want to pick up on one point (and I think it's something that is long overdue for a change) is that the KC is driven by the breed clubs not the other way round. It's the breed clubs that decide which tests are mandatory or advisable. Also any changes that the KC decide to make seem to take forever.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Peggypegs said:


> I personally think what breeds are popular today is driven by fads and modern lifestyle. People want smaller, lazier dogs beause they have smaller houses and work long hours but still want a dog. Combined with people wanting to do as little grooming as possible while keeping the cute puppy look forever, they choose pugs, frechies, bulldogs and poodle crosses. You only have to see the number of people that don't groom their poodle cross thinking that no shed means no brush.
> You only have to see what celebrities to see what people will be influenced however unconsciously to also get. All social media is covered in adds and images full of these types of dogs so of course the general public is going to buy into the product forgetting not every dog will actually suit them. Combined with the ease of getting one quickly from all those free add sites feeds into the want it now culture that we live in.
> On the other point of breeding for health I do now think the majority of kennel clubs just don't do enough to ensure health. You only have to go on the hard to find list of all tests available for all breeds and see there are many more then advised by the KC. I think it should now be that to be registered the tests they reconend should have been carried out to an acceptable score; this would give puppy buyers the confidence their puppy has met a better standard then one that isn't.
> I do also think breeds stud books should be reopened to give breeders the chance to outcross without the threat of being excommunicated and told they don't love their breed. This could give so many smaller breeds a chance to continue into the future. Eg field spaniels using cockers with good results to help improve scores or bring much needed new blood. So many breeds are just too small to maintain yet have many closely related breeds that would add much needed diversity without loosing too much of that presious type. You can't improve a breeds health within a closed gene pool if all the individuals are sub par to begin with.


Yep, agree with all of this.......

I'd like a system like they have in other countries where the puppies can only be registered if BOTH parents have the minimum recommended health tests.

Also agree with outcrossing provided it's done properly via the proper channels. Some breeds are dying a death, literally, due to lack of genetic diversity. And I don't just mean the usual 'rare' breeds, either. Give it 10 years when we see the full impact of this French Bulldog insanity......


----------



## Peggypegs (Jul 16, 2018)

Siskin said:


> I like your post, but just want to pick up on one point (and I think it's something that is long overdue for a change) is that the KC is driven by the breed clubs not the other way round. It's the breed clubs that decide which tests are mandatory or advisable. Also any changes that the KC decide to make seem to take forever.


I know, always thought it strange the KC can't dictate the health standard of dogs registered when it's the ones who hold the registery, but then again the dog world is still full of people who value tradition and absolute purity over the long term future of the breeds they claim to love.


----------



## Peggypegs (Jul 16, 2018)

labradrk said:


> Yep, agree with all of this.......
> 
> I'd like a system like they have in other countries where the puppies can only be registered if BOTH parents have the minimum recommended health tests.
> 
> Also agree with outcrossing provided it's done properly via the proper channels. Some breeds are dying a death, literally, due to lack of genetic diversity. And I don't just mean the usual 'rare' breeds, either. Give it 10 years when we see the full impact of this French Bulldog insanity......


I grew up with Dalmatians and while they never had major problems with uric acid, it's seen as just a quirk of the breed. I hate that the breed clubs are so strongly against the LUA Dalmatians they know their dogs would fail the test for high uric acid and puppy buyers wouldn't want a dog from parents that failed. I do think the outcross could do with being repeated as there aren't enough LUA Dalmatians to make a massive impact to the breed and they are all closely related thus leading to a bottle neck if they spread through the whole gene pool.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Jamesgoeswalkies said:


> I'm afraid I feel the blanket idea that 'mutts are healthier' is something out of the past and may not hold true today.
> 
> Pedigree Dogs as Healthy as Mongrels, say Vets - Telegraph
> 
> J


2014.. today? The study I referenced was quoted by some in the pedigree world as a demonstration that pedigrees were actually healthier despite it showing the opposite as they are in total denial. Even your link


> The latest research, published in the journal Plos One, evaluated a total of 84 health conditions and in 13 instances, pedigrees did show significantly higher prevalence. There were no cases where crossbreeds suffered in greater proportions


Hardly matches the title of the article does it.

It's time people stopped concentrating of* health as a marketing device*. Health is important and I'm not saying we should not concentrate on the well being of the dogs themselves, simply stop using it for marketing. For new owners the priority is we need to ensure they do their research. To do so, people cannot dismiss realities as myths if they want to be taken seriously on other points.


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

Peggypegs said:


> I personally think what breeds are popular today is driven by fads and modern lifestyle. People want smaller, lazier dogs beause they have smaller houses and work long hours but still want a dog.


I remember reading something somewhere about how people today want dogs that act like cats and cats that act like dogs. Think there's some truth in it.


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

Goblin said:


> So tell me, what % of genetic diseases can be tested for?


I don't know this figure, do you? I'd be interested to know.



Goblin said:


> Health testing is good, it's useful as part of the toolbox. It's not the be all and end all many make it out to be.


I did not mean to convey that health testing is the be all and end all, and if that's what you got from my post I obviously did not express myself clearly. 
What I meant to convey is that it is not the mixing of breeds that creates healthy dogs, but the breeding of any breed - purebred or cross, with purpose. Knowing what is in those lines, keeping data on what develops in those lines, and purposefully breeding from the healthiest dogs with the soundest temperaments. 
Simply crossing two breeds doesn't create health, but purposefully breeding two dogs who compliment each other, who come from long lines of healthy stock without hidden issues in the lines (that you know because you are keeping up with that pedigree) does.

Not only that, but keeping track of what is in each pedigree also gives us a leg up when it comes to the issues we don't yet have tests for. This is how the gene for bloat is slowly being unearthed in great danes. Responsible breeders and owners participating in studies and research related to bloat and able to provide researchers genetic information far back in the line of the dog who bloated. Eventually there will be a genetic test for bloat because of the efforts of those who are breeding with purpose.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

O2.0 said:


> I don't know this figure, do you? I'd be interested to know.


You may find http://www.instituteofcaninebiology.org/blog/what-does-health-tested-really-mean an interesting read. It lists the figure for German Shepherds at 14%, Boxers at 6%.

The article also points out that health testing is a:


> game of genetic whack-a-mole could potentially go on forever.





> I did not mean to convey that health testing is the be all and end all, and if that's what you got from my post I obviously did not express myself clearly.


Wasn't necessarily your post. It's just I constantly see health testing being used as marketing just as much as the idea of crossbreeds are healthier is used for the same purpose. Both are wrong, neither means a dog is healthy. Both however have some basis in fact so neither should simply be dismissed and called a myth or false. We need to deal with the reality and "market" the limitations and problems in general. If we are going to educate, we also need to be honest, with ourselves and with those who need to be informed.


----------



## Magyarmum (Apr 27, 2015)

labradrk said:


> Yep, agree with all of this.......
> 
> I'd like a system like they have in other countries where the puppies can only be registered if BOTH parents have the minimum recommended health tests.
> 
> Also agree with outcrossing provided it's done properly via the proper channels. Some breeds are dying a death, literally, due to lack of genetic diversity. And I don't just mean the usual 'rare' breeds, either. Give it 10 years when we see the full impact of this French Bulldog insanity......


I can only speak for Shar-Pei, but my vet was telling me that in Hungary if a vet treats a puppy/young dog who has all the symptoms of one of the autoinflammatory diseases associated with SPAID it's reported to Animal Health and Welfare who have the authority to order the breeder to remove the carriers from their breeding programme.

I know of one breeder in the US who has introduced a Traditional Bone Mouth Shar-Pei imported from I think it was Finland into their breeding programme (Unfortunately I can't for the life of me remember her name) The benefit of doing so is that the Bone Mouth doesn't have the same genetic make up which predisposes the meat mouth to SPAID. Hopefully more breeders will follow suit and together with the DNA test Shar-Pei will become a much healthier breed, albeit with considerably fewer wrinkles.

An interesting article from Pedigree Dogs Exposed (2011)

http://pedigreedogsexposed.blogspot.com/2011/04/sharpei-will-wrinkles-have-to-go.html


----------



## Gemma Charles (Aug 6, 2018)

People have been tampering with dogs for literally millennia, and in every corner of the world. Some of the recognised breeds today are in my opinion cruel. I have seen dog breeds that can't breath too well, breeds with inner eyelids that hang down and point outwards. breeds who eyes constantly weep, breeds who skin flaps are so extreme that they cause sores and infections, breeds that produce dogs that can barely walk. etc. etc. When first introduced, most new breeds are snubbed unless they are produced by lord or lady such and such. 

Every breed that is viewed as "established" today, was a new breed at some point. Furthermore, when we look at the "older" breeds in pictures, even as late as the 1930 we see that even they have changed a great deal from what they were 60 or so years ago.

Personally my favourite bread is the Westie, however I am pleased for any bread new or old that meets the needs of dog-kind first and then the needs of the would-be owner.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

.

I like the whole package of bone-mouth Shar-Pei - not only better airways, but less aural stenosis (wider ear canal, important for air circulation & fewer ear infections). Plus they tend to have IMO & IME better temps - cool but tolerant of strangers, & some are downright affable.
They also *seem* to have fewer skin issues, but as I base this on dogs I've known or 2nd-hand info from other trainers & owners, I cannot quantify it... it's merely an impression. 

- terry

.


----------



## Moo Dog (Jun 5, 2018)

Sorry if somebody already pointed this out...

In my country, and my particular breed set, there is a hybrid called the "Texas Heeler," a Border Collie x Australian Cattle Dog. Now I don't know who woke up one morning, said to themselves, "today I think I will cross a BC and Heeler." But here they are. On it's face, it seems like a terrible idea... Only bested by crossing a Cattle Dog with a Malinois.

Really, I have no idea why or for what anyone would want such drivey (and potentially neurotic) dogs for.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

.

Wow, @Moo Dog - 
what country is home, for U? // I bet there will be a glut of these hard-headed, nippy, pushy dogs in shelters there, very soon if not currently! 
If many of this BC x ACD mix inherit the ACD's strong tendency to stranger-suspicion or even stranger-intolerance, meaning "bite when touched w/o permission", the fad will be self-limiting in a relatively brief time, LOL.

 Humans are never content with "what is" -- they always want MORE. More speed, more style, more intensity, more sumthin'.

- terry

.


----------



## Moo Dog (Jun 5, 2018)

@leashedForLife - I mentioned Texas Heelers, US.

Broad brush comments about Heelers, not cool. The only Heelers grumpy about people they don't know are owned by irresponsible people who don't socialize their dogs. I admit my Red has a general bad attitude, but he goes bonkers for anyone new coming up to the house. He's been known to thoroughly inspect mail, UPS and FedEx trucks.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

.

I'm not sure why observing that ACDs are typically not "hail, fellow, well-met!" party animals would be insulting, @Moo Dog - I mean, they're not Labs, galloping over to all & sundry so as to knock 'em down cheerfully & slobber 'em to death, after all.
Everyone knows multiple Labs, where the breed is common, who will drag their beloved owner into traffic in order to get up close & personal with a total stranger who smiled at the dog, from across the street. // That's a generalization, too - & while there are Labs who will, with equal cheer, bite an innocent stranger who hasn't provoked the dog in any way, the gallumphing greeters are so common, they are a cliche'.

Cautious, stand-offish ACDs are - IMdirectE - just as common among ACDs as lick-happy social butterflies are, among Labs. One is no more insulting than the other, IMO, any more than observing that Chis are often lap-piranhas.

Frankly stranger-intolerant ACDs are less common than the "let me think about it..." type, but they're hardly rare.

This is among my all-time fave teaching videos, & it features what I consider to be the classic ACD reaction to encountering a stranger - it's excellent b/c the trainer's timing is spot on, & the dog interacts with the muzzle eagerly... while she continues to give the stranger with the clicker the hairy eyeball, LOL.

Desensitization to a Basket Muzzle, posted 2011 by Karendala1138

It's a potent example of how clear & highly motivating reward-based training truly is, when despite her misgivings, the dog obviously not only understands what is being rewarded, but eagerly engages with the object to get the reward.
She's not by any means a nasty dog - merely cautious, which given her breed, & the work they were developed to perform, is, again IMO & IME, perfectly acceptable.

-terry

.


----------



## SpicyBulldog (Jun 30, 2012)

Moo Dog said:


> Sorry if somebody already pointed this out...
> 
> In my country, and my particular breed set, there is a hybrid called the "Texas Heeler," a Border Collie x Australian Cattle Dog. Now I don't know who woke up one morning, said to themselves, "today I think I will cross a BC and Heeler." But here they are. On it's face, it seems like a terrible idea... Only bested by crossing a Cattle Dog with a Malinois.
> 
> Really, I have no idea why or for what anyone would want such drivey (and potentially neurotic) dogs for.


Probably somebody working Cattle. I'm not really seeing the downside. This cross has been around for some time. Lots of people have use for drivey dogs. I have seen BC move sheep and it's amazing to watch them work. I've also seen ACD and ACD x BC and other crosses move cattle. It wasn't as if a single person made the cross. Working farm dogs are at times cross bred. The dogs are used on ranches and moving cattle over distances.


----------



## Torin. (May 18, 2014)

Texas heelers can be either
Australian cattle dog x border collie
or
Australian cattle dog x Australian shepherd

I'm not sure of behavioural differences between the two types, or if they are even are distinct types (as @SpicyBulldog says to my knowledge most people have them as working cattle and droving dogs than as pets). All dogs though, so not a hybrid.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

QUOTE, "Torin:

....
All [their ancestors are] dogs though, so [ACD x Aus-Shep or ACD x BC mixes are] not hybrids.
_______________________________
.

Genetically speaking, they are in fact, hybrids - the 1st generation cross of any deliberately-sequestered parental lines, such as seed corn strains, cantaloupes, wheat, up to & including any mammal, is a hybrid.
It's not a STERILE hybrid such as a mule (horse x donkey), but like hybrid veg, fruit, or grain, U can't breed any F1 hybrid & get predictable fixed traits - F1 x F1 is especially random outcomes.

It is a technical term, but it is correct usage. 

- terry

.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

Goblin said:


> Some purebreed breed clubs deliberately do not want to be on registers like the KC or AKC for various reasons.
> 
> Again show me where on this thread people have said all designer dogs are healthier.
> 
> ...


Yes, the insurance companies use their data to decide which breeds are most at risk but do you think many real crossbreed owners actually insure plus the number of dogs that would be classified by their owners as cross breeds rather than a designer breed will be small compared with numbers of each pure breed. So fairly slanted data.


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

SpicyBulldog said:


> Probably somebody working Cattle. I'm not really seeing the downside. This cross has been around for some time. Lots of people have use for drivey dogs. I have seen BC move sheep and it's amazing to watch them work. I've also seen ACD and ACD x BC and other crosses move cattle. It wasn't as if a single person made the cross. Working farm dogs are at times cross bred. The dogs are used on ranches and moving cattle over distances.


This. You can get a really nice working dog crossing heelers (ACDs) and headers (BCs). This refers to the default way the dog likes to herd, by nipping heels - hence heelers, or facing the stock - hence headers. Obviously all herding dogs do both, but what they default to is very much genetic, so getting a good combination of the styles makes for a very versatile and therefore effective herding dog.

I absolutely LOVE watching ACDs work. They're amazing, and have seen some fantastically cool dogs come out of ACD crosses. No, not a dog for everyone, but really nice, drivey, great dogs. Skidboot was an ACD and an incredible ambassador to the breed. This idea that they're bitey, stranger aggressive, problem dogs is about as accurate as saying all BCs are going to nip your kids. The reality is that they're a popular breed for a reason. They're great dogs.

I don't see why "drive" is considered a bad thing. A lot of people want exactly that in their dogs.


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

leashedForLife said:


> .
> Humans are never content with "what is" -- they always want MORE. More speed, more style, more intensity, more sumthin'.
> 
> - terry
> ...


I think we do it simply because we can .  Now that scientists can mess about with our human DNA goodness knows what we will end up like !


----------



## SpicyBulldog (Jun 30, 2012)

O2.0 said:


> This. You can get a really nice working dog crossing heelers (ACDs) and headers (BCs). This refers to the default way the dog likes to herd, by nipping heels - hence heelers, or facing the stock - hence headers. Obviously all herding dogs do both, but what they default to is very much genetic, so getting a good combination of the styles makes for a very versatile and therefore effective herding dog.
> 
> I absolutely LOVE watching ACDs work. They're amazing, and have seen some fantastically cool dogs come out of ACD crosses. No, not a dog for everyone, but really nice, drivey, great dogs. Skidboot was an ACD and an incredible ambassador to the breed. This idea that they're bitey, stranger aggressive, problem dogs is about as accurate as saying all BCs are going to nip your kids. The reality is that they're a popular breed for a reason. They're great dogs.
> 
> I don't see why "drive" is considered a bad thing. A lot of people want exactly that in their dogs.


A dog without drive to me is not a dog Im keen on. Of course there are various drives and it depends what job you need done. I can understand some pet owners not wanting high energy, high drive dog, but for a working dogs drives are necessary.


----------



## Cpoofitz (Aug 9, 2018)

Sandor Fagyal said:


> *Hybrid breeds, designer breeds or simply mutts?*
> 
> Over the past couple of years there is an every increasing popularity of mixing all sorts of breeds with one another. I cannot see the deeper benefits and purpose to it? There are already over 350 FCI and AKC recognized dog breeds (called purebreds). Why would we need more of these?
> 
> ...


DOGS in the wild would never breed to KC breed standards. The weak dogs would die and not be able to spread genetic defects to their off spring. Designer dogs like pugs., French bulldogs, cavaliers, GSds etc etc all have Huge health issues and suffer because of it. . . I have had cavapoos and Cavaliers for many years and I certainly know which will cost me less at the vets and less heart ache with genetically inherited diseases and which will live the longest. Remember a dog is for life! And shouldn't be 
Shortened by kc interbreeding and extreme exaggeration of bodily features


----------



## Biffo (Mar 14, 2016)

The Russian Black Terrier, created from the cross breeding of many breeds in the 1950s, including Newfie and Rottweiler, has inherited the health problems of both breeds. There is no reason a cross breed will be healthier than a pedigree. It's easily managed with testing to ensure carriers are only bred to clear, affected dogs are not bred at all. Most cross breeders do no health testing. Some may do health testing, but the majority do not.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

Cpoofitz said:


> DOGS in the wild would never breed to KC breed standards. The weak dogs would die and not be able to spread genetic defects to their off spring. Designer dogs like pugs., French bulldogs, cavaliers, GSds etc etc all have Huge health issues and suffer because of it. . . I have had cavapoos and Cavaliers for many years and I certainly know which will cost me less at the vets and less heart ache with genetically inherited diseases and which will live the longest. Remember a dog is for life! And shouldn't be
> Shortened by kc interbreeding and extreme exaggeration of bodily features


since when have the pure breeds you mention been designer dogs. the only in your post that can be described as a designer dog is the cavapoo.


----------



## mrs phas (Apr 6, 2014)

Blitz said:


> since when have the pure breeds you mention been designer dogs. the only in your post that can be described as a designer dog is the cavapoo.


C'mon @Blitz , ALL breeds of dogs are originally designer dogs, bred down or up from the original breakaway template of wolves and wolf like animals
If they weren't then we wouldn't have the vast differences, just one medium sized rough( or broken if you like) brownish black dog, end of
Yes, now, certain "designer" breeds are now recognised as "pure" breeds, but that's only because some officious club donkeys years ago decided that "they" breed true (pure) when bred together, ergo "they" are true (or pure) breeds
I don't doubt that pretty soon cava, cocker, et all will follow the labra (in some states)and also be recognised as such
So let's, for the moment ALL stop calling them "designer"breeds, which gives them some status, in the eyes of idiots that pay £1000+ (usually much more than one of the, normally 2, " pure" breeds involved) and call them what they really are, which is crossbreeds, or, in USA, and other countries, mutts
Once people start to realise that they've been caught by a con, the better IMHO, its the only way the exploitation will stop


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

.

As my then-Prof said, _"If U don't know what U're mating, U can never know what U're *breeding*" - _
by which, of course, he meant U cannot know what U are passing on to POSTERITY, I-e, the breed U supposedly love so much. 

I very heartily agree, @Biffo - if U want to breed ethically & knowledgably, U *must* test.

I would moreover add that along with testing for generic dog issues, & BREED SPECIFIC issues, ethical breeders of all sizes & breeds or mixes, should *wait* until both the tested sire & the tested dam are at least 2-YO before they are 1st mated.
Delaying any breeding until both dog & bitch are 24-MO does 2 things:
- allows heritable problems that cannot be tested for, to become symptomatic 
- ADDS an average of *two years, to the lifespan of their pups*

85% of the heritable issues that will affect an individual dog, show symptoms by 2-YO; that still leaves 15% which may lurk, but 85% is a helluva good start. 
So far as I know, there hasn't been a published article explaining the gain in lifespan, but I'll take it gladly unexplained - another two years added to a dog's brief life is a wonderful gift. 

- terry

.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

Cpoofitz said:


> And shouldn't be
> Shortened by kc interbreeding


What is 'kc interbreeding'?


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Biffo said:


> The Russian Black Terrier, created from the cross breeding of many breeds in the 1950s, including Newfie and Rottweiler, has inherited the health problems of both breeds. There is no reason a cross breed will be healthier than a pedigree. It's easily managed with testing to ensure carriers are only bred to clear, affected dogs are not bred at all. Most cross breeders do no health testing. Some may do health testing, but the majority do not.


So easily managed with only 14% for German Shepherds and 6% of conditions for boxers being testable. That's if all tests were carried out but many are not. Stopping carriers from breeding, reducing the gene pool further and potentially raising new isssues. Health testing is a useful,essential tool, not the solution as you start playing that "whack a mole" scenario previously mentioned.


----------



## SpicyBulldog (Jun 30, 2012)

leashedForLife said:


> I very heartily agree, @Biffo - if U want to breed ethically & knowledgably, U *must* test.
> 
> I would moreover add that along with testing for generic dog issues, & BREED SPECIFIC issues, ethical breeders of all sizes & breeds or mixes, should wait until both the tested sire & the tested dam are at least 2-YO before they are 1st mated.
> Delaying any breeding until both dog & bitch are 24-MO does 2 things:
> ...


In this country (USA) some certs can be done until 2 years old anyway, so seems by default breederd wouldn't be breeding until at least 2. Then there is also clearly good breeders wanting their dogs to be mature before breeding (even if they can get certs). So I don't think this is an issue for reputable breeders. BYBs are going to breed as young as they like and not health test, they could care less sadly.

Since a lot of diseases have a late age of onset waiting until 2 years isn't going to improve things. Researching lines is your best bet. I wouldn't recommend breeding a young dog by any means, but at 2 years old many dogs are "healthy" then at 5 years plus problems become apparent but they've already been bred passing on genes for those diseases. I really don't see how anyone can make such claims. Not helpful to breeder who's trying to learn proper breeding.

Data needs to be presented prove it adds 2 years. Then taken into account age of parents, obviously 9-12 months is going to be a big difference from 24 months or older. Yet the difference between 23 months, 24 months/2 years and 25 months is insignificant. Also seems like would take a whole lot of repeat breedings or comparatives similar breedings to gather this data and cause of death needs to be known for all dogs produced. I accept things even if science can't explain it, there are a lot of things we can see are true even if science can't yet explain it. Though people need to use legitimate data as well.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

QUOTE, SpicyBulldog:

... Since a lot of diseases have a late age of onset, *waiting until 2-years old * isn't going to improve things. ... I really don't see how anyone can make such claims. *Not helpful to breeder who's trying to learn proper breeding.

*Data needs to be presented prove it * adds 2 years. ****
*...*
_____________________________________
.

re asterisks:
In phrase #1, where Spicy refers to "waiting until 2 years old", he refers to *waiting to BREED for the first time, till any dog is at least 2-YO.*

In phrase #2, "how could anyone make such claims" implies that I made it up from whole cloth. :Hilarious

In phrase #4, ** *"it" refers to delayed breeding, & **** *"2 years" refers to the average additional lifespan to the pups born of such makings, where both sire & dam are at least 24-MO on 1st mating.


@SpicyBulldog ,
I didn't casually invent those statistics.

Both of those stats -
* 85% of heritable problems will be symptomatic by 24-mos
* breeding at a minimum age of 24-MO & up, adds 2-yrs on average to their pups' lifespans...

came from Padgett's book, *Control of Canine Genetic Diseases*
The book is available on Amazon, & currently 37 used copies are listed -
Dr Padgett has an extensive bibliography, & footnotes. 

- terry

.


----------



## SpicyBulldog (Jun 30, 2012)

leashedForLife said:


> QUOTE, SpicyBulldog:
> 
> ... Since a lot of diseases have a late age of onset, *waiting until (the dog is ) 2-years old, isn't going to improve things. ... I really don't see how anyone can make such claims. *Not helpful to breeder who's trying to learn proper breeding.
> 
> ...


Have both hardcover and kindle version, don't need a 3rd copy. Please direct me to where this information is located. That way I can read context. The statement can hardly be applied in real world in many cases. If someone wishes to breed properly it is best they find a mentor within their breed, rather than rely on a blanket statement that may not apply to their breed. As breeds are known to have their own set of diseases, some might have more early on set diseases, others have mostly late onset (so this doesn't help in that case as I stated) and still others have a mix of both.

As I said researching lines is important....and Padgett said that as well... Section "For The Breeder" 
_Once you have determined what traits are carried in your dog's family, you can begin to apply the data. Experienced breeders should know what traits occur in their lines. In my opinion, if they don't know the traits that occur in their lines, I would hesitate to think that the word "breeder" applies to them. Instead, I would suggest that you think of them as "people who mate dogs."
_
This is just one such quote where he speaks of the importance of knowing family / lines. Of course you need to know your breed as well in the first place, what diseases are seen overall and typical age of onset, then break down to what's typically found in which line or specific dogs progeny.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

.

@spicy,
Sorry, but no - I won't re-read an approx 350 page hardcover to find which page it's on. Regretfully, but no.

the Kindle version OTOH, should be searchable by keywords. Aren't they?
- t

.


----------



## SpicyBulldog (Jun 30, 2012)

leashedForLife said:


> .
> 
> @spicy,
> Sorry, but no - I won't re-read an approx 350 page hardcover to find which page it's on. Regretfully, but no.
> ...


Yes kindle has search function, and the search yields nothing for 85%, eighty five, eighty-five. 85 does appear several times but not with the statement that you said. Tried other words that you used and they do appear, but again not with the statement you are saying.

It could never be applied to every breed. Any breed that is prone to primarily late on set diseases you won't see the issues until past adulthood.

The book has great info, but was also published 20 years ago. Since then more diseases have been found, BUT a lot more testing is also available. Due to current technology I could have a 14 month old female that's fully health tested come into season and be bred, I wouldn't do it, but point is with testing available it would negate needing to until 2 years old for genetic health concerns in some breeds.


----------



## Biffo (Mar 14, 2016)

Goblin said:


> So easily managed with only 14% for German Shepherds and 6% of conditions for boxers being testable. That's if all tests were carried out but many are not. Stopping carriers from breeding, reducing the gene pool further and potentially raising new isssues. Health testing is a useful,essential tool, not the solution as you start playing that "whack a mole" scenario previously mentioned.


I said the testing ensured that carriers would be bred to clear. Not removed from breeding stock, but bred responsibly to reduce known health conditions within the breed, I didn't mean to imply it was all that mattered.

Health testing is a useful too, and should be used but it is not the be all and end all. Too many people focus on health testing and do no temperament testing, or look at pedigrees and compatibility, and unknowing people new to the breed think they are buying from a super responsible, reputable breeder. A dog can pass every health test and still be a poor example of the breed with an unstable temperament.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Biffo said:


> Health testing is a useful tool, and should be used but it is not the be all and end all.


I assume you meant tool, not too  The problem is that is not how it is currently being marketed. Health testing is being used as if it solves everything. Just as cross breeds are "healthier" but it's not the true story, the idea of "health tests" solve the health issues is also not the true story. As responsible dog lovers and owners we need to ensure marketing is not only factual but tells the whole story.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

QUOTE, SpicyBulldog:

Have both hardcover and kindle version, don't need a 3rd copy. Please direct me to where this information is located. That way I can read context.
...
_______________________

QUOTE, SpicyBulldog:

Yes kindle has search function, and the search yields nothing for 85%, eighty five, eighty-five.
85 does appear several times, but not with the statement that you said. Tried other words that you used and they do appear, but again not with the statement you are saying.
...

The book has great info, but was also published 20 years ago.
Since then *more diseases have been found, *BUT a lot more testing is also available.

Due to current technology I could have a 14 month old female that's fully health tested come into season and be bred; I wouldn't do it, but point is, with testing available, it would negate needing to (wait) until 2 years old for genetic health concerns in some breeds.
___________________________
.

Well, I *don't *have the e-book, I have the hardcover, which is searchable to an extent, but it's also in storage, as I share an apt with my current full-time client, & no, I won't dig into the stacks & go thru some 8 or 10 boxes of books, all taped shut, from my recent move. 
I have yet to be paid, & don't really have the $$ to spare, to buy a Kindle edition that I don't feel the need for, to do a search in order to cite the page # & paragraph for U. // If I go to the public library & borrow a copy in my sparse free time, what precisely will U give me if I not only find both statements, but provide the page # & quote the paragraph? -. A sincere apology, for doubting me? ... not good enuf, i'm afraid. :Hilarious
I'd like something a bit more substantial in exchange for my time & effort... it's a 30 minute trip to the library, without considering the search time.

Could U please name 2 or more brand-new k9 diseases found in the past 25 years that are not restricted to a single breed? - I honestly can't think of even one which meets all 3 criteria: 
- recently discovered, 
- *heritable* rather than contagious or vector borne, 
- affecting multiple breeds.

If we discuss tests, yes - many more heritable conditions can be screened for than heretofore; however, there are still multiple heritable issues which cannot be screened for, save by opening the medical Hx of the individual prospective sire & dam, & that of their immediate relatives... such as bloat / GDV.
No breeder that I know of opens their individual stud's or dam's entire vet record to the owners of a potential mate.

Conversely, multiple breeders to my knowledge have deliberately bred dogs that they knew were affected or were proven carriers of devastating heritable problems; to name just a few, consigning bad results on those OFA hip rads to the trash can, using a Cav who threw syringomyelia-affected pups as a matador sire, & breeding gundog-champion Labs who carried cataracts, knowingly, to unscreened Fs, to throw entire litters of affected & carrier pups.

Testing does not guarantee that dogs who are carriers or even dogs who will be affected (but don't currently show symptoms) will NOT be bred; making tests mandatory & putting the onus on vets to file the results on an open website would, OTOH, take the option to pretend their dog is "fine" out of the owner's / breeder's control.
The PennHIP reporting system files every dog's rads, good, bad, or indifferent, by breed; nobody gets to deny that FTC / AKC-Ch Finnegan's Wake has cr*p hips along with his good head, soft mouth, & excellent blind retrieve.
OFA allows the breeder or owner to opt out, without disclosure, & breed w/o notifying the owners of the dogs they mate. Verbal statements that "my dog has good hips & knees" or whatever, aren't worth the paper they aren't printed on. 

Cheers, 
- terry

.


----------



## SpicyBulldog (Jun 30, 2012)

leashedForLife said:


> Well, I don't have the e-book, I have the hardcover, which is searchable to an extent, but it's also in storage, as I share an apt with my current full-time client, & no, I won't dig into the stacks & go thru some 8 or 10 boxes of books, all taped shut, from my recent move.
> I have yet to be paid, & don't really have the $$ to spare, to buy a Kindle edition that I don't feel the need for, to do a search in order to cite the page # & paragraph for U. // If I go to the public library & borrow a copy in my sparse free time, what precisely will U give me if I not only find both statements, but provide the page # & quote the paragraph? -. A sincere apology, for doubting me? ... not good enuf, i'm afraid. :Hilarious
> I'd like something a bit more substantial in exchange for my time & effort... it's a 30 minute trip to the library, without considering the search time.


Yeah you told me that you couldn't remember and wasn't going to reread the book. I haven't nagged you to do so, only saying the search didn't yield desired results (not sure why you'd have different results on kindle anyway). I did spend 40 mins searching for different words then had to go through the actual results which can be a lot depending on the word. 
If you found it I would thank you. Not sure why I'd apologize since asking for page # references isn't doing something wrong or offensive. I also asked so I could read the context and exactly what he was saying since that's important. I didn't say I doubt you, but wanted to read it for myself didn't know that required an apology.



> Could U please name 2 or more brand-new k9 diseases found in the past 25 years that are not restricted to a single breed? - I honestly can't think of even one which meets all 3 criteria:
> - recently discovered,
> - heritable rather than contagious or vector borne,
> - affecting multiple breeds.
> ...


I would have to look through journals and articles. Why would you want only diseases found in more than one breed? Diseasee found in one or two breeds are still very important, most new diseases would be that way. As many genetic diseases are actually caused by old mutations that's why they're widespread. Breeders are breeding specific breeds, if a novel mutation occurs in a breed it is important to recognize it and attempt to figure mode of inheritance and how to pevent producing it and eventually develop a test. 
Which genetic test developing is another reason the list of genetic diseases has increased. Some diseases are the same clinically but caused by different genes. Testing rules them out as being the same whether they've been in a breed for a long time or whether it is more recently seen. Some of these diseases are only found in a breed or two and others are found in several breeds once a test is developed that detects the gene. 
So again it is dependent on the specific breed, you'll note I was talking about my breed as far as test being applicable at a young age. I also asked about breeds that have mostly late on set diseases? Again how would waiting until 2 help. 
Bloat can happen in "any dog" at "any age" but is seen more often in larger breeds, deep chest breeds and the average age for bloat is also 7 years old, so waiting until 2 and assuming it would likely show by then is a ridiculous notion.
I'm not sure why one would need access to an actual vet record. I wouldn't expect a dog to have been treated for a bunch of genetic diseases by age 2 or so. Secondly breeders share information they don't need to give full access to vet record, they simply say they've observed this in that dog or a few dogs in their line have shown this. The reason why I know what issues are associated with what lines is because of respective breeders of those lines. 
So discussing test, again I could have a fully health tested dog at a year and breed that dog their next heat or at will if a male. Are some things not testable? Yes demodex usually appears in puppies. Cancer normally don't see that until a dog is at least 5 and as old as 10+. So neither disease is relevant to 2 years old, one appears well before and the other typically years after.



> Conversely, multiple breeders to my knowledge have deliberately bred dogs that they knew were affected or were proven carriers of devastating heritable problems; to name just a few, consigning bad results on those OFA hip rads to the trash can, using a Cav who threw syringomyelia-affected pups as a matador sire, & breeding gundog-champion Labs who carried cataracts, knowingly, to unscreened Fs, to throw entire litters of affected & carrier pups.


Yes there are dishonest breeders and those making irresponsible decisions. Tools like tests and screening are only helpful when properly applied. How on earth is this relevant to what I was saying? I'd think obviously I was talking about using the tools correctly.



> Testing does not guarantee that dogs who are carriers or even dogs who will be affected (but don't currently show symptoms) will NOT be bred; making tests mandatory & putting the onus on vets to file the results on an open website would, OTOH, take the option to pretend their dog is "fine" out of the owner's / breeder's control.
> The PennHIP reporting system files every dog's rads, good, bad, or indifferent, by breed; nobody gets to deny that FTC / AKC-Ch Finnegan's Wake has cr*p hips along with his good head, soft mouth, & excellent blind retrieve.
> OFA allows the breeder or owner to opt out, without disclosure, & breed w/o notifying the owners of the dogs they mate. Verbal statements that "my dog has good hips & knees" or whatever, aren't worth the paper they aren't printed on. .


Nothing wrong with breeding carriers to non carriers. Having clear by parentage is great though. If you're getting a puppy or looking to do a breeding with someone else's dog it really isn't all that hard to ask for proof. Taking the word that the dog(s) are fine would be a willful choice by someone and actually wouldn't cut it for many, they need to see the results. 
I think it would be great if there was mandatory health testing required by registries with the results available to the public. It isn't that I don't agree with your type of thinking, I just know that I can easily ask for results (normally pretty easy to spot a liar) and refuse to buy a puppy if breeder won't / can't furnish results. What I do think this would be helpful in is being able to track more in lines, you could have info on dogs in the pedigree AND extended pedigree to see relative info. This is very important for EBVs and getting an idea on polygenic diseases. 
In my own example I would have had to do pennhip since OFA requires dogs to be 24 months, unless you're doing pre lims I suppose. 
Again if someone gets a failing score and choosing not to make that public it is still on say bitch owner to ask for results. You still get these results mailed to you. If they say the dog is OFA'd and results are not on site and you ask you're either going to be shown failing results and can pass on breeding or they're going to dance around it or make excuses and then you're going to laugh and either know 1 of 2 things.....the dog was either NEVER OFA'd or was and failed / is displastic or maybe even borderline and it's a hard pass on that breeding. I totally understand the need for transparency, but also understand it easy to spot fakes for serious breeders. Byb and less experienced consumers can be duped or they simply don't care, hence why they buy from byb / pet stores or why one is probably breeding their own unhealth tasted dog to an untested or failing dog.


----------



## SusieRainbow (Jan 21, 2013)

Quotes from this thread have been used by a site 'Wuuff' without the consent or knowledge of forum members. This is unacceptable use of the forum.

The OP has been banned.

It appears that we need to excercise caution when responding to such threads, who knows where the replies will be used !


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

SusieRainbow said:


> The OP has been banned


And has he been contacted so he can know what we think of him and his site? And that he's breached our copyright?
Not sure what good banning would do. It is, after all, a public forum that anyone can read.
Perhaps a sticky thread somewhere about his site might be appropriate, one that was less than congratulatory. We could use quotes from it.


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

Burrowzig said:


> Perhaps a sticky thread somewhere about his site might be appropriate, one that was less than congratulatory.


The problem with that is that any mention of the site, negative or positive, gives it clicks and clicks = revenue for whoever owns the site. That guy's boss is probably congratulating him right now for drumming up traffic to the site. 
Websites like that don't care about legitimacy, they care about visibility.

Really, the only effective communication I see is if the owner of PetForums addresses the content "theft" with the owner of that other site. 
@petforum are you going to address this at all?


----------



## tabelmabel (Oct 18, 2013)

The fact is, although he was very underhand in his reasons for starting the thread, he did link the thread into his article (a citation in kind?)

I would have thought anything put out on a public forum is fair game for source material for writing articles as long as it is credited back to its original source and not passed off as his own work (which this was)


Look how often tabloids take quotes off mumsnet and build whole articles round it for publication.

I cant see how there can be illegality. It is so widespread goes on all the time unchallenged anyway.



I would have thought the most effective thing to do would be to delete this entire thread and replace it with a message saying content redacted or something and a warning that users werent happy to be associated with his article.

Then anyone clicking the link from his article to check source material will see that.


Though, tbh, will many folk even be reading his article more than 2 yrs on. I only found it whilst innocently looking for something else. .


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

SusieRainbow said:


> It appears that we need to excercise caution when responding to such threads, who knows where the replies will be used !


If anyone joined the forum and did a search on the topics they were interested in producing an article about, they could find plenty of quotes without having to start a thread themselves. So it's not just responding to threads. If no-one responded to threads there'd be no forum anyway. And what many of us have written on here over the years could be twisted out of context or meaning if anyone had the mind to. Just one of those things. If anything, it should make us write thoughtfully and clearly so there's less room for what we say to be misconstrued or mistaken.


----------

