# Why would you do it?



## BessieDog (May 16, 2012)

Not a thread dissing crossbreeds, but I'm just genuinely interested. 

If you have gone to the trouble of choosing a breed that's right for you - like me with Bess and people like Dogless with the RRs and Dober with Dobermans, why would you consider for a moment breeding with another breed? 

Breeding is a very serious business. Costly with probably no guaranteed profit, time consuming and with possible dangers to the bitch. Not something to go into lightly. 

So what makes someone decide they'd put their bitch through that to produce unknown offspring?

I don't think I've phrased this very well, so I hope that you see what I'm getting at. I'm just genuinely interested in why people want to put two pedigree dogs of different breeds together?


----------



## Dober (Jan 2, 2012)

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$


----------



## Holtie (May 30, 2012)

Same as Dober said!


----------



## EmCHammer (Dec 28, 2009)

My favourite dog is a staffie cross.. Not that I would ever suggest breeding more nor would I buy one either.. Volunteering for a pound dog rescue I see enough already needing a home or put to sleep.

They would be my first choice and I know that somewhere up the line someone has decided to breed a mix of these two dogs.

My last boy was maybe staffie whippet and current boy is staffie boxer maybe both brilliant dogs. I know where I am with the staffie side and both mixes worked well for me.

Suppose people want to combine looks or traits of both dogs.. Have seen some extreme mixes though.

There is the money making side of it although that's not exclusive to crossbreeds well have a feeling it is more when they try to make out they rare and exclusive. 

Maybe people have two nice dogs they think would make lovely pups.. I haven't got the mindset of a breeder so who knows

But as mentioned from the point if view of a dog owner I like crossbreeds.. We do seem to get less and less these days of mongrel type dogs through the pound mostly pedigrees and obvious first crosses


----------



## BessieDog (May 16, 2012)

Dober said:


> $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$


Yes, but you can't guarantee a profit. You could spend 000's in vet bills.


----------



## K3esy (Feb 1, 2013)

I brought my Dobie X weimaraner because I could afford another Dobie but would not breed my Dobie with anything other than an other Dobie , I think it is all down to money , but sometime I do wonder ohh I wonder what a ??? Breed would look like with a ???? Breed , but with too many rescue dogs out there to me it would be stupid to even contemplate it .


----------



## BessieDog (May 16, 2012)

Something else then. 

It seems there is a market for some crosses, because people actively like them. And also that an awful lot end up in rescues.


----------



## BessieDog (May 16, 2012)

BessieDog said:


> Something else then.
> 
> It seems there is a market for some crosses, because people actively like them. And also that an awful lot end up in rescues.


Debating points, folks!


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

What like Lurchers?


----------



## BessieDog (May 16, 2012)

Dober said:


> $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$


If its the money, why not breed and produce pedigree offspring? Are crosses worth more?


----------



## cavmad (Jan 27, 2009)

Money firstly the people who usually breed xbreeds dont care about health checks, feeding properly and dont think that anything can go wrong (I know that there are a few that health check etc).Also with the cavs its getting through to people about health problems so the breeders x them so they can charge more and convince the general public that they are getting a dog with the cav temperament without any of the health problems and people will believe them because they must know as they are breeders. The other big thing is the non moulting and the fact that people might not be allergic to them.Most people only think about Poodles and Bichons as being the only non moulting breeds so xing them with spaniel that most people thing as soft or labs that are popular but seem to moult all year round the BYB can say that the pup wont moult and again most people will believe them


----------



## Fleur (Jul 19, 2008)

As a buyer of a cross breed I had looked at Shih Tzu's however they seemed to be getting more and more Brachycephalic not something I like 
I admit to having no knowledge of breeding especially 5/6 years ago and perhaps naively I believed by crossing a Shih Tzu with a familiar sized/conformation and character dog you would likely avoid the squashed face and problems that come with that. (although both my Shih Tzu Crosses have nice long muzzles)
So as a buyer that's why I wanted a cross breed - and if there are people who want them then there will be people who supply them.
Simple rules of supply and demand. 
Even though I have 2 cross breeds I'm still horrified by people crossing dogs of very different size, energy and tempermant.
I also think the 'pedigree' world needs some decent PR  There are a few breeds that have caused all pedigrees to be painted with the same brush to the average person.
No one I knew growing up had a KC reg dog unless they were showing - pets and workers weren't from KC dogs - it would never of occured to me to go to a KC breeder


----------



## purpleskyes (May 24, 2012)

I think with some people it's all about boundaries seeing how far they can push things or wanting to create the next big thing in dog breeds.

It's like the reptile world first there was royal pythons, then they found ways to create lots of different colours of royal python and then the next big thing was scaleless royal pythons? I mean wtf it's a snake it's meant to have scales people!! And finally they have started crossing completely different species of snake you have the burmball which is a Burmese python ( can get to 16ft) with a royal ( max out at 6ft) and a ticball which is a retic ( can get to 23ft) with a royal.

Sorry for going off with a reptile example but yeah I think people just like to mess around with stuff as much as they can.


----------



## tabulahrasa (Nov 4, 2012)

A lot of ads I see I think it must just be money.

Some crosses are originally done for a purpose, Labrador poodle to try and get a non- shedding guide dog, lurchers... There must be others?

Some will be accidents.

The other thing is that people don't always pick the right breed for them, I'm happy with my choice for instance, but there are quite a few breeds with the traits I want. Some people don't research at all, just get a dog.


----------



## foxiesummer (Feb 4, 2009)

Our local papers pet section recently had loads of adverts for x breeds. They also had loads of adverts for pedigrees. The prices for both were very similar but it was the pedigree dogs which sold. The x breeds are still being advertised but at a lower and lower price. Serves em right. Breed for greed.


----------



## Holtie (May 30, 2012)

I have been asked by people if I would ever breed from my two girls and the answer is a ' no' - I have not the space, time nor the money to do this to afford to pay for the vet bills for the necessary vaccinations.

While I understand there are crossbreeds out there, managed and un-managed, it is sad that a majority of these crossbred dogs end up in rescue. These un-managed ones are by certain groups of people just to make money. That is my opinion.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

This sort of discussion invariably turns into a free for all. Please refer to this sticky http://www.petforums.co.uk/dog-chat/36419-important-rule-regarding-crossbreeds.html


----------



## tashi (Dec 5, 2007)

Ok we will trial this and see how it goes I will hide the ruling for now BUT if things do go pear shaped it will be re-instated.


----------



## Fleur (Jul 19, 2008)

tashi said:


> Ok we will trial this and see how it goes I will hide the ruling for now BUT if things do go pear shaped it will be re-instated.


Thank you Tashi  I thought this might make a good trial thread 
Lets hope we're not all to scared to post now


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

I imagine with some people its the hope that crossing out with other genes will create a more balanced dog i.e. crossing a husky with a very biddable breed would lead to a dog with better recall who is more pet household friendly. Kes' grandma is husky x collie and she has great recall and is very smart, I think the mixing of those genes worked quite well. Obviously it's not a science and it could be the opposite, but perhaps the lure of 'creating' the dog you want is part of it?


----------



## Guest (Feb 2, 2013)

Well how about for health reasons? 
Wasn't there a man who outcrossed Dalmation with a pointer to try and do something about the urine stone bladder thing that dalmations can have? (Eurgh sorry I have an awful memory.) 

Maybe some people have a preference for certain crosses due to their ability to work (gundog crosses, collie crosses, lab crosses, GSD belgium shepherd crosses). Some may prefer them due to their personality (lurchers :001_wub and some people just prefer mongrels. 

But if your on about it byb breeder-wise, then probably money.


----------



## Hanlou (Oct 29, 2012)

I think a lot of the popularity comes from the perpetuation of myths when it comes to cross-breeds.  

I say this because before I started looking on dog forums and doing some serious researchI was looking into Cocker Spaniels x Poodles. Why? Because I was repeatedly told that they were the 'best of both worlds'. I like Cockers and I like Poodles so it just seemed to be a good compromise to me. And there are breeders that health test for this particular cross (I found some). 

However on doing more research I discovered that rather than get a cross I might get a dog that took after just one of its parents or that the coat might be a-very-difficult-to-groom curly x cocker coat. 

I would guess a lot of people 'buy into' the myths that breeders like to preach - 'non shedding' because it's crossed with a poodle, 'not as hyper' as a Pedigree because it's crossed with a more placid breed and of course 'healthier' because it's not a Pedigree. 

I like a lot of crosses myself - we met a Cocker x Poodle the other day (Teddy adored him lol and they played beautifully together!) and he was a gorgeous dog. And the owner got him because she'd been told Cocker Spaniels were 'crazy hyperactive' dogs and when they were crossed with Poodles it cut down on the hyperactivity. Whic of course is not necessarily true.I didn't say anything of course - why would I? 

The myths and lack of health testing is what bothers me rather than the actual dogs being crossed - after all a lot of breeds came about because someone decided to cross x,y, z - I have looked into Eurasiers which are a very new breed and they were brought about through a variety of crosses because someone wanted a 'companion dog' with a certain look. And I don't see anything particularly wrong with that if done in the right way.


----------



## Fleur (Jul 19, 2008)

Phoolf said:


> I imagine with some people its the hope that crossing out with other genes will create a more balanced dog i.e. crossing a husky with a very biddable breed would lead to a dog with better recall who is more pet household friendly. Kes' grandma is husky x collie and she has great recall and is very smart, I think the mixing of those genes worked quite well. Obviously it's not a science and it could be the opposite, but perhaps the lure of 'creating' the dog you want is part of it?


I think this is true - someone with limited understanding of genetics etc (Like me  ) could want to achieve the best of both 
And if they are successful go on to breed again and then get the worst of both which end up in rescue

But I know I fit into this category wanting my SHih Tzu crosses - a shih tzu temperment with the longer muzzle - although my dogs are playful and loving they are very different to pure SHih Tzus I've met


----------



## puppymadness (Aug 20, 2009)

Maybe I am wrong but for those saying its to get the 'best' traits from 2 dogs is this not how we got dogs from wolves? And how we now have so many different, pedigrees surely they all started as a cross of something?


----------



## SamanthaGoosey (Jan 26, 2013)

Putting the idea of them making money from it aside, I think people would just prefer a dog to look a certain way, or even behave in a certain way - but obviously when people say they wanted a dog with the loyalty of a lab, the energy of a collie, the protective nature of a staffy, don't understand you can't guarantee a dog will end up with the exact traits you want. Plus a lot of the time it's nurture over nature and as long as the dog has a certain upbringing, it may not even be close to what they're expecting.

So yeah, in summary probably just for looks, but in fairness you can't fault people for wanting that because every dog at some point was a cross breed


----------



## dandogman (Dec 19, 2011)

- For the experience 
- May seem cheaper as health tests seem to get forgotten with x's
- Money. Labradoodles fetch more (If you'll pardon the pun) than Labradors
- Unique looking dog
- Fashion statement
- Accidental mating
- Better characteristics (e.g. outcrossing Dalmatians with Pointers to eliminate crystals, Labradoodles non shedding)


----------



## LexiLou2 (Mar 15, 2011)

Its not something I would do myself, however if someone bred a jug for example, so two similar sized dogs but for the reason of lengthening the pugs muzzle and then bred back to a pug to try and get a pug with a longer muzzle then that i get, like with the dallies to the pointers.

If it is done with full research and for a particualr and well thought out reason then I get it.

The origional labradoodle i believe was to help blind people with allergies actually be able to own a guide dog and again I get the reasoning behind it.

However there are certain types such as a beafie I will never ever get and is bred for the only purposes of making money......why would anyone ever ever want a staffie/beagle cross?? what traits could those two breeds ever want to inherit from eachother? Speaking as a staffie owner so I am allowed to say this, you ahve a dog with a possible predisposition for dog aggressiveness (as I am assuming the dogs used in these crosses aren't tested for temprement) that is likely to run off??!


----------



## puppymadness (Aug 20, 2009)

I love crosses- Bella is a lab x gsd but what I don't get is the random names people give them to try and 'disguise' the cross


----------



## northnsouth (Nov 17, 2009)

LurcherOwner said:


> Well how about for health reasons?
> Wasn't there a man who outcrossed Dalmation with a pointer to try and do something about the urine stone bladder thing that dalmations can have? (Eurgh sorry I have an awful memory.)
> 
> .


I was going to mention this, there is a lot of info on this out cross on the British Dalmatian sites,and some very heated threads. 
I can see this as a good thing to improve a specific health issue.

About The Dalmatian Heritage Project - Dalmatian Puppy Breeding & Adoption - Hayward, California
http://www.luadalmatians.com/History.html
Spot the difference: One of these dalmatians will be healthy for life, so why are dog-lovers so furious? | Mail Online

This is just a couple of articles I have read..


----------



## Werehorse (Jul 14, 2010)

There is a reasonable chance that a cross will be somewhere in the middle ground between the two parents and absolute predictability of looks and temperament (when is temperament ever truely predictable anyway) is just not as important to some people. For myself I think nurture plays a massive role in the dog you end up with so as long as the individual parent dogs being crossed had nice temperaments I wasn't worried about which breed my crosses ended up most like. Plus I like the purebreds of all the breeds in both my dogs so I would have been happy to end up with a pup which was only like on of his parents!

I don't see deciding to breed from your bitch for a cross as any different to deciding to do so for a pedigree litter, to me breed boundaries are arbitary constructs. As long as health tests for any recessive traits that are prevalent in both breeds are done and possibly hip testing if it is relevent (difficult, when you usually refer to average scores for breed plus the cross will have a slightly different hip conformation than either parent anyway) then I see no issue. I also think cross-breed breeders should take as much responsibility for the pups futures as good pedigree breeders do (lifetime support, close questioning of potential homes etc). However, having been very closely questioned by Hugo's breeder (despite him being the result of an accidental mating)and informed that she would take him back if there was ever a problem, I do not think the divide between those who do take this responsibility and those who don't take this responsibilty necessarily falls on the boundary between pedigree and cross-breed breeders.

I prefer crosses myself - I think I will always be on the lookout for a suitable cross from a breeder I am happy with whenever I look for a new pup.


----------



## Tigerneko (Jan 2, 2009)

LurcherOwner said:


> Well how about for health reasons?
> Wasn't there a man who outcrossed Dalmation with a pointer to try and do something about the urine stone bladder thing that dalmations can have? (Eurgh sorry I have an awful memory.)
> 
> Maybe some people have a preference for certain crosses due to their ability to work (gundog crosses, collie crosses, lab crosses, GSD belgium shepherd crosses). Some may prefer them due to their personality (lurchers :001_wub and some people just prefer mongrels.
> ...


Absolutely agree with this, I think (okay so this is sort of taking the discussion to Pedigree breeds but it does interlink!) outcrossing is a good idea if it is to improve the health of a breed, when you look at the descendants of the Dallie that was outcrossed with a GSP, you cannot tell the difference between them. Maybe someone who is an absolute expert on Dals might be able to tell, but to me there is NO difference - except for the fact that a health issue has been removed from their bloodline, which I think is fabulous.

The KC are also talking about (I am not sure if it has been okayed or not yet) allowing the crossing of Irish Setters with Irish Red and White Setters in order to save the IRWS as a breed, otherwise it will die out. For the sake of saving a breed and improving the health, then I think outcrossing and crossing is the way forward but so far very few people are accepting it. I can sort of understand where they are coming from, if the KC asked Manchester Terrier breeders to start out-crossing with English Toy Terriers then I could see a lot of people putting their foot down. Not that it is going to happen, I was just using it as an example of two similar breeds 

I can also understand people crossing different breeds for working purposes, such as creating different types of Lurcher and crossing different working Terriers to improve their working abilities, but the working world is very different to the pet world, they are unlikely to be sold at a huge profit and they are being bred specifically to work.

Some people (I think this is more in the US than over here) are also crossing Collies with smaller, quicker high energy breeds to use for activities such as Flyball and Agility, which also makes sense - especially in the US there is a big 'market' for Flyball and Agility dogs and the 'sports' breeders will want to try and find a very fast, agile and highly trainable type of dog.

As for the pet market, I don't really know. There are people out there who don't want a Pedigree, people who think that crossbreeds are healthier and such like, but personally I can't see much of a reason to cross a lot of the crosses you see today - like the Husky/Mal crosses, or some of the Beagle crosses - Northern breeds and Scenthounds are very specialised breeds that need experience and a lot of research & knowledge and when I often see crosses of those sorts, I do worry about the potential danger they could be in if someone buys them without thinking about the 'difficulties' of the parent breeds. IMO there is such a vast array of dog breeds out there, there must surely be something for everyone without the need to cross what we already have without good reason.


----------



## Fleur (Jul 19, 2008)

I also think it's also a fashion thing.
Cocoa Chanel made white poodles popular many years ago
King Charles made small spaniels popular even longer ago.
Cross breeds aren't new the Cockerpoo has been around since the 1930's I believe.
But crosses are fashionable - especially 'Doodles' and Bichon crosses are fast catching up.

Plus a although there are a lot of pedigree dogs out there, so as many people say there is a dog breed for everyone, not all are easy to get hold of, low in numbers, the breeders are very protective etc.
I know when we very 1st decided to get a dog I got one of those 'breeds for you' books and the 2 breeds we initially thought we wanted to investigate - one isn't available in this country the other seems to be pretty rare.
So availability could be another reason why buyers go for a cross breed.
This makes them popular - the dog you fall in love with at the park/ your friends or neighbours dog is a cross so you decide to get one to - therefore the demand goes up the breeder meet this demand and the cycle starts again.

On a slightly different note - I've never really understood why Poodle crosses are called Doodles
I understand the Labradoodle = labrad + oodle = Labradoodle
But a Goldendoodle 
Surely it should be Golden + oodle = Goldenoodle


----------



## Bijou (Aug 26, 2009)

Our pedigree breeds have been refined and bred for specific traits with great passion and dedication and are deserving of being preserved- for example a pure bred Arab horse will send chills down your spine with their sheer beauty like no Anglo Arab can - similarly with a pedigree Borzoi , Great Dane, or Doberman - how can these and other breeds be improved by cross breeding ? - they are living works of art . It saddens me when people don't consider some of our wonderful native breeds or one of the many stunning continental breeds now available when choosing a pup instead of opting to follow fashion and get a designer cross.

The Pointer/Dalmatian outcross is often mentioned but what is never mentioned is that the resulting cross bred pups were subsequently bred back into the Dalmatian restricted gene pool ( and quite heavily line bred too ) in order to get back the unique traits of this breed and it took many mnay generations - the cross breeding was not done to get 'something different' but to solve a health issue - and that's a million miles away from all those Oodles of Doodles !


----------



## Werehorse (Jul 14, 2010)

Indeed, regards horses, Bijou. But I have an Anglo-arab because a pure Arab would be too small for me and the pure Thoroughbreds I tried were just too hot-headed. My Anglo is firey but obedient and a perfect riding horse. Anglo-arabs are well-known for their work-ethic and are excellent sports horses. Personally I think she is beautiful too - Arabs are beautiful but sometimes a little "over-done" for my taste.

Here's my mare, she takes _my_ breath away;

















Most riding horses I've ever come across have been cross-breeds or mixtures. It is great that the pedigree stock from which they come is preserved but I think the variety and mixing up of genes is really important too. I like how a horse can be registered and have a pedigree even if it is a mix.

Both my Anglo and OH's Irish Sports Horse (ID x TB) have pedigrees which stretch at least 5 gens on each side (my mare's pedigree is rediculous! :lol so if I was to breed from my mare I would be able to check out what stock I was breeding from etc etc.

I think the dog world could gain a lot from accepting cross-breeds and mixes more and learning lessons from how horses have been bred. Not that horse-breeding is perfect!

I think part of the difference is that horses are still very much working animals - breed is, in many cases, less important than soundness, ability and temperament.


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

As a former owner of an Arab and also an Anglo Arab (grew up on them) I have to say I get chills down my spine when I see a nice Arab, a nice Anglo Arab, a nice Borzoi and as well a nicely put together crossbred dog.

Gorgeous mare Werehorse.



> . . . The Pointer/Dalmatian outcross is often mentioned but what is never mentioned is that the resulting cross bred pups were subsequently bred back into the Dalmatian restricted gene pool ( and quite heavily line bred too ) in order to get back the unique traits of this breed and it took many mnay generations - the cross breeding was not done to get 'something different' but to solve a health issue - and that's a million miles away from all those Oodles of Doodles !


Stocklore Budgette Buster, at 7 gens down from the Pointer, is the highest LUA linebred dog I found at a 13.3% 5 gen COI










They were all decended from Stocklore Stipples who was from the four gens down from the initial cross and she was the girl that was AKC pointed when the political uproar happened in the USA and the AKC cancelled her registration - she was from a 1/2 cousin x 1/2 cousin pairing - 6.25% 5 gen COI.








- sourece - http://www.luadalmatians.com/Stipples.html

Black Eyed Susan was her daughter - 5 gens down from the pointer used - I have most of the 5 gen pedigree and so far a 0% COI with no shared ancestors by sire/dam.










Lindgates Trievor Watson and littermate Lidgates Trievor Franc were the next gen down and again sire/dam outcrosses to each other - completely different lines on both sides.










Stocklore Forrest Can-O-Pee is from Budgette Buster and Lindgate's Trievor Watson - the first time the LUA lines were used on both sides and this COI is at less than 2% at 5 gens.










Source for pedigrees - Meet the luadals

Is that one pedigree what you were referring to when you said the resulting crossbred pups were "quite heavily linebred"?

This type and lots of half sibling pairings, is what I get to commonly peruse through when I'm looking at pedigrees.










Another here - http://i622.photobucket.com/albums/tt305/pedigreemiss/non-protocol pedigrees/TelvaraKoolOperator.jpg

And here - http://i622.photobucket.com/albums/...pedigrees/inbredpedigreebjWishfulThinking.jpg

And here - http://www.caninehealthregistry.org/component/ctkpedigree/dogdetails/47190/

And here - http://www.caninehealthregistry.org/dog-names/dogdetails/47189/

The COI of the BOB Dalmatian, Crufts, 2012, is 30.9% - Her two grandsires were one dog and one granddame was his full sibling - http://www.champdogs.co.uk/dog/11626

I don't think your definition of 'heavily linebred' matches mine.

CC


----------



## Bijou (Aug 26, 2009)

CC 'Sophie's' pedigree is *horrendously* close - here's the COI for some of my dogs :

*Result
Inbreeding Coefficient*

Belgian Shepherd Dog (Groenendael)
Bijou Du Clos Des Agapornis (IMP FRA)
0.5%
Breed Average
2.8%

Belgian Shepherd Dog (Groenendael)
Grondemon Milor Des Marais
1.4%
Breed Average
2.8%

Belgian Shepherd Dog (Groenendael)
Grondemon Blackhawk ***
0.4%
Breed Average
2.8%

Belgian Shepherd Dog (Groenendael)
Grondemon Chardonnay
1.4%
Breed Average
2.8%

Belgian Shepherd Dog (Groenendael)
Grondemon Chinook ***
0.4%
Breed Average
2.8%

Belgian Shepherd Dog (Groenendael)
Woodlyn Dark Velvet Of Grondemon
0.4%
Breed Average
2.8%

Belgian Shepherd Dog (Groenendael)
Lebeau's American Dream Of Grondemon ( Imp USA )
0.1%
Breed Average
2.8%

note that the breed average is a mere 2.8% , and this is in a breed that has a fairly small gene pool and we have to rely on taking our bitches abroad and importing new lines to keep our co-efficients of inbreeding low so yes for me a COI of 13 % within something as numerically popular as Dalmatians would most certainly be " quite heavily linebred "


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

JTHolt said:


> I have been asked by people if I would ever breed from my two girls and the answer is a ' no' - I have not the space, time nor the money to do this to afford to pay for the vet bills for the necessary vaccinations.
> 
> While I understand there are crossbreeds out there, managed and un-managed, *it is sad that a majority of these crossbred dogs end up in rescue.* These un-managed ones are by certain groups of people just to make money. That is my opinion.


What information/statistics do you base this statement on?


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

Werehorse said:


> Indeed, regards horses, Bijou. But I have an Anglo-arab because a pure Arab would be too small for me and the pure Thoroughbreds I tried were just too hot-headed. My Anglo is firey but obedient and a perfect riding horse. Anglo-arabs are well-known for their work-ethic and are excellent sports horses. Personally I think she is beautiful too - Arabs are beautiful but sometimes a little "over-done" for my taste.
> 
> *Here's my mare, she takes my breath away*;
> 
> ...


Mine too - I'm blue from suffocation! And green too, the envy....


----------



## catz4m8z (Aug 27, 2008)

I dont know why anyone breeds period TBH! I would find it all way too stressful and worrying.
I am glad that people do still cross for what ever reason, as I now have my 2 Chiweenies!! Personally I love mini Dachshunds but have several unavoidable steps in my house/garden and was worried that a dog with such a long back would hurt itself.....
By crossing with a Chihuahua you can reduce that risk whilst keeping alot of the characteristics you love as Chis and daxies have quite compatible personalities. They are also similar size and other then a couple of conditions to health test for are pretty healthy, long lived breeds. To my mind thats a good reason to crossbreed.

Of course their is a reason that Chiweenies are gaining popularity and are so popular in the states.....
they are also stinkingly cute!LOL


----------



## Micky93 (May 15, 2012)

Bijou said:


> Our pedigree breeds have been refined and bred for specific traits with great passion and dedication and are deserving of being preserved- for example a pure bred Arab horse will send chills down your spine with their sheer beauty like no Anglo Arab can - similarly with a pedigree Borzoi , Great Dane, or Doberman - how can these and other breeds be improved by cross breeding ? - they are living works of art . *It saddens me when people don't consider some of our wonderful native breeds or one of the many stunning continental breeds now available when choosing a pup instead of opting to follow fashion and get a designer cross*.
> 
> The Pointer/Dalmatian outcross is often mentioned but what is never mentioned is that the resulting cross bred pups were subsequently bred back into the Dalmatian restricted gene pool ( and quite heavily line bred too ) in order to get back the unique traits of this breed and it took many mnay generations - the cross breeding was not done to get 'something different' but to solve a health issue - and that's a million miles away from all those Oodles of Doodles !


I can understand the way in which not all pedigree breeds can be improved by outcrossing.. and also why someone with such great knowledge of pedigree dogs would believe that only pedigree and well bred dogs would be 'stunning' - but what about for the population who have grown up around mutts who are just another member of the family, the one who is there for you when you need a friend most, when you're alone with no-one else beside you or when the world seems to be against you? For me a dog isn't about looks or how well it stands or the specific inches his length is - it's just about having a companion who is well loved and cared for and has a lovely temperament.

This is NOT to say I'm saying that pedigree owners don't want this - I adore a good English or Irish Setter (Henry and Bess; I'm looking at you  ) as my grandparents actually bred (and yes, health tested!!) 2 of their KC Reg Irish Setter Bitches and obviously I adore the breed - but it's not the only thing when looking for a dog.

PERSONALLY, the health and temperament are what attracts me to a specific dog, not their looks.


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

LexiLou2 said:


> Its not something I would do myself, however if someone bred a jug for example, so two similar sized dogs but for the reason of lengthening the pugs muzzle and then bred back to a pug to try and get a pug with a longer muzzle then that i get, like with the dallies to the pointers.
> 
> If it is done with full research and for a particualr and well thought out reason then I get it.
> 
> ...


Maybe they are trying for the opposite, a less DA dog who is more biddable and better with recall? That would be the ideal, but as my previous post said it's no science, as with a collie x husky you could end up with a dog who has a HUGE prey drive, will run off to any livestock herd and then kill them. Or, as with Kes' family you could get a dog who is more biddable than a husky and with reliable recall. I personally don't think it's all that bad is you want to mix certain traits and it works out well, say for example mixing a boxer with a more laid back breed so they were easier to handle?


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

Phoolf said:


> Maybe they are trying for the opposite, a less DA dog who is more biddable and better with recall? That would be the ideal, but as my previous post said it's no science, as with a collie x husky you could end up with a dog who has a HUGE prey drive, will run off to any livestock herd and then kill them. Or, as with Kes' family you could get a dog who is more biddable than a husky and with reliable recall. *I personally don't think it's all that bad is you want to mix certain traits and it works out well,* say for example mixing a boxer with a more laid back breed so they were easier to handle?


What worries me is what happens to the dogs when the experiment doesn't work out well? Pups may be sold as the 'perfect' mix but when they turn out to be difficult dogs or just not have the traits that buyers were 'promised' how many people persevere and how many sell them / give them away / surrender them to a rescue?


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

Dogless said:


> What worries me is what happens to the dogs when the experiment doesn't work out well?


While it disgusts me when people breed two unhealthy breeds together I think those who buy mongrels like myself generally know they're in for an unpredictable ride and nothing is guaranteed. While I think it's wrong to say mix two brachyacephalic breeds together I think where temperament is concerned you generally know you'll have more of one than the other so prepare yourself. With Kes being a massive mix I was expecting any of the breeds or very few of the breeds to shine through, but I knew that having lots of very biddable breeds in her she was likely to be less stubborn and more trainable than if she were full bully.


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

Phoolf said:


> While it disgusts me when people breed two unhealthy breeds together I think those who buy mongrels like myself generally know they're in for an unpredictable ride and nothing is guaranteed. While I think it's wrong to say mix two brachyacephalic breeds together I think where temperament is concerned you generally know you'll have more of one than the other so prepare yourself. With Kes being a massive mix I was expecting any of the breeds or very few of the breeds to shine through, but I knew that having lots of very biddable breeds in her she was likely to be less stubborn and more trainable than if she were full bully.


I wish that was the case; you may well have been prepared for anything, but so many ads for mongrels / crosses promise certain things and buyers will expect them. A colleague bought a lab x boxer for instance as the breeder said that it would be calmer and more biddable than a boxer; he is now in rescue. Another colleague bought a pug x JRT as the breeder said that the dogs would be a longer- nosed pug from the JRT side, but calm like a pug; that dog was given to rescue.


----------



## BessieDog (May 16, 2012)

The problem is, in my view, too many people breeding indiscriminately with no knowledge or science behind it. 

I know someone who bred her full American CS with a nice looking dog down the road. No idea what breed it was. They kept one pup, and she's planning on her to have a litter. Dad not important. 

Obviously no health tests! 

If there is a good reason behind the cross, and its done carefully then I have no problem with it. But ignorant indiscriminate breeding could produce unexpected and unwanted traits which means the dog is likely to end up in rescue. 

IF I ever breed Bess ill want to know what her faults are, and find a sire whose strong points are her weaker ones. Today, for example, I met a very placid setter and her owner said all dogs from that breeding were placid. Perhaps a mix with that breeding would produce less hyper pets than Bess!

I suppose what I'm saying is breeding for temperament and health is fine. Breeding for looks without reference to health or potential behavioural problems is what I have difficulty with. Which probably is true for pedigrees or crosses.


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

Dogless said:


> I wish that was the case; you may well have been prepared for anything, but so many ads for mongrels / crosses promise certain things and buyers will expect them. A colleague bought a lab x boxer for instance as the breeder said that it would be calmer and more biddable than a boxer; he is now in rescue. Another colleague bought a pug x JRT as the breeder said that the dogs would be a longer- nosed pug from the JRT side, but calm like a pug; that dog was given to rescue.


Lab..boxer....calm.....:nonod:


----------



## Guest (Feb 3, 2013)

Dogless said:


> What worries me is what happens to the dogs when the experiment doesn't work out well? Pups may be sold as the 'perfect' mix but when they turn out to be difficult dogs or just not have the traits that buyers were 'promised' how many people persevere and how many sell them / give them away / surrender them to a rescue?


but then you could kinda say the same of pedigree's although to a lesser extent. People may not research the chosen breed or not be able to cope with them, or they may have a dog that isn't traditionally like the rest of its breed temperament wise. And they'll end up with rescue too. Huskies are an example.
But then again thats down to the owner and the breeder who sold them as the perfect breed/mix. I think if you are going to own a dog you have to be prepared to manage things that crop up unexpectantly, because most dogs are individuals and don't really ever go by any of those 'puppy' books you read. And you also have to aware of breed traits that could appear. 
I'm gonna use lurchers as an example (sorry:lol you're quite likely to get a high prey drive and instinct to chase, but not all dogs do. If crossed with a herding breed you may expect to have to up the mental stimulation or watch out for herding behaviour, but then again you don't always get this. You may have a traditionally laid back dog/bitch, or you may not.
Sorry if this doesn't make sense, i'm a bit tired. :blush:


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

Phoolf said:


> Lab..boxer....calm.....:nonod:


Exactly; but not everyone does their research first, that is a huge part of the problem. Just like the lady who though breeding Kilo to her sibe would be good the other day - she had never even heard of prey drive herself and had no idea why I said that a RR x sibe is a dog that I would never, ever want to own. She just thought that they'd be different looking and rare and people would buy them because of that. Sadly, people would.


----------



## SLB (Apr 25, 2011)

Working dogs are often crossed to make better ones. Mine are just larger spaniels in terms of how they work. Lets not forget that the Doberman is a fairly new breed. 

I like my crossbreeds - you never know what you're getting - thats the fun of it.


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

Dogless said:


> Exactly; but not everyone does their research first, that is a huge part of the problem. Just like the lady who though breeding Kilo to her sibe would be good the other day - she had never even heard of prey drive herself and had no idea why I said that a RR x sibe is a dog that I would never, ever want to own. She just thought that they'd be different looking and rare and people would buy them because of that. Sadly, people would.


I think this is more an issue of human ignorance rather than cross or interbreeding though, I'm sure many of the PF members here who have mongrels were well prepared and researched all the breeds so they knew that kind of things would probably crop up. I know I've looked into all the ones I didn't know too much about (not being too familiar with Am Bulls in general but more just general bully behaviour). Just like some pedigree breeders will say 'oh your yorkie looks nice, can I stud him with my yorkie?', there's ignorance everywhere, but the deed itself is not the problem.


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

Bijou said:


> Our pedigree breeds have been refined and bred for specific traits with great passion and dedication and are deserving of being preserved- for example a pure bred Arab horse will send chills down your spine with their sheer beauty like no Anglo Arab can - similarly with a pedigree Borzoi , Great Dane, or Doberman - how can these and other breeds be improved by cross breeding ? - they are living works of art . It saddens me when people don't consider some of our wonderful native breeds or one of the many stunning continental breeds now available when choosing a pup instead of opting to follow fashion and get a designer cross.
> 
> The Pointer/Dalmatian outcross is often mentioned but what is never mentioned is that the resulting cross bred pups were subsequently bred back into the Dalmatian restricted gene pool ( and quite heavily line bred too ) in order to get back the unique traits of this breed and it took many mnay generations - the cross breeding was not done to get 'something different' but to solve a health issue - and that's a million miles away from all those Oodles of Doodles !


This is such a good post, I wanted to rep you but it wouldn't allow me!!

This was a health issue that needed addressing and it was to preserve the breed and enhance it again.


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

Phoolf said:


> I think this is more an issue of human ignorance rather than cross or interbreeding though, I'm sure many of the PF members here who have mongrels were well prepared and researched all the breeds so they knew that kind of things would probably crop up. I know I've looked into all the ones I didn't know too much about (not being too familiar with Am Bulls in general but more just general bully behaviour). Just like some pedigree breeders will say 'oh your yorkie looks nice, can I stud him with my yorkie?', there's ignorance everywhere, but the deed itself is not the problem.


I think the deed is the problem when done by the ignorant, for the ignorant, for the wrong reasons - money, "it will calm a bitch to have a litter" etc....

I do not have a problem with it done by the educated, for the educated, for the right reasons.


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

Phoolf said:


> While it disgusts me when people breed two unhealthy breeds together I think those who buy mongrels like myself generally know they're in for an unpredictable ride and nothing is guaranteed. While I think it's wrong to say mix two brachyacephalic breeds together I think where temperament is concerned you generally know you'll have more of one than the other so prepare yourself. With Kes being a massive mix I was expecting any of the breeds or very few of the breeds to shine through, but I knew that having lots of very biddable breeds in her she was likely to be less stubborn and more trainable than if she were full bully.


Is that the reason that the breeder threw all those breeds together? To make a more biddable dog?

The breeds you often say Kes has in her seem quite stubborn though, in general.


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

emmaviolet said:


> Is that the reason that the breeder threw all those breeds together? To make a more biddable dog?
> 
> The breeds you often say Kes has in her seem quite stubborn though, in general.


Collies and GSD's are stubborn?  She has almost half stubborn breeds and half biddable breeds imo, which means she has her moments but is less challenging that if she were a full bull breed, she's also a lot more intelligent than she would be otherwise.


----------



## Guest (Feb 3, 2013)

Dogless said:


> What worries me is what happens to the dogs when the experiment doesn't work out well? Pups may be sold as the 'perfect' mix but when they turn out to be difficult dogs or just not have the traits that buyers were 'promised' how many people persevere and how many sell them / give them away / surrender them to a rescue?


This is the problem in a nutshell IMO.

While it is very true that all purebreds are the result of initially crossing breeds, the dirty little secret that no one wants to know or talk about, is that hundreds of years ago, when breeds were being developed, breeders were willing to ruthlessly cull. Any dog that didn't make the cut of what they were shooting for was culled - as in bucketed at birth in some cases, or simply shot later on when the desired traits were shown to be lacking.

Now we frown on culling, which is good, but what happens when you breed a litter of JRTs and BC's intending to make a faster flyball dog? You end up with say 8 pups. Out of those 8, you may only get 2 with the right mix of biddability and drive and speed. What happens to the ones who were too impulsive and turn out to have an issue with veering off course to go attack the other dog? You put a dog like this in a pet home, and you're going to end up with a public menace. No working home will take the dog because they want a dog they can compete. You could end up with 6 of these dogs either dumping them off on unsuspecting pet homes or shelters.

Same thing when you breed for a certain trait. If you look at the original doodle experiments, most came out looking like either all poodle or all golden. Of the ones who had the right coat type, you still had to have the right temperament for service work, and often you get a dog with the right coat, wrong temperament. Now what? You have a whole litter of pups, none of which can be used for their intended purpose.


----------



## Booties (Nov 23, 2012)

I could post a paragraph of mature debate, however I'm going to quote Jurassic Park instead.

*Dr. Grant:* I have a theory that there are two kinds of boys. There are those that want to be astronomers, and those that want to be astronauts. The astronomer, or the paleontologist, gets to study these amazing things from a place of complete safety. 
*Erik:* But then you never get to go into space.

Perhaps, as another view, some people just want to experiment, make their own...
Instead of studying from afar


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

Dogless said:


> I wish that was the case; you may well have been prepared for anything, but so many ads for mongrels / crosses promise certain things and buyers will expect them. A colleague bought a lab x boxer for instance as the breeder said that it would be calmer and more biddable than a boxer; he is now in rescue. Another colleague bought a pug x JRT as the breeder said that the dogs would be a longer- nosed pug from the JRT side, but calm like a pug; that dog was given to rescue.


Surely people who are going to give the dog up to rescue when things don't work out exactly as they want, are going to find something wrong with any dog, be it pedigree or mongrel.

Although with a pedigree you have a better idea of what the temperament is likely to develop into, you can never be 100% sure. You take on a dog, you live with it and manage the problems. That's what I believe anyway.


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

Phoolf said:


> Collies and GSD's are stubborn?  She has almost half stubborn breeds and half biddable breeds imo, which means she has her moments but is less challenging that if she were a full bull breed, she's also a lot more intelligent than she would be otherwise.


Well they do have their stubborn tenancies too, but the list of all the other breeds are very stubborn.


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

newfiesmum said:


> Surely people who are going to give the dog up to rescue when things don't work out exactly as they want, are going to find something wrong with any dog, be it pedigree or mongrel.
> 
> Although with a pedigree you have a better idea of what the temperament is likely to develop into, you can never be 100% sure. You take on a dog, you live with it and manage the problems. That's what I believe anyway.


That is what I believe too; unfortunately lots of people I come across just give a dog away (I've been asked a few times by people if I want theirs) and get a new one in a sort of cycle of dissatisfaction or laziness .


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

emmaviolet said:


> Well they do have their stubborn tenancies too, but the list of all the other breeds are very stubborn.


Well then I guess I'm lucky she's not even worse then  I think there's a difference between stubborn in the bully sense and stubborn as in less biddable like a husky. The bully sense of stubborn is quite unique to that group imo and completely different to the stubborn husky types.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

Dogless said:


> That is what I believe too; unfortunately lots of people I come across just give a dog away (I've been asked a few times by people if I want theirs) and get a new one in a sort of cycle of dissatisfaction or laziness .


So it has nothing to do with breeds at all, has it? It has as usual to do with ignorance and laziness. People like that don't think of their dogs like we do, as part of the family no matter what.

When I read up on newfoundlands I read that they were stubborn. Ferdie certainly lives up to that, I have never known such a stubborn dog, but Joshua wasn't neither is Diva.

I could tell you that newfoundlands have the most wonderful temperament from living with Diva, but there is always someone who will tell you what a pain their one is or was.


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

Phoolf said:


> Well then I guess I'm lucky she's not even worse then  I think there's a difference between stubborn in the bully sense and stubborn as in less biddable like a husky. The bully sense of stubborn is quite unique to that group imo and completely different to the stubborn husky types.


That's it though, if a stubborn bull breed is put to a husky breed, you could wind up with a dog that wouldn't follow any command and not come back when recalled!
If they put them together to make them more biddable, they could have made everything so much worse!


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

emmaviolet said:


> That's it though, if a stubborn bull breed is put to a husky breed, you could wind up with a dog that wouldn't follow any command and not come back when recalled!
> If they put them together to make them more biddable, they could have made everything so much worse!


You're right of course, but with Kes' mums mating being accidental (as opposed to previous generations in her family which were not) it wasn't something considered or thought about, thankfully it's turned out well and from reports from the guy who has her brother and keeps in touch with the other pups it sounds like I've got the worst of it.


----------



## Roxyjade (Jan 30, 2013)

I was between buying a King Charles and a Lhasa apso so Instead I bought a cross between the two and she's lovely! Breed means absolutely nothing to me, neither do papers I couldn't care less how many champions are in her lines etc, I want a nice loving family pet and wev definately got that regardless of anything else! There's no rules to breeding! Us humans can have kids with who he want whatever people's religions, race. So unless your specially buying a dog for earning money on breeding or showing or cruft a alot of people arnt bothered about the breed!!


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

Roxyjade said:


> I was between buying a King Charles and a Lhasa apso so Instead I bought a cross between the two and she's lovely! Breed means absolutely nothing to me, neither do papers I couldn't care less how many champions are in her lines etc, I want a nice loving family pet and wev definately got that regardless of anything else! There's no rules to breeding! Us humans can have kids with who he want whatever people's religions, race. So unless your specially buying a dog for earning money on breeding or showing or cruft a alot of people arnt bothered about the breed!!


As I'm currently doing some work in the Genetics department of our hospital I do muse on this a lot. There's people out there who takes risks all the time when they have a dominant condition in their genes, so any child would have a 50% chance of having bad health etc. As humans we put so much emphasis on breeding dogs, but so much less on breeding healthy humans a lot of the time. I personally, as well as other reasons, won't be having children because I don't think it would be fair to pass on my genetic traits etc.


----------



## Alice Childress (Nov 14, 2010)

Roxyjade said:


> I was between buying a King Charles and a Lhasa apso so Instead I bought a cross between the two and she's lovely! Breed means absolutely nothing to me, neither do papers I couldn't care less how many champions are in her lines etc, I want a nice loving family pet and wev definately got that regardless of anything else! There's no rules to breeding! Us humans can have kids with who he want whatever people's religions, race. So unless your specially buying a dog for earning money on breeding or showing or cruft a alot of people arnt bothered about the breed!!


People don't earn money from showing (and rarely from breeding if done correctly), it costs them a fortune!

To me breeds are important for the very reason that you don't think they are - because I want a dog that my lifestyle fits and will become a happy pet. Breeds, with their breed traits (and the ability to look back over the specific breed lines), give you the best idea of what your dog is going to end up being like as an adult, and what their needs will roughly be. If I picked some random puppy, they may grow up to be a dog with a very high prey drive and needs hours and hours of exercise - both qualities that I can not provide for. To me, this is why keeping breeds to a breed standard is so important in deciding what dog is best for you, and in turn, what dog will become that lovely family pet you speak of.


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

Phoolf said:


> As I'm currently doing some work in the Genetics department of our hospital I do muse on this a lot. There's people out there who takes risks all the time when they have a dominant condition in their genes, so any child would have a 50% chance of having bad health etc. As humans we put so much emphasis on breeding dogs, but so much less on breeding healthy humans a lot of the time. I personally, as well as other reasons, won't be having children because I don't think it would be fair to pass on my genetic traits etc.


Actually I think it rather selfish when a person has a child who could suffer through their whole life from a genetic condition but chooses to have children anyway. I saw a documentary about a group of disabled children, there was one little girl who had no quality of life at all, couldn't move or breathe, there was a one in four chance that each child she had would have this but she continued to have baby after baby after baby..... 

I will not be having children so as not to pass on my genes.


----------



## Roxyjade (Jan 30, 2013)

Alice Childress said:


> People don't earn money from showing (and rarely from breeding if done correctly), it costs them a fortune!
> 
> To me breeds are important for the very reason that you don't think they are - because I want a dog that my lifestyle fits and will become a happy pet. Breeds, with their breed traits (and the ability to look back over the specific breed lines), give you the best idea of what your dog is going to end up being like as an adult, and what their needs will roughly be. If I picked some random puppy, they may grow up to be a dog with a very high prey drive and needs hours and hours of exercise - both qualities that I can not provide for. To me, this is why keeping breeds to a breed standard is so important in deciding what dog is best for you, and in turn, what dog will become that lovely family pet you speak of.


Everyone has different opinions but to me I no what breeds mine is! I understand what ya saying if the other breed is unknown! But if you buy a dog ya should be prepared to excercise it also to the dogs requirements so if u get a dog and it turns out to be cross then it doesn't matter if u love the dog and have time for the dog you would give it the excersice and time it needs!


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

emmaviolet said:


> *Actually I think it rather selfish when a person has a child who could suffer through their whole life from a genetic condition but chooses to have children anyway. *I saw a documentary about a group of disabled children, there was one little girl who had no quality of life at all, couldn't move or breathe, there was a one in four chance that each child she had would have this but she continued to have baby after baby after baby.....
> 
> I will not be having children so as not to pass on my genes.


I agree, and it makes me sad when I have to read about people who chose to do this anyway but I suppose it's their choice at the end of the day, sadly not the resulting childs.


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

Roxyjade said:


> Everyone has different opinions but to me I no what breeds mine is! I understand what ya saying if the other breed is unknown! But if you buy a dog ya should be prepared to excercise it also to the dogs requirements so if u get a dog and it turns out to be cross then it doesn't matter if u love the dog and have time for the dog you would give it the excersice and time it needs!


But you have no way of knowing what you dog truly is, you can only take the word of the woman who put those dogs together.


----------



## Roxyjade (Jan 30, 2013)

emmaviolet said:


> But you have no way of knowing what you dog truly is, you can only take the word of the woman who put those dogs together.


I used to be really bothered myself! We have a mini schnauzer who cost us £600 kc reg met mum met dad etc, and he's a lil sod! Iv had to get him castrated so he doesn't breed as I wouldn't want people to have to go through what we have! He's Soo yappy, dog aggresive and wev kept him and looked after him and got on with his ways although I no alot of people wouldn't! He would of been I. A rescue now but we love him!
Our cross is opposite, never barks, loves other people and dogs etc, which says to me however much u pay for a full ped dog there is still no guarantees it's guna fit ya lifestyle and what it's guna end up like! It's a risk when u buy ANY dog any breed any pedigree!!


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

I met the most adorable crossbreed fellow today - he was a Springer x Pointer BUT there was a bit of Munsterlander mixed in. Gorgeous dog. Alas though he was so energetic that his first owner couldn't cope and he ended up in rescue. Happily the woman who now has him seems to really adore him  

I think when people with the right knowledge of dogs decide to crossbreed, the results may be good. i.e. as people have mentioned, introducing a different breed to try and resolve a health problem.

However, when there are so many people with NO knowledge and experience, simply throwing two breeds together....and when they DON'T do the vital health tests on the dam and sire....that is when I have a big issue with it. (I also have a big issue when people breed two of the same breed together and don't health test of course).

This thread makes me think of the Eurasier. That's a mix of three or four breeds I think - including Keeshond, Samoyed, Chow. The aim was to produce the 'perfect' or 'ideal' pet dog. 

Somewhat ironically, of the two Eurasiers I know, one is an incredibly tense and snappy dog......


----------



## Alice Childress (Nov 14, 2010)

Roxyjade said:


> Everyone has different opinions but to me I no what breeds mine is! I understand what ya saying if the other breed is unknown! But if you buy a dog ya should be prepared to excercise it also to the dogs requirements so if u get a dog and it turns out to be cross then it doesn't matter if u love the dog and have time for the dog you would give it the excersice and time it needs!


As you know your dog's breeds, that is different as you can research each and make sure you could handle both - although that does rather prove my point  Because you know your dogs breeds, you can make sure that both breeds fit your life, hence having those standard breeds is important.

Of course if you get a dog you should be prepared to exercise them, that is why breeds are important to me - dogs exercise needs can vary massively and my lifestyle cannot offer the amount that say a husky, or border collie needs. I physically could not give a dog with those very high needs what they needed no matter how much I loved them.


----------



## Luz (Jul 28, 2012)

It's an odd one isn't it. I do think Puggles are lovely as they tend to be cute with less breathing problems than a Pug. When we decided that we were getting too old to have another Staffy I saw an advert for Staffy x Chihuahuas and I did think that they would be perfect, as in a Staffy but tiny. Thinking on though, it might go horribly wrong if you ended up with a pup with the worst traits rather than the best. 

My mum actually went on a waiting list for Daisy, a Yorkie/Chihuahua as she wanted a very tiny pretty little 'handbag dog'. I have to say she has the loveliest personality and would happily go home with anyone who cuddled her. 
However, I do despair of some of the cross breeds that are going on and wonder 'WHAT WERE THEY THINKING?'


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

emmaviolet said:


> Actually I think it rather selfish when a person has a child who could suffer through their whole life from a genetic condition but chooses to have children anyway. I saw a documentary about a group of disabled children, there was one little girl who had no quality of life at all, couldn't move or breathe, there was a one in four chance that each child she had would have this but she continued to have baby after baby after baby.....
> 
> I will not be having children so as not to pass on my genes.


My son went to school with a severely mentally disabled girl, one of six children, who had a baby sister with the same syndrome, but they still kept having children. Because their priest told them to.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

I don't see the point of crossing to pedigree breeds, surely there are enough breeds out there for people to find one they like.


----------



## kirksandallchins (Nov 3, 2007)

If people never crossed different breeds then breeds like Dobermanns, Bull Terriers and Bull Mastiffs to name but a few would not exist. Even the Labradoodle was created for a genuine purpose - it is just the greed of people that has made crossbreeding more fashionable.

Personally I got a Labradoodle as I wanted the poodle temperament but not the expense of having it trimmed every 6 weeks. I looked at a multitude of other breeds in the size range and coat types I wanted but none fitted all my tick-boxes. Maybe I have just been lucky with my 2 Labradoodles but they are just about my perfect dogs


----------



## Fleur (Jul 19, 2008)

Happy Paws said:


> I don't see the point of crossing to pedigree breeds, surely there are enough breeds out there for people to find one they like.


But are they actually available?
One of the 'issues' is that crosses are more readily available and some breeders are (often rightly so) protective of their breed.
A couple of people have said they contacted breed clubs and breeders and got no response, you need to own the breed to get the breed 
We are constantly told on this forum that responsible breeders only breed when they want a pup - there is no way they can meet the demand for pets.
I'm not saying there aren't enough varities of pedigrees just maybe not enough breeders.
I don't know any or know of any breeders to buy a dog I would entirely rely on the breed club responding to my enquiries or public adverts.


----------



## Guest (Feb 3, 2013)

kirksandallchins said:


> If people never crossed different breeds then breeds like Dobermanns, Bull Terriers and Bull Mastiffs to name but a few would not exist. Even the Labradoodle was created for a genuine purpose - it is just the greed of people that has made crossbreeding more fashionable.
> 
> Personally I got a Labradoodle as I wanted the poodle temperament but not the expense of having it trimmed every 6 weeks. I looked at a multitude of other breeds in the size range and coat types I wanted but none fitted all my tick-boxes. Maybe I have just been lucky with my 2 Labradoodles but they are just about my perfect dogs


And do you know how many dogs were culled in the process of creating a breed like the Doberman?


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

Fleur said:


> But are they actually available?
> One of the 'issues' is that crosses are more readily available and some breeders are (often rightly so) protective of their breed.
> A couple of people have said they contacted breed clubs and breeders and got no response, you need to own the breed to get the breed
> We are constantly told on this forum that responsible breeders only breed when they want a pup - there is no way they can meet the demand for pets.
> ...


So true. Almost all the breeds I would like have such low numbers, and so few breeders.


----------



## tonysoprano (Feb 2, 2013)

I am stumped as to why anyone would want to breed from any dog at the moment. 
Have a walk round the many rescue centers. You will see every breed available, including all the new doodles, spockers etc. From a litter of 7 pups, the real truth is some of them will be joining them. if every dog lover owned 3 dogs, there would still be not enough dog owners out there.

I wont give you the statistics of how many dogs were put down last year in the U.K 

forget any type of breeding - its neutering we need


----------



## Bijou (Aug 26, 2009)

For goodness sake we're not talking about popping out for a take away here - why on earth would you NOT research different breeds to find the perfect match and be prepared to wait for the right pup 
You have a dog for 12-14 years on average - it lives in your home and shares your world as much as any other member of yoiur family ..yet some folk put more effort into choosing their next sofa !.

I breed a numerically small breed and currently have people on my waiting list that have been there for almost a year ( and my bitch has STILL not come into season  ) - my prospective puppy buyers have all visited me and met 'mum' and some of the other dogs I've bred several times whilst waiting so have a pretty good idea of what to expect when they do get their pup- now that's got to be better than basing your choice of dog on what 's available in the local ad trader at the right time - no ?


----------



## Alice Childress (Nov 14, 2010)

Fleur said:


> But are they actually available?
> One of the 'issues' is that crosses are more readily available and some breeders are (often rightly so) protective of their breed.
> A couple of people have said they contacted breed clubs and breeders and got no response, you need to own the breed to get the breed
> We are constantly told on this forum that responsible breeders only breed when they want a pup - there is no way they can meet the demand for pets.
> ...


I do think that there is an argument to say that good ethical breeders (who currently almost by definition do not breed often), should actually start breeding more in order to make it easier for people to find a well bred puppy. In a perfect world, as byb numbers fell, decent breeders would take their place.

I've found it really difficult to find a Bernese pup by a breeder I feel comfortable with. Just under 600 Bernese pups were registered last year, so they are by no means in danger (nor native), but compared to one of the more popular breeds, pups are few and far between. To find a puppy easily, really you need to hear about them by word of mouth, and to hear about them by word of mouth, you need to get yourself involved in the breed world. Although to me, a commitment as big as a dog is worth all the trouble, I can understand why many people feel that this is all a bit ridiculous in order to find a pet dog when this need to get so involved and 'prove yourself' to breeders, seems to be a relatively new attitude (my elderly uncle simply cannot understand, no matter how I explain it to him, why you wouldn't just go to your neighbour down the street with a litter and pick up a pup). Times have changed though, and I for one feel very strongly about puppies only being brought into this world ethically and responsible and part of that means the breeders making absolutely sure that they are going to the right homes.

It's a shame that people do not just think of this need to get involved and prove yourself, as part of commitment and the done thing. Maybe in future years it will become the norm, but for the moment, I think a lot of people are put off and then end going to some byb 10 minutes down the road who will give them a puppy without any questions and they are free to do what they like.


----------



## Bijou (Aug 26, 2009)

> forget any type of breeding - its neutering we need


nope - what we need is responsible, breeding, buying and ownership !


----------



## Fleur (Jul 19, 2008)

Bijou said:


> For goodness sake we're not talking about popping out for a take away here - why on earth would you NOT research different breeds to find the perfect match and be prepared to wait for the right pup
> You have a dog for 12-14 years on average - it lives in your home and shares your world as much as any other member of yoiur family ..yet some folk put more effort into choosing their next sofa !.
> 
> I breed a numerically small breed and currently have people on my waiting list that have been there for almost a year ( and my bitch has STILL not come into season  ) - my prospective puppy buyers have all visited me and met 'mum' and some of the other dogs I've bred several times whilst waiting so have a pretty good idea of what to expect when they do get their pup- now that's got to be better than basing your choice of dog on what 's available in the local ad trader at the right time - no ?


You are totally right
I spent 2 years researching breeds, visited Discovery Dogs spoke to breeders their spent time with the dogs picked up contact info to the breed clubs of breeds we were interested in.
Sent long e-mails and left messages on answer phones, registered with 2 rescues in all that time only one breeder got back to me to tell me they had no plans to breed for at least 3 years - no other breeder, breed club got back to me or referred me onto other breeders, in all that time the rescues did not have a dog they were happy to rehome with a 1st time owner with kids - so as an average no dog experienced first time owner supposed to do?

I'm not saying irresponible breeding should be happeing - but I can understand why it is


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

Well I'm obviously going about breeding and showing the wrong way, I'm several thousand pounds down, and all I've got to *show* for it is a rather healthy and robust puppy, a few rosettes and certificates, and a new set of friends with rather healthy and robust puppies! 

Seriously, I have no idea why the majority of people choose to breed, no matter what they're breeding. The only way to try and prevent bad breeding, is take away the market by educating people, but unfortunately there are plenty of websites willing to cater to those selling the latest greatest litter of pups from affordable to ridiculously priced no matter what they are. It's like King Canute sat on the beach trying to hold back the tide!


----------



## hazel pritchard (Jun 28, 2009)

One of my rescue x breed dogs was found last Sept to have degenrative disc disease, the vet told me this is getting more common is small breeds with slightly long backs, i doubt whoever bred him did any health checks before breeding more than likely it was for £££££ , as this dog was found dumped in a cardboard box on the street with another puppy aged about 6 weeks old.


----------



## Werehorse (Jul 14, 2010)

I have to say that subconsciously I reckon one of the reasons I have the dogs I have is that it sticks in my throat quite a bit for someone else to sit in judgement on whether I am fit to own a dog. Be that a pedigree dog breeder or a rescue centre. I got dogs from people who I knew through other people (farming/shooting community  :lol and I know that the breeders questioned the "middle men" as to our credentials for the high energy breeds we have but I never felt like they were giving us the third degree or not treating us as the responsible adults we actually are!

I understand why breeders and rescue centres feel they have to judge potential owners but it irks me when I think about them doing it to *me*! Do they not know who I am? :lol:


----------



## tonysoprano (Feb 2, 2013)

Bijou said:


> nope - what we need is responsible, breeding, buying and ownership !


responsible - unfortunately, most are not
breeding - I take it your a breeder
Buying - Oh' you are!


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

tonysoprano said:


> responsible - unfortunately, most are not
> breeding - I take it your a breeder
> Buying - Oh' you are!


Can I ask you, do you truly think, if people who health tested, ensured they didn't use dogs of poor temperament, ability or conformation, stopped breeding completely because of the dogs being handed in to rescue and pts, that other, less responsible breeders would also stop, or not even fill the gap in the market left by those who had stopped breeding? Many responsible breeders have stopped breeding for the most part, but long term, if the good breeders decrease or even stop breeding, you are left with the dregs of a gene pool for pedigrees, and God only knows what else!


----------



## Bijou (Aug 26, 2009)

> breeding - I take it your a breeder
> Buying - Oh' you are!


..and the inference here is what ? ........


----------



## Guest (Feb 3, 2013)

tonysoprano said:


> responsible - unfortunately, most are not
> breeding - I take it your a breeder
> Buying - Oh' you are!


How does this add anything of value to the discussion?

There ARE people breeding responsibly, many of them also actively involved in rescue and picking up the messes left by irresponsible breeders. Just because you are not aware of this doesn't mean it's not true.


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

Happy Paws said:


> I don't see the point of crossing to pedigree breeds, surely there are enough breeds out there for people to find one they like.


I'll state full out that I have no desire to be 'pushed' into purchasing a pup from a subscribed list of breeds.

Why would I succomb to that? I didn't have a say in making the list. It was not voted on. The list is not set in stone and it is not the be all end all for everyone.

I will state full out that there is not enough variety in breeds of the temperament type, size and moderate phenotype that I like to provide me a purebred dog with even somewhat good chances at having lifelong good health.

I can find that in a cross and have.

CC


----------



## tonysoprano (Feb 2, 2013)

My point is no breeder will be comfortable with neutering and the topic "why would you do it" is why I wouldn't 

I believe that we don't need any breeders. If breeds die out then so be it. At least we will be sure of no suffering. If you love dogs then you love all dogs. 
I have fostered over 200 dogs in the last 3 years, many pedigrees that can be traced back to very reputable breeders, including 4 rotties and 2 Akitas that I have now kept. It is not the fault of the breeder that the owner chose not to keep these dogs but do we need any more pedigrees. 

I stand firm that all dogs should be neutered. I cant for the life of me understand why one would choose not to, But it is not going to happen.

I agree that the bad breeders will remain so, but all breeders good or bad can not be sure where these dogs will end up.

I have seen far to much suffering and abuse to get excited about any new breeds and what would breed well with what.

sorry if i rattled your cages, it is best I get out of here. I should never have signed up! I will end up peeing everyone off, including myself.


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

My involvement in rescue began over 30 years ago, and involves fostering as well.

Unfortunately as commercial breeders have INCREASED here due to the demand for dogs that are not being supplied by pet breeders two of my last fosters were ex mill mommas.

One died while she was being spayed (didn't wake up - older girl with a heart murmur - if I knew then what I know now I would have insisted she stay intact).

I don't share your views.



tonysoprano said:


> I am stumped as to why anyone would want to breed from any dog at the moment.
> Have a walk round the many rescue centers. You will see every breed available, including all the new doodles, spockers etc. From a litter of 7 pups, the real truth is some of them will be joining them. if every dog lover owned 3 dogs, there would still be not enough dog owners out there.
> 
> I wont give you the statistics of how many dogs were put down last year in the U.K
> ...


I can quote statistics. There are ~ 8-9 million owned dogs in the UK, about 800,000 looking for new pups yearly, and ~1500 shelter dogs for which homes were not found in time were put down in the UK last year.

---------------------------------

EmCHammer - Thank you for the correction and the direction to find the info - The source I found was this one - http://www.dogstrust.org.uk/az/s/straydogsurvey/straydogsurveysummaryreport2012.pdf -

A percentage of stray dogs are put down as well yearly that DogsTrust handles - with the highest percentage of that happening in Northern Ireland at 19% of the strays found. The UK average was 7%. The reasons for destruction were supplied for about half the strays that were put down - ill health, behavioural and illegal dogs seem to be the core issue but we won't know for those where reasons were not given.

"The estimated proportion of stray dogs being put to sleep remains at 7%. This is still one of the lowest destruction figures recorded since the Stray Dogs survey began in 1997. This year 6,900 stray dogs were reported as having been put to sleep by authorities taking part in this survey, compared with 7,700 last year. From this figure we can estimate that approximately 8,903 dogs were put to sleep across the UK during the period of 1st April 2011 to 31st March 2012.

Amongst the authorities responding, details were given for around half of reported destructions. It was reported that 1,924 dogs were put to sleep due to behavioural problems or aggression, 1,607 due to ill health, and 575 under the Dangerous Dogs Act."

----------------------------------

As well THOUSANDS were imported from commercial breeding operations in Wales and in Ireland.

Many more rescues were imported from outside your country.

Having dogs in rescue does not mean there is an overpopulation of dogs.

Having dogs killed by shelter systems that are doing diddly squat to encourage their adoptions, and in many cases are discouraging adopters, does not mean there is an overpopulation of dogs.

Dogged Blog: Why shelter killing has nothing to do with 'pet over-population'

There are bodies in the UK which, I understand, take in great amounts of donations to help animals but CHOOSE to focus on spending that for political purposes instead of on helping rescue dogs.

The money is there to support EVERY animal that needs a home if it was turned their way. There are many more times the homes looking for dogs in the UK than the numbers made available through rescue.

The fact is the agencies and the bodies that CAN make a difference are turning a blind eye and no amount of caring breeders choosing to not breed a litter are going to resolve THAT problem.

--------------------------------------------

For those of us on the North American side.

In the USA there are now over 78 million owned dogs. From 1973 to 2007 US cat and dog owning homes more than doubled and animal shelter euthanasia rates dropped by more than 60%. In 2012 less than 1.5 million dogs were euthanised and that is a drop from 6-7 million in 1973. Keep in mind from studies in the 90s about 24% of relinquishments for dogs and 17% for cats are pets for which euthanasia has been requested, and as well those numbers include animals the shelters CHOOSE to not allow for adoption, many being 'type' dogs in areas where those are illegal to adopt out.

The rate of pets killed in shelters per 1000 people has dropped from 115 to 9.7 and again the way stats are kept those include owner requested euthanasias done at shelters.

ANIMAL PEOPLE ONLINE » U.S. animal shelter toll appears to drop below three million

CC


----------



## Shadowrat (Jan 30, 2011)

I know what you mean, if you like a breed for that breed, why 'muddy' the qualities you like by merging it with another?
As has been said: money. Probably.
I admit to having a morbid curiosity about what certain breeds would look like crossed (a greyhound a bulldog has always made me think) but never enough to actually do it! I just like imagining what certain breeds would look like smushed together!

I think people manage to sell crosses of two pedigrees because some people want something 'different'. 
A dobe? Well, anyone can get a dobe! A dobe x husky? Dobe x staff, etc thats likely to be 'rarer' and more 'different'. 
I also think some people want a dog of a certain breed but know they may not cope with its traits, so think if its crossed with something 'easier' they'll get the breed they want, but watered down!
Not true, of course, but I known a couple of of people do this. One wanted a dobe but felt she couldn't cope with the energy and drive (just liked the look, velcro-ness, intelligence etc) so she purchased a dobe x lab, thinking that would make it more 'manageable'. 
Obviously.....it didn't. In fact, she'd probably have been better off getting a pure dobe in the first place!
I think some people don't realise that with a cross, you can get the worst of both breeds, not always the best! The amount of people I've met who think crossing 3 or 4 breeds together will give you this super dog with all these amazing traits! When you ask what would happen if it got the worst of all those breeds, they seem like its something that never occurred to them!

I sometimes don't think well meaning dog people help this assumption, either. 
I very recently saw a dog rescue page on FB trying to home some husky cross pups. I like this rescue, they do good work, but they'd written these pups up as 'husky cross, so much more mellow than a full husky, without many of the difficult traits!' or words to that affect (not a direct quote).
These were young pups, not really old enough to see the dogs they'd become, but I wondered how they could actually say this? Of every single pup in the litter? That none of them would have the 'difficult' husky traits? I don't think one can state that with any certainty.

But I do think this is partly why there are a lot of husky crosses about these days: people love the look of huskies, and lets be honest, they're beautiful dogs and tend to make any cross look gorgeous. So people think they can breed an 'easier' husky by crossing it with something a bit more mellow, and get the dog with the looks but without the work needed. Which probably appeals to many.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

tonysoprano said:


> My point is no breeder will be comfortable with neutering and the topic "why would you do it" is why I wouldn't
> 
> I believe that we don't need any breeders. If breeds die out then so be it. At least we will be sure of no suffering. If you love dogs then you love all dogs.
> I have fostered over 200 dogs in the last 3 years, many pedigrees that can be traced back to very reputable breeders, including 4 rotties and 2 Akitas that I have now kept. It is not the fault of the breeder that the owner chose not to keep these dogs but do we need any more pedigrees.
> ...


If every dog was neutered and nobody bred any dog at all, it would not be many years before the canine becomes an extinct animal. Is that what you want?


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

tonysoprano - I don't see why anyone should HAVE to surgically alter their dog. Just because your dog is intact doesn't mean it's being used for breeding, not to mention if you look up the health effects of neutering and spaying you would be condemning many dogs to a painful death.


----------



## dandogman (Dec 19, 2011)

comfortcreature said:


> I'll state full out that I have no desire to be 'pushed' into purchasing a pup from a subscribed list of breeds.
> 
> Why would I succomb to that? I didn't have a say in making the list. It was not voted on. The list is not set in stone and it is not the be all end all for everyone.
> 
> ...


Sorry, but that is absolute tosh!

I fail to see the logic on how crossing 2 un health tested dogs (vast majority of cross bred dogs parents aren't health tested) will produce healthier puppies than breeding 2 health tested dogs


----------



## Shadowrat (Jan 30, 2011)

tonysoprano said:


> I believe that we don't need any breeders. If breeds die out then so be it. At least we will be sure of no suffering.


Wiping out a species isn't the best way to 'stop suffering'. By that argument, humans should die off too, as at least then no-one would be suffering! Lets kill everything, I can't cope with the sad any more!



tonysoprano said:


> I stand firm that all dogs should be neutered. I cant for the life of me understand why one would choose not to, But it is not going to happen.


I chose not to because I see no reason to?
I also don't like the health issues associated with neutering, or behavioural changes that can occur. 
I'm not breeding, I have no bitches, he will never be responsible for a litter, why should I snip him and subject him to the risks involved when there is no benefit to us?

Many responsible dog owners choose not to neuter these days, as the potential risks are being hidden away less and less and people are becoming more aware of the realities that vets have tried to brush under the carpet for years. 
Having an intact animal doesn't mean one is automatically planning to breed. 
Im not planning on having any kids, but I haven't told my husband he should be neutered 

95% of my rats are in tact.....is that wrong too? The reality actually is that the chance of an accidental mating with the rats is far higher than the risk of Dresden accidently impregnating anything. 
In fact, we've had two accidental matings here in the 16 years I've had rats. Fortunately as rat owners, we have the luxury of galastop (a medication used to treat brain tumours in rats but that has the side effect of causing them to re-absorb babies, with no side effects) but my point is that I see no reason to neuter my dog; it would serve more purpose to neuter all my male rats, but Im not doing that either, nor do I suspect you would argue I should!


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

tonysoprano said:


> My point is no breeder will be comfortable with neutering and the topic "why would you do it" is why I wouldn't
> 
> I believe that we don't need any breeders. If breeds die out then so be it. At least we will be sure of no suffering. If you love dogs then you love all dogs.
> I have fostered over 200 dogs in the last 3 years, many pedigrees that can be traced back to very reputable breeders, including 4 rotties and 2 Akitas that I have now kept. It is not the fault of the breeder that the owner chose not to keep these dogs but do we need any more pedigrees.
> ...


You think there should be no breeding and let breeds die out? Do you include dogs in general? because if you say no one should breed, they will eventually. If you only apply this to the different breeds, then you will eventually end up with one generic 'dog' (probably middle sized, similar to the dingo) which will not suit all homes by a long way.


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

dandogman said:


> Sorry, but that is absolute tosh!
> 
> I fail to see the logic on how crossing 2 un health tested dogs (vast majority of cross bred dogs parents aren't health tested) will produce healthier puppies than breeding 2 health tested dogs


I'm not sure if they'd be 'healthier' as this could be subjective, but just because you health test or do not health test doesn't mean a dog will be either healthy or unhealthy. Health tests are a fairly new thing, we managed to keep dogs fairly well before they came into place by knowing a dogs lines, traits, temperament and general health history.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

tonysoprano said:


> I am stumped as to why anyone would want to breed from any dog at the moment.
> Have a walk round the many rescue centers. You will see every breed available, including all the new doodles, spockers etc. From a litter of 7 pups, the real truth is some of them will be joining them. if every dog lover owned 3 dogs, there would still be not enough dog owners out there.
> 
> I wont give you the statistics of how many dogs were put down last year in the U.K
> ...


And what about those who want dogs as more than pets? You could start with Guide Dogs for the Blind? Where would they get their dogs from? They have probably the largest breeding program in Europe and are very careful and specific with their breeding, they don't take any random puppy, much less any rescue.


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

tonysoprano said:


> My point is no breeder will be comfortable with neutering and the topic "why would you do it" is why I wouldn't
> 
> I believe that we don't need any breeders. If breeds die out then so be it. At least we will be sure of no suffering. If you love dogs then you love all dogs.
> I have fostered over 200 dogs in the last 3 years, many pedigrees that can be traced back to very reputable breeders, including 4 rotties and 2 Akitas that I have now kept. It is not the fault of the breeder that the owner chose not to keep these dogs but do we need any more pedigrees.
> ...


There are a couple of reasons I wouldn't want the pups I bred to be neutered, at least early  There are health issues related to Labradors which are looking very strongly as if neutering/spaying can exacerbate them, so I don't believe it's the best thing to whip out/off sexual reproduction organs for convenience, and as a preventative measure. That said, I do think there are people who are not responsible enough to own an entire dog or bitch, but how can that be prevented, it's not against the law, and if a responsible breeder turns them away, they just go to the next breeder who'll allow them to buy a pup.

I am in touch, and *intend* to stay in touch with the other puppy owners, I've seen one, and hope to see all of them over the next couple of months. They are all endorsed and were sold under contract which stipulates their progeny cannot be registered with the KC unless various criteria are met, in which case I will lift the endorsements for free. I will actively encourage these people to breed *responsibly* because I do feel the only way to stop irresponsible breeding of any pet is by educating, and by provicing an alternative.

I do hope you stay and join in debates, I don't mind that you have a completely different view, it's healthy to see all sides of the debates we have on here


----------



## dandogman (Dec 19, 2011)

Phoolf said:


> I'm not sure if they'd be 'healthier' as this could be subjective, but just because you health test or do not health test doesn't mean a dog will be either healthy or unhealthy. Health tests are a fairly new thing, we managed to keep dogs fairly well before they came into place by knowing a dogs lines, traits, temperament and general health history.


It means there will be a lesser *chance *of developing HD if a dogs parents are hip scored for instace, than a dog from someone who has chucked too dogs together hoping for the best. If these techniques are there for us to use to assist us in breeding healthier dogs, they should be used.


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

dandogman said:


> *It means there will be a lesser chance of developing HD if a dogs parents are hip scored for instace*, than a dog from someone who has chucked too dogs together hoping for the best. If these techniques are there for us to use to assist us in breeding healthier dogs, they should be used.


Well, no, it doesn't. Unless I've missed the point of scoring completely, does getting the hips scored magically make them perfect?


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

Phoolf said:


> Well, no, it doesn't. Unless I've missed the point of scoring completely, does getting the hips scored magically make them perfect?


Although it's not 100% confirmed, obviously if you see a pattern of high hip scores, or dogs who produce high scoring progeny, then you avoid that line. It's difficult with *some* bitches, who only have one or two litters, because obviously their influence is much less, but could also sway what happens with hip scores.

I very much doubt if Zasa will be a 0/0 like her mum, I think it would be just too perfect to be true, although judging from how she is and moves, I don't think she looks much different to her mother. We'll see.


----------



## dandogman (Dec 19, 2011)

Phoolf said:


> Well, no, it doesn't. Unless I've missed the point of scoring completely, does getting the hips scored magically make them perfect?


Yes, because decent breeders would only breed from dogs below a certain score, which is around 15 in Labradors.


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

dandogman said:


> Yes, because decent breeders would only breed from dogs below a certain score, which is around 15 in Labradors.


Then your wording was completely wrong, having hip scores means nothing, it's what you do with them that counts. And even if the hip scores are good it is no guarantee at all that any offspring will have good hips.


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

dandogman said:


> Sorry, but that is absolute tosh!
> 
> I fail to see the logic on how crossing 2 un health tested dogs (vast majority of cross bred dogs parents aren't health tested) will produce healthier puppies than breeding 2 health tested dogs


The vast majority of Tibetan Spaniels are unhealth tested. The vast majority of Cavaliers used for litters are remiss in health tests. The vast majority of Cockers used for litters are remiss in health tests.

The parents of my dogs were health tested, and have a pedigree in which I have met a good amount of dogs in their background.

Their health testing and temperaments and phenotype were better than I could do with Cocker breeders here, with Cavalier breeders here, or with Tibbie breeders here, and all three of those breeds are a compromise with regard to phenotype with me as their muzzles are shorter than I like.

I did better than that and my pups are backed for life by their breeder.

CC


----------



## Tigerneko (Jan 2, 2009)

dandogman said:


> Yes, because decent breeders would only breed from dogs below a certain score, which is around 15 in Labradors.


Hip scoring is actually one of the poorer examples of a health test, a parents hip score does not guarantee that the pups will have good hips - even if you breed from two 0:0 parents, you are not guaranteed to get 0:0 puppies at all, it often isn't really that much of an indicator of what the progeny will be like.


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> Although it's not 100% confirmed, obviously if you see a pattern of high hip scores, or dogs who produce high scoring progeny, then you avoid that line. It's difficult with *some* bitches, who only have one or two litters, because obviously their influence is much less, but could also sway what happens with hip scores.
> 
> I very much doubt if Zasa will be a 0/0 like her mum, I think it would be just too perfect to be true, although judging from how she is and moves, I don't think she looks much different to her mother. We'll see.


Off topic but I've never had any tests done (not being a breeder) and my only dog prone to HD infact ended up with it (rescue so not forseeable) but can I ask (if you know) why it is different breeds have such varying hip scores as 'desirable', is it simply that dogs with excellent hips are so rare within certain breeds these days that higher scores are acceptable?


----------



## dandogman (Dec 19, 2011)

Phoolf said:


> Then your wording was completely wrong, having hip scores means nothing, it's what you do with them that counts. And even if the hip scores are good it is no guarantee at all that any offspring will have good hips.


My wording wasn't great I will change it. 

It is no guarantee, but it gives a much better chance.


----------



## EmCHammer (Dec 28, 2009)

Just to clarify the number of dogs who were destroyed last year as unclaimed strays was 8000 not 1500 as per the annual dogs trust stray dog survey. Only three quarters of the local authorities in the UK responded so the figure is going to be higher. 

I like crossbreeds still sorry to say; not advocating excessive or silly crosses or money making etc; but not all dogs get the worst of both traits it sounds a bit voice of doom to say so.. My staffie boxer is brilliant been such an easy dog affectionate like a staffie any very easy to train etc. ok he is trashing the house but that's what any pup teenager might do. He is chilled out and has a great temperament. 

I stand by my thoughts of whether you buying pure breed, crossbreed or rescue ing either its all about being responsible, research and choosing someone responsible to rehome from.

Suppose if I was to be buying a dog then would feel differently and def want health checks a d to support responsible breeders.. But being a 100percent rescue person and my favourite dogs suffering the most and being killed in their thousands each year I am quite glad I like them and only wish more people did.

I often think with the bull breeds people try to cross to make bigger and chunkier dogs all the time. Would like to think it is because they think the lovely staffie temperament will make a dog great with children and affectionate etc but sadly people churning them out dont probably have that thought pattern.


----------



## Fleur (Jul 19, 2008)

Phoolf said:


> Well, no, it doesn't. Unless I've missed the point of scoring completely, does getting the hips scored magically make them perfect?


No ones said they'd be perfect - but I would think if you have good hip scores through the family tree than you'll be increasing the chances of good hips in the pup.
Where as unscored parentage or high scored parentage would be either an unknown or an increased risk


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

EmCHammer said:


> Just to clarify the number of dogs who were destroyed last year as unclaimed strays was 8000 not 1500 as per the annual dogs trust stray dog survey. *Only three quarters of the local authorities in the UK responded so the figure is going to be higher. *


Is the data purely from those 3/4 or did they add in another 1/4 on top as 3/4 is a good representation to make a guestimate from?


----------



## dandogman (Dec 19, 2011)

Tigerneko said:


> Hip scoring is actually one of the poorer examples of a health test, a parents hip score does not guarantee that the pups will have good hips - even if you breed from two 0:0 parents, you are not guaranteed to get 0:0 puppies at all, it often isn't really that much of an indicator of what the progeny will be like.


If you breed 0:0 with 0:0, you will be *likely* to low scoring pups, so I disagree with you, obviously you can get throwbacks though.


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

Phoolf said:


> Off topic but I've never had any tests done (not being a breeder) and my only dog prone to HD infact ended up with it (rescue so not forseeable) but can I ask (if you know) why it is different breeds have such varying hip scores as 'desirable', is it simply that dogs with excellent hips are so rare within certain breeds these days that higher scores are acceptable?


Dogs of yesteryear just limped, these days it's diagnosed as hip dysplasia, or elbow dysplasia etc.

Different breeds have slightly different constructions, Labs are scored out of 106, so 53 points per hip, which is broken down into different areas of construction. Some breeds are scored out of less points, I can't remember if any breeds are scored from a higher number.

My bitch is a 0/0, but that's becoming less rare with Labs, there is a lady, who I've met, who has a third generation Labrador from at least one 0/0 hip scored parent on either side. Her affix is Rivermeadow if you wanted to take a peek at her dogs, she's a lovely person and her dogs are just beautiful.

It's becoming easier to see which dogs are producing good or poor, or even erratic hip scores. The dog I used with Tau has a good record for producing low hip scoring progeny, even so, I very much doubt if Zasa will be 0/0 like her mum, I'd be happy with anything within the range of the Breed Mean Standard. She's certainly a fit little ratbag!!

I think also it's worth mentioning the breed mean standard is just that, and should not exclude dogs that have hip scores above the magic number, there is a lot more to hip scoring tha a cut off point where all dogs should be below that number.


----------



## dandogman (Dec 19, 2011)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> Although it's not 100% confirmed, obviously if you see a pattern of high hip scores, or dogs who produce high scoring progeny, then you avoid that line. It's difficult with *some* bitches, who only have one or two litters, because obviously their influence is much less, but could also sway what happens with hip scores.
> 
> I very much doubt if Zasa will be a 0/0 like her mum, I think it would be just too perfect to be true, although* judging from how she is and moves*, I don't think she looks much different to her mother. We'll see.


Out of interest, how do you mean 'moves'?


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> Dogs of yesteryear just limped, these days it's diagnosed as hip dysplasia, or elbow dysplasia etc.
> 
> *Different breeds have slightly different constructions, Labs are scored out of 106, so 53 points per hip, which is broken down into different areas of construction. Some breeds are scored out of less points, I can't remember if any breeds are scored from a higher number. *
> 
> ...


Ah that explains it, thanks, sometimes I see hip scores and think that they sound really high but obviously they're not.


----------



## EmCHammer (Dec 28, 2009)

Phoolf that is a very good question re the dogs trust figures. I in the bath at the minute (sorry tmi) but once out and on laptop not phone will dig out the link or it should be very easy to find by googling dogs trust 2012 stray dog survey


----------



## EmCHammer (Dec 28, 2009)

Slightly off topic but here is the link

http://www.dogstrust.org.uk/az/s/straydogsurvey/straydogsurveysummaryreport2012.pdf


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

EmCHammer said:


> Phoolf that is a very good question re the dogs trust figures. I in the bath at the minute (sorry tmi) but once out and on laptop not phone will dig out the link or it should be very easy to find by googling dogs trust 2012 stray dog survey


I have just amended that stats post with this info and gone looking for the source. Thanks you EmCHammer - I was using RSPCA supplied numbers of healthy dogs killed as I am not familiar with your agencies.

The source I found was this one - http://www.dogstrust.org.uk/az/s/straydogsurvey/straydogsurveysummaryreport2012.pdf - The reports given on strays destroyed named the destruction for aggression and ill health, with half not reporting reasons as well. Is there another?

"The estimated proportion of stray dogs being put to sleep remains at 7%. This is still one of the lowest destruction figures recorded since the Stray Dogs survey began in 1997. This year 6,900 stray dogs were reported as having been put to sleep by authorities taking part in this survey, compared with 7,700 last year. From this figure we can estimate that approximately 8,903 dogs were put to sleep across the UK during the period of 1st April 2011 to 31st March 2012.

Amongst the authorities responding, details were given for around half of reported destructions. It was reported that 1,924 dogs were put to sleep due to behavioural problems or aggression, 1,607 due to ill health, and 575 under the Dangerous Dogs Act."

Of the ~119,000 strays 23% are status dogs, 47% find their way back home and ~40,000 are distributed to find homes.

These are remarkably low numbers for a country with 8-9 million owned dogs, which is the figure I come up with on a google search for what is owned in the UK.

CC


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

575 due to the DDA? Methinks many staffies will be culled under the umbrella.


----------



## EmCHammer (Dec 28, 2009)

The other biggest reason is no where to go, not enough rescue spaces or homes and no one wants them. especially as a large proportion are guaranteed to be bull breeds ..


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

Yup, our local rescue is 95% staffies, but then they're one that is happy to have them so the dog wardens etc always ship them off there. Not having an interest in having a staff myself I just don't look at their rescue pages anymore as an option.


----------



## missnaomi (Jun 4, 2010)

Dober said:


> $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$


I think this is true for lots of people... but there are some people who just don't think of breeding in the way Bessiedog described it - for example, where I work the kids know I love dogs - and are always telling me that their dog has had puppies and bringing me photos on their phones to look at, and a lot of them fairly regularly breed their two family pets together and give the puppies to friends and family or advertise them via word of mouth, now some clearly breed a status or "desirable" dog - and this is usually to sell for money, but the ones that breed "randoms" - two mongrels crossed, various staffie crosses, a lot of them do it because they love their dogs and think they'd have nice puppies, they want to keep one, their neighbours want one etc.

These people don't think in terms of breeds/breeders/ethics they purely do it because they enjoy it, they like having the little puppies around, they like their dog and want more, and many of them have acquired their dogs in the first place this way - I'm not at all saying it's right, but it's done with good intentions if that makes sense. They don't "not" adopt from a rescue, but they don't really think of it, as puppies are easily and readily available, and they're not fussed on breed - just want a nice dog. I reckon this is where a lot of the future rescues come from, and it's a lack of foresight on their part - no concept of what will happen to them all in their lifetime, no understanding of the current rescue crisis for such dogs - but it's not malicious or money grabbing. I've even been offered a puppy at parent's evening because some kid said I'm a "nice lady" and that I love dogs and their dad wanted to thank me for helping them at school.

In these cases, I think education is the key, a lot of people wouldn't do it if they knew how many ended up in rescue, knew what could go wrong, knew what happened to dog in rescue etc - as they do genuinely care for their dogs, but living on an estate where you hardly ever see a stray dog and most people seem to have several dogs, not having the internet, and coming from a family who have always done it - it's not too hard to see why this continues, after all - who doesn't love puppies?


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

missnaomi said:


> I think this is true for lots of people... but there are some people who just don't think of breeding in the way Bessiedog described it - for example, where I work the kids know I love dogs - and are always telling me that their dog has had puppies and bringing me photos on their phones to look at, and a lot of them fairly regularly breed their two family pets together and give the puppies to friends and family or advertise them via word of mouth, now some clearly breed a status or "desirable" dog - and this is usually to sell for money, but the ones that breed "randoms" - two mongrels crossed, various staffie crosses, a lot of them do it because they love their dogs and think they'd have nice puppies, they want to keep one, their neighbours want one etc.
> 
> These people don't think in terms of breeds/breeders/ethics they purely do it because they enjoy it, they like having the little puppies around, they like their dog and want more, and many of them have acquired their dogs in the first place this way - I'm not at all saying it's right, but it's done with good intentions if that makes sense. They don't "not" adopt from a rescue, but they don't really think of it, as puppies are easily and readily available, and they're not fussed on breed - just want a nice dog. I reckon this is where a lot of the future rescues come from, and it's a lack of foresight on their part - no concept of what will happen to them all in their lifetime, no understanding of the current rescue crisis for such dogs - but it's not malicious or money grabbing. I've even been offered a puppy at parent's evening because some kid said I'm a "nice lady" and that I love dogs and their dad wanted to thank me for helping them at school.
> 
> In these cases, I think education is the key, a lot of people wouldn't do it if they knew how many ended up in rescue, knew what could go wrong, knew what happened to dog in rescue etc - as they do genuinely care for their dogs, but living on an estate where you hardly ever see a stray dog and most people seem to have several dogs, not having the internet, and coming from a family who have always done it - it's not too hard to see why this continues, after all - who doesn't love puppies?


Couldn't agree more, Kes' family have a history of breeding mongrels, and although they haven't ended up in rescue most were given away to friends etc. and they see them regularly all over the place. I paid for Kes what it had cost to feed, worm her etc. and no more.


----------



## Alice Childress (Nov 14, 2010)

missnaomi said:


> In these cases, I think education is the key, a lot of people wouldn't do it if they knew how many ended up in rescue, knew what could go wrong, knew what happened to dog in rescue etc - as they do genuinely care for their dogs, but living on an estate where you hardly ever see a stray dog and most people seem to have several dogs, not having the internet, and coming from a family who have always done it - it's not too hard to see why this continues, after all - who doesn't love puppies?


I think is true. There are different sorts of back yard breeders, the ones out of money that are using dogs as breeding machines, and the well meaning breeders that are doing it out of ignorance to the reality.

You are absolutely right. It's breeders as well as puppy buyers that need to be educated.

When I was a child my family cat had an accidentally litter, and many of my friends families did too (including our local vet). Two kittens stayed here, and two went to my uncle. It seemed to completely normal. As a teenager I always assumed, without really thinking about it, that one day, in the long off future, when I had a kids, I would let my future cat have one litter. It was such a lovely experience, and seemed so normal that it never occurred to me what this really meant. It was only when I started researching getting rats, that I began to actually think about people breeding animals and very quickly realised that breeding just because you want a cute rat/kitten/puppy, was simply not a good enough reason for bringing life into the world.

What amazes me though, is that people do not educate themselves before breeding. I only needed to research a little into rats, and where to home them from, to led me to think about and research ethical breeding. If someone is at the point of actually seriously considering breeding their animal, surely if they hadn't already, they would go and research and educate themselves and then would very quickly realise the consequence of their potential actions. Apparently not though 

Cross breed, pedigree, good old fashioned mongrel, why would you not want to learn everything you could about dogs and breeding before going ahead...


----------



## missnaomi (Jun 4, 2010)

Alice Childress said:


> What amazes me though, is that people do not educate themselves before breeding. I only needed to research a little into rats, and where to home them from, to led me to think about and research ethical breeding. If someone is at the point of actually seriously considering breeding their animal, surely if they hadn't already, they would go and research and educate themselves and then would very quickly realise the consequence of their potential actions. Apparently not though


I very much agree with you - I am a serial researcher myself  ...however I think we have to remember that whilst it seems like everyone has the internet and can read well/would use a library - they don't, and can't. The specific people I'm thinking of probably would think they had researched by speaking to other people who had done the same thing - thereby perpetuating the same ideas/myths and actions.


----------



## Alice Childress (Nov 14, 2010)

missnaomi said:


> I very much agree with you - I am a serial researcher myself  ...however I think we have to remember that whilst it seems like everyone has the internet and can read well/would use a library - they don't, and can't. The specific people I'm thinking of probably would think they had researched by speaking to other people who had done the same thing - thereby perpetuating the same ideas/myths and actions.


Yes, you are probably right. When something seems so normal, many do not bother to question it.

Another reason that education from a young age is important. I know it's another topic all together really, but I for one wish animal welfare was taught in school - far more important than the term spent in my school on caribbean poetry!


----------



## DogLover1981 (Mar 28, 2009)

There isn't any real issues when people are doing the proper testing and research into intentionally creating crossbred dogs. However, I'm willing bet that 90% of people are doing it for the money and do little research.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

cavmad said:


> Money firstly the people who usually breed xbreeds dont care about health checks, feeding properly and dont think that anything can go wrong (I know that there are a few that health check etc).Also with the cavs its getting through to people about health problems so the breeders x them so they can charge more and convince the general public that they are getting a dog with the cav temperament without any of the health problems and people will believe them because they must know as they are breeders. The other big thing is the non moulting and the fact that people might not be allergic to them.Most people only think about Poodles and Bichons as being the only non moulting breeds so xing them with spaniel that most people thing as soft or labs that are popular but seem to moult all year round the BYB can say that the pup wont moult and again most people will believe them


I am sure that GDBA would be thrilled with your view as the breed of choice is a Labrador x Golden Retriever.

There are also very many crosses deliberately bred to compete in various disciplines such as Obedience and Working Trials.

To make a sweeping generalisation such as most such breeders do not care about health checks makes for sensationalist if untrue headlines. There breeders of both pedigree and x breeds who do health test and who do not health test.

Unfortunately like many polemicists you choose to look at only onse small sector of X breeding instead of fully understanding the bigger picture.


----------



## missRV (Nov 9, 2012)

Well we got a crossbreed after having owned a pedigree; we wanted a dog who didn't look like Bimble; but who had a soft temperament, cute looks, easy to train. We did research and they all pointed to a KCS x Bichon. Admitted since joining the forum I've learnt that you can't guarantee behaviours from the cross of dogs but Rosie has turned out to be just what we wanted so I don't regret anything  

We did research breeders, and rejected a puppy from what was blatantly a BYB (owned both dogs, planning the next litter from the same bitch for a few months later; when I phoned up there were dogs barking over her voice in the background) The breeder we went for said they health check but we didn't know enough at the time to ask for specificics; I would get another crossbreed in the future and I would get it from the same breeder if they had the dog we wanted. Obviously next time we'll ask for the KC names so we can check out health test results. There's no pedigree dog in the world who we'd chose over Rosie.


----------



## tonysoprano (Feb 2, 2013)

Firstly - whoever said ( I havent time to scroll through ) No I am not saying neuter working/service dogs, I am not stupid!
Also there is only health benefits to neutering/ spaying. Why do you think all rescue centers do this?
Responsible breeders? Please tell me where they are! When I ask people who are handing in their dog, whether they have contacted the breeder where the bought the dog, 95% of the time they say the breeder will not take the dog back! Are breeders in it for the welfare of the dog? Or is it a hobby they enjoy? A business? Either way 50% of the dogs I collect have originally come from breeders, they are not all strays from Ireland you know!
I dont think you know how serous it is out there. I have worked with dogs for 30 years and this is the first time where we have 4 dogs to a kennel. If you have 100 kennels and 600 dogs to house what do you do. But the breeders, good and bad, carry on selling entire dogs to the public who mostly look after and care for the dog their entire life. You only need 10% of these owners to give up their dogs to add to the strays and status /fashion dogs, and the rescues are bursting at the seems. 

I spend hours contacting breed rescues only to be told they will only take dogs with papers. What does this say? 
The amount of unwanted dogs is not stabilizing, it is increasing by the day. 
Yes, there are very good responsible, caring breeders out there, I am sure. But even you, unwittingly are adding to this problem. 
If you really love dogs then you will let the dog world take a breather.


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

missRV said:


> Well we got a crossbreed after having owned a pedigree; we wanted a dog who didn't look like Bimble; but who had a soft temperament, cute looks, easy to train. We did research and they all pointed to a KCS x Bichon. Admitted since joining the forum I've learnt that you can't guarantee behaviours from the cross of dogs but Rosie has turned out to be just what we wanted so I don't regret anything
> 
> We did research breeders, and rejected a puppy from what was blatantly a BYB (owned both dogs, planning the next litter from the same bitch for a few months later; when I phoned up there were dogs barking over her voice in the background) The breeder we went for said they health check but we didn't know enough at the time to ask for specificics; I would get another crossbreed in the future and I would get it from the same breeder if they had the dog we wanted. Obviously next time we'll ask for the KC names so we can check out health test results. There's no pedigree dog in the world who we'd chose over Rosie.


No offence but when you gave the website of wbere you got rosie it was all the markings of a puppy farm. So many types of crosses and I think a special christmas breed!!!

Maybe give it a bit more thought as all the info on here helps.


----------



## missRV (Nov 9, 2012)

emmaviolet said:


> No offence but when you gave the website of wbere you got rosie it was all the markings of a puppy farm. So many types of crosses and I think a special christmas breed!!!
> 
> Maybe give it a bit more thought as all the info on here helps.


Yet when I enquired and on the advert it specified "HEALTH TESTING" is carried out.

I really love my dog at the end of the day and like I said I would not change anything about her. Yes we did go into this with our eyes closed but like I said I would get another dog from the same breeders and next time ask for specifics Like I initially said  I do regret that I hadn't joined the forums before getting her then I'd have had more insight.


----------



## Fleur (Jul 19, 2008)

missnaomi said:


> I very much agree with you - I am a serial researcher myself  ...however I think we have to remember that whilst it seems like everyone has the internet and can read well/would use a library - they don't, and can't. The specific people I'm thinking of probably would think they had researched by speaking to other people who had done the same thing - thereby perpetuating the same ideas/myths and actions.


I agree with this - if this is the way you've always bred with no major complications, if this is how your family and friends do things why would you question it?


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

missRV said:


> Yet when I enquired and on the advert it specified "HEALTH TESTING" is carried out.
> 
> I really love my dog at the end of the day and like I said I would not change anything about her. Yes we did go into this with our eyes closed but like I said I would get another dog from the same breeders and next time ask for specifics Like I initially said  I do regret that I hadn't joined the forums before getting her then I'd have had more insight.


Im not saying you dont love your dog but that doesnt mean you should go back to a puppy farm knowing what you do now. You feel comfortable lining their pockets again?


----------



## missRV (Nov 9, 2012)

Well I don't need to think about it for hopefully a long time! However I see no other 'cavachon' breeders who are any better. And actually they were the least 'puppy farm' like out of everywhere we looked into. 

Our breeders were recommended to us and we went to them on that basis.

Maybe if so many crosses are 'dumped' in rescue centres, our next dog will be a rescue.... Rosie is only 5 months old so like I said we won't have to consider it for a good few years


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

missRV said:


> Well I don't need to think about it for hopefully a long time! However I see no other 'cavachon' breeders who are any better. And actually they were the least 'puppy farm' like out of everywhere we looked into.
> 
> Our breeders were recommended to us and we went to them on that basis.
> 
> Maybe if so many crosses are 'dumped' in rescue centres, our next dog will be a rescue.... Rosie is only 5 months old so like I said we won't have to consider it for a good few years


But now you know I cant believe you are saying you would go back!

If no one else breeds 'cavachons' then get an ethically bred bichon instead of giving money to a puppy farm again.


----------



## missRV (Nov 9, 2012)

Maybe I won't! I've not really thought of it! What I'm saying is if in 10-12 years time when I'm looking at another dog hopefully by this time there'll be a list of ethical doodle breeders; maybe an 'ofsted' so to speak on breeders, that they need to have an official 'stamp of approval' to look out for before purchasing a pup... maybe there'll be a list of certified breeders available... I don't know.

I do know that I wouldn't buy another pup without getting health test results first.


----------



## tashi (Dec 5, 2007)

Can I just point out that having relevant health tests for a parent, when crossbreed it doesn't always mean that crossbreed will be free from those problems. Think it is a little misleading to think that they will. I do know of a Mis-mating between a health tested Labrador who was caught by a health tested standard dachshund, resulting in one puppy who he kept until the end of her days sadly 'Dolly' had hip dysplasia, eye problems and also epilepsy. I just don't want people thinking because sire and dam are fully health tested that you will be getting a free from problems puppy, the 'goalposts' for each breed depend on genetics which are different for different breeds.


----------



## missRV (Nov 9, 2012)

So if you have 2 parents both free from all obvious health problems there's still a chance that the puppy could inherit genetic disorders from which both parents are clear?


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

missRV said:


> Maybe I won't! I've not really thought of it! What I'm saying is if in 10-12 years time when I'm looking at another dog hopefully by this time there'll be a list of ethical doodle breeders; maybe an 'ofsted' so to speak on breeders, that they need to have an official 'stamp of approval' to look out for before purchasing a pup... maybe there'll be a list of certified breeders available... I don't know.
> 
> I do know that I wouldn't buy another pup without getting health test results first.


I was only quoting you just a few posts back where you said you would happily go back to your 'breeder'.


----------



## missRV (Nov 9, 2012)

And I appreciate that but only IF they could prove to be ethical IF health testing becomes a universal requirement amongst all cross breeders.

The best solution would be some universal regulation with all cross breeders. To which if they fail to adhere, then potential buyers should be prompted to walk past and take their business elsewhere.


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

missRV said:


> And I appreciate that but only IF they could prove to be ethical IF health testing becomes a universal requirement amongst all cross breeders.
> 
> The best solution would be some universal regulation with all cross breeders.


Well they are not, the fact they have puppies all the time is not ethical at all. Even if they were to do a few tests, they are not ethical, they are farming those puppies and you need only see the website and that they are 'open till late' and 'busy all weekend' to see that.


----------



## missRV (Nov 9, 2012)

Like I said hopefully in the next 10 years puppy farms will be forced to change.


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

Phoolf said:


> I agree, and it makes me sad when I have to read about people who chose to do this anyway but I suppose it's their choice at the end of the day, sadly not the resulting childs.


They could make a very different decision if they had to pick up the tab themselves, rather than relying on the state/taxpayers to fund the lifetime of care the children need; aside from the pain and distress.


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

missRV said:


> Like I said hopefully in the next 10 years puppy farms will be forced to change.


I'm leaving this now, that is not what you said, you said if you wanted another puppy you would go back to your breeders and by that you meant as they are right now!!!


----------



## missRV (Nov 9, 2012)

Read what you like into what I said.... what I MEANT was I got my Rosie so I'm happy.... I'd go back if they could PROVE they were ethical. I've said it as clear as I can. I see nowhere in any of my posts nor any of your quotes "I would use them again as a puppy farmer" can't believe you've taken objection to anything I've said which is basically "There SHOULD be regulation on cross breeders" the same as ANY breeder.


----------



## Fleur (Jul 19, 2008)

tashi said:


> Can I just point out that having relevant health tests for a parent, when crossbreed it doesn't always mean that crossbreed will be free from those problems. Think it is a little misleading to think that they will. I do know of a Mis-mating between a health tested Labrador who was caught by a health tested standard dachshund, resulting in one puppy who he kept until the end of her days sadly 'Dolly' had hip dysplasia, eye problems and also epilepsy. I just don't want people thinking because sire and dam are fully health tested that you will be getting a free from problems puppy, the 'goalposts' for each breed depend on genetics which are different for different breeds.


I do understand that each breed is very different and even if you are breeding a pedigree from 2 fully health tested parents you cannot guarentee a problem free pup but I would of thought the vast diffference is size and shape of a Lab and Dachshund would likely cause hip or similar problems - I personally think if this had been a deliberate breeding it would of been one of those I can't believe it moments


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

missRV said:


> Well we got a crossbreed after having owned a pedigree; we wanted a dog who didn't look like Bimble; but who had a soft temperament, cute looks, easy to train. We did research and they all pointed to a KCS x Bichon. Admitted since joining the forum I've learnt that you can't guarantee behaviours from the cross of dogs but Rosie has turned out to be just what we wanted so I don't regret anything
> 
> We did research breeders, and rejected a puppy from what was blatantly a BYB (owned both dogs, planning the next litter from the same bitch for a few months later; when I phoned up there were dogs barking over her voice in the background) The breeder we went for said they health check but we didn't know enough at the time to ask for specificics; I would get another crossbreed in the future and I would get it from the same breeder if they had the dog we wanted. Obviously next time we'll ask for the KC names so we can check out health test results. There's no pedigree dog in the world who we'd chose over Rosie.





missRV said:


> Read what you like into what I said.... what I MEANT was I don't regret anything because I got my Rosie out of them. I'd go back if they could PROVE they were ethical. I've said it as clear as I can.


Here is what you said, you said you would go back if they had the dog you wanted.

Ah you have edited your post now, but I don't have an attitude, why not get an ethically bred bichon or the like rather then supporting a blantant puppy farm? It is beyond me.


----------



## missRV (Nov 9, 2012)

emmaviolet said:


> Here is what you said, you said you would go back if they had the dog you wanted.
> 
> Ah you have edited your post now, but I don't have an attitude, why not get an ethically bred bichon or the like rather then supporting a blantant puppy farm? It is beyond me.


Why suggest that I should get a bichon? :mad2: Why not comprehend that I am not supporting puppy farms and that I have taken info from these forums for my future dog to ensure that this does not happen again? Yes IF they have the dog we want AND there's regulation so they ARENT puppy farms then I see no problem!


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

Quote from ComfortCreature: I will state full out that there is not enough variety in breeds of the temperament type, size and moderate phenotype that I like to provide me a purebred dog with even somewhat good chances at having lifelong good health.

I can find that in a cross and have.

CC



dandogman said:


> Sorry, but that is absolute tosh!
> 
> I fail to see the logic on how crossing 2 un health tested dogs (vast majority of cross bred dogs parents aren't health tested) will produce healthier puppies than breeding 2 health tested dogs


I don't see that as tosh of any kind. I take CCs statement as saying that he/she couldn't find a dog of the size, looks and temperament he/she wanted without health problems. Many people looking for a dog the size, looks and temperament of a CKCS come up against the same dilemma.

When I was looking for a first dog, I looked through all the breeds and the best match I could come up with in terms of size, looks and temperament was the Kooikerhondje. They were very rare in the UK, none were being bred (the only people breeding them here had died), and the price was prohibitive. No health problems as such, but the unavailability put the kibosh on it. So I got a collie/terrier cross who is about the same size and has many of the same characteristics.

Now, if you cross breeds that have the same root, it's likely any genetic defects could emerge and affect offspring. With a recessive genetic condition, the genes have to come from each parent, and be in the same place in the sequence. With dogs from different roots (different breeds in their background), the genes for defects can be in different places in the sequence, so don't double-up to produce affected pups. There's a gene test for PRA in labs, but not for border collies. The gene in border collies is not in the same place as in labs - if it was they would be able to use the same test for both breeds, and there's a huge commercial imperative to do so. You could therefore cross a PRA carrier lab, and a PRA carrier collie, and even though both defective genes were passed on, they would not double-up and the pups would be carriers, not affected.


----------



## Shadowrat (Jan 30, 2011)

tonysoprano said:


> Also there is only health benefits to neutering/ spaying. Why do you think all rescue centers do this?


Please research this topic more, not just articles from biased sources. There are very definitely potential negatives to neutering, from a health standpoint. And sometimes even from a temperament standpoint. Why do you think many owners here on this forum don't do it? Because we all want to breed?
No. I'd say the majority of us here have no plans to ever breed anything, we're just pet owners. 
But we've researched the pros AND cons, and made the best decision for our dogs based on all the information.

Im not anti-neutering, particularly for bitches as I can see that the benefits outweigh the risks with the girls. But what I am opposed to is brainwashing on the subject, where people aren't allowed to make an informed choice because lots of the negatives are hidden up by vets who make a mint off routine neutering, or rescues who think no-one is able to keep an intact dog responsibly.



tonysoprano said:


> Responsible breeders? Please tell me where they are! When I ask people who are handing in their dog, whether they have contacted the breeder where the bought the dog, 95% of the time they say the breeder will not take the dog back!


Riiiight, so because _you've_ not dealt with them, they must not exist?
Good job I don't take that attitude with my rescue work, isn't it?

My breeder made it absolutely firm that if I couldn't keep my dog, he went back to them, no question. My breeder health tests, my breeder raises the pups in his living room, my breeder is very picky about where his dogs went, I was talking to my breeder for over a year before I got my puppy, I visited his home several times for hours on end, he was at the end of the phone 24/7 to answer my questions and help me with any issues we had. 
Unfortunately, he passed away recently, but he was one of these 'elusive' breeders you seem to think don't exist. 
Except they do. But why would you have come into contact with them? If you have such a downer on breeding, you're not exactly going to be meeting the good ones regularly, are you? I met mine because I specifically went and searched for a good dobe breeder, because I wanted a dog from health tested lines that wouldn't drop dead of DCM at 5, and had sound temperament. 
Im not sure why you think good breeders don't exist, just based on your limited experience? Go out there and talk to some breeders, educate yourself rather than just sit on your high horse looking down your nose at _anyone _who breeds.

Im gonna go out on a limb and say Im guessing that as soon as someone says they're a breeder, you have already made up your mind about them, without actually bothering to find out the realities?

Hey, you know what, I run a rat sanctuary. The rats I get in, mostly in poor condition to say the least, are from pet shops or BYBs. I get a LOT of rats in from BYBs, the guy down the road who thought he could make a quick £100 on a litter of rats.
Do I have a downer on all rat breeders just because I see primarily the 'bad' ones? Do I hell!
In the time I've done rat rescue, I've never, ever, had a rat from a good breeder end up here. 
And I fully support the good breeders, every inch as much as I support the idea of rescue. You can do both, you know....



tonysoprano said:


> Are breeders in it for the welfare of the dog? Or is it a hobby they enjoy? A business? Either way 50% of the dogs I collect have originally come from breeders, they are not all strays from Ireland you know!


Yes, many breeders are in it for the welfare of the dogs.
Why do you think I wanted a breeder who was working hard to lessen the problem with DCM in my breed? Why was he bothering to do this? It wouldn't affect him if dogs continued to drop dead at 5 from this disease, but he did it because he loved the animals and did not want to see them suffer with this problem.
In fact, when he died, it was requested that anyone who wanted to do something in his honor donate money to either a dobe rescue, or group working on tackling DCM in the breed, as this is what he wanted.
Yep, totally not bothered about dog welfare 
So what if it is a hobby as well? Does that make it wrong if one also enjoys it?
I'd say my rats are a hobby, in that they're something I get a lot of joy out of and spend a lot of my free time and money on. But Im also a rescuer. Is it wrong if my rescue and work with rats is also a passion and 'hobby'?

With my species, good breeders are absolutely _vital_. 
With my species, the average life span is just over 2, when it could potentially be 3 or 4. They are plagued with a whole host of health issues from cancer to kidney failure to brain tumours to respiratory issues. These aren't just things that pop up now and again in the species, these are things that are all but guaranteed to occur sooner or later, particularly in poorly bred rats. Good breeders work to breed that _out _of the animals, because they _care_.

If you've sat and watched an animal you love struggle to breathe because of lung scarring caused by repeated infections, then watched it die at barely a year old, you'd maybe understand the reasons why people who love these animals want to improve their health and stop this from happening. 
And the only way you can do it is by breeding selectively. And it shows. Get a rat from a GOOD breeder, who focuses on health first, and you'll see the difference between that and a rat from Pets at home. 
Breeding works. If you are happy to see animals die young of horrendous illnesses, then thats your choice I guess. Im personally not. I've seen it too often, and every time I sit with a dying rat in my arms, dying due to one of the above illnesses, I cry and I get angry....at who? Good breeders who are working to obliterate these problems?
No, at the BYBs and pet shops who churned out these animals so carelessly to begin with.

Oh, and for money? No.....Im not sure on dogs as I have never really had much to do with that side of it, but I can tell you categorically that there is no money to be made in breeding rats, none at all. The maximum you can charge for a rat is about £10-12, for a really nice, well bred rat from a good breeder.
Lets say mum has 10 in the litter, thats potentially £100 you could 'make'. Deduct from that the costs of feeding a litter for 7 weeks (they eat constantly as babies), the cleaning out/litter costs (will need to be done far more regularly when you have kittens, as they pee and poo and spread food everywhere) possible vets fees for the mum if she has issues birthing, maybe even possible vets fees for the kittens if there are any concerns, transport costs to get to the stud rat if not one of your own (often involves staying overnight somewhere), extra cages to seperate the sexes of the babies when old enough, I could go on. It all comes to much more than the £100 you might make on a litter if you were lucky.
I'd imagine it is much the same with dogs, only far more expensive!
I'd imagine most good dog breeders don't make a hell of a lot, if any, money from breeding. Most are probably out of pocket.

You say 50% of your dogs come from 'breeders', as if all breeders are identical. I have no doubt that many rescue dogs come from breeders, just as many rescue rats do.
But I'd also bet my life on the fact that these are not the sort of breeders anyone here is talking about when they talk about good breeders.
You seem unable to understand that there is a difference between a good breeder and a bad one.



tonysoprano said:


> I dont think you know how serous it is out there.


Of course. Only _you_ have seen the atrocities 
No-one else here works in rescue, no-one else here saves lives, no-one else here has been up all night nursing a dying or ill rescue animal, no-one else here pumps all their money into helping needy animals, no-one else drives up and down the country to save animals in dire straits....
Honestly, get over yourself. Stop acting like some kind of bloody martyr, like you do so much more than everyone else and have so much more understanding of life than anyone else.

You don't.



tonysoprano said:


> I have worked with dogs for 30 years and this is the first time where we have 4 dogs to a kennel. If you have 100 kennels and 600 dogs to house what do you do.


I had 60 rats at one time a couple of years back, I was getting 3 or 4 calls a week about rats. 60 is my maximum limit, so we had to turn some away. I'd never before had such a huge number needing help. 
Did it make me hate breeders? No, because the good breeders weren't the ones flooding my rescue with rats; the BYBs and pet shops were. 
Your anger seems misdirected.
Rather than hating good breeders, hate BYBs! _They're_ your problem, not the decent ones....



tonysoprano said:


> But the breeders, good and bad, carry on selling entire dogs to the public who mostly look after and care for the dog their entire life. You only need 10% of these owners to give up their dogs to add to the strays and status /fashion dogs, and the rescues are bursting at the seems.


So.....those of us who _are _responsible and have entire dogs who we care for brilliantly, love, and would never give up to rescue, should be penalised because a minority _can't_ be responsible? 
Sorry, I don't like that mindset. Thats how perfectly harmless things become illegal, because a few people mess up with them and ruin it for everyone. 
To use myself as an example. I have an intact dog, I got him from a brilliant breeder, he is my baby and will never end up anywhere near a rescue, nor will he ever make babies. 
What is the problem there, exactly?



tonysoprano said:


> .
> Yes, there are very good responsible, caring breeders out there, I am sure. But even you, unwittingly are adding to this problem.
> If you really love dogs then you will let the dog world take a breather.


Wow. 
How is a good breeder adding to the rescue problem?
_Please_ tell me this isn't that backwards thinking you so often hear of 'well, if someone hadn't got a breeder dog, they'd have gotten a rescue dog instead!' because that has been proven time and time again to be false.

I got a breeder dog because I wanted a breeder dog, for a number of very valid reasons. I _did not want a rescue dog_.
The idea that if the breeder route hadn't been available to me, I'd have just gone and got a rescue instead is ridiculous. I wouldn't have. If I want to take on a rat, I won't just go get a hamster instead if no rats are available!

People get dogs from good breeders for extremely logical and valid reasons. I have no interest in listing them right now, but suffice to say that a rescue dog is not everyone's ideal.
And Im about as pro rescue as you can get, but I still acknowledge that rescues aren't for everyone.
In fact, I've even sent people who enquired at my rescue to good breeders instead, as they just weren't ready for a rescue rat.

I just fail to see how _genuinely good_ breeders are contributing to the rescue crisis.....do you have sources on that or an explanation for it?


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

Phoolf said:


> Then your wording was completely wrong, having hip scores means nothing, it's what you do with them that counts. And even if the hip scores are good it is no guarantee at all that any offspring will have good hips.


No guarantee, but it certainly stacks the odds. The average scores in some breeds like labs are improving over the years because of hip scoring and breeding from the lower scores.


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

missRV said:


> Why suggest that I should get a bichon if you have no issue with crosses? :mad2: Why not comprehend that I am not supporting puppy farms and that I have taken info from these forums for my future dog to ensure that this does not happen again?


I said bichon as she is half bichon obviously!

You have supported a puppy farm and you jst posted you would go back for another. What do you not understand?


----------



## missRV (Nov 9, 2012)

I would go back for another IF regulation were in place!


----------



## WeedySeaDragon (Oct 7, 2012)

missRV said:


> So if you have 2 parents both free from all obvious health problems there's still a chance that the puppy could inherit genetic disorders from which both parents are clear?


It depends on the inheritable issue in question.

When some hereditary diseases are tested for the result is a definite yes (the dog is a sufferer or a carrier) or no (the dog is completely clear). If two dogs are mated who are completely clear of a genetic disease then it is impossible for them to pass it on.

Things like hip dysplasia are a bit more complicated. There is no definitive yes or no as to whether a dog can potentially produce puppies who are affected. This is why hips are rated rather than simply being 'good' or 'bad'. Going for dogs with the lowest scores increases the likelihood of the pups also having good hips but it's never guaranteed.


----------



## Guest (Feb 4, 2013)

tonysoprano said:


> Responsible breeders? Please tell me where they are! When I ask people who are handing in their dog, whether they have contacted the breeder where the bought the dog, 95% of the time they say the breeder will not take the dog back!


Then that's not a responsible breeder. Being a responsible breeder is more than a few health checks. It involves keeping up with the puppies you produce, making sure they are doing well in the homes you selected for them, knowing what issues they may be having etc. The reason you don't see responsible breeder dogs in rescues is because a responsible breeder makes sure their dog doesn't end up in rescue! It's like a doctor saying they never see healthy people. Duh... healthy people don't go to the doctor!


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

missRV said:


> So if you have 2 parents both free from all obvious health problems there's still a chance that the puppy could inherit genetic disorders from which both parents are clear?


You can only test for a minority of heritable conditions.

And crossing 2 very different breeds - different shapes, sizes such as Lab/Dachsie, really is asking for structural problems.


----------



## Alice Childress (Nov 14, 2010)

missRV said:


> We did research breeders, and rejected a puppy from what was blatantly a BYB (owned both dogs, planning the next litter from the same bitch for a few months later; when I phoned up there were dogs barking over her voice in the background) The breeder we went for said they health check but we didn't know enough at the time to ask for specificics; I would get another crossbreed in the future and I would get it from the same breeder if they had the dog we wanted. Obviously next time we'll ask for the KC names so we can check out health test results. There's no pedigree dog in the world who we'd chose over Rosie.


Off topic, but MissRV it really worries me that you would even consider going back to the breeder (be it tomorrow, or 10 years time). Yes, Rosie is fantastic, but the link you gave to your breeders website was really shocking. They were breeding so many litters, of many random breeds/cross breeds, with promises of many more to come in the coming months. You may have rejected a breeder that was blatantly a back yard breeder, but it sounds as though you ended up going with a puppy farm instead.



missRV said:


> Well I don't need to think about it for hopefully a long time! However I see no other 'cavachon' breeders who are any better. And actually they were the least 'puppy farm' like out of everywhere we looked into.


There are other breeders that are better than a someone breeding so so many litters and using bitches as money making machines, there really are. And if there are not... then do not get a cavachon. I have absolutely nothing against cross breeds, and in fact, cavachon's are one of my favourites, however I am against unethical breeding and if there were no ethical breeders of the dog I wanted, I would get another dog. There is no excuse for supporting a puppy farm (and it may not have seemed like one, but to be breeding that many litters they had to be, even if they were not keeping dogs in the worst possible state).



missRV said:


> Read what you like into what I said.... what I MEANT was I got my Rosie so I'm happy.... I'd go back if they could PROVE they were ethical. I've said it as clear as I can. I see nowhere in any of my posts nor any of your quotes "I would use them again as a puppy farmer" can't believe you've taken objection to anything I've said which is basically "There SHOULD be regulation on cross breeders" the same as ANY breeder.


I understand what you are saying, but you do not need to go back to prove that they were ethical. _Their website proves that they are not!_ You do not need to know anymore. Rosie was lucky and ended up with you, but who knows where her siblings went? Where other puppies from them went? Dogs that are carelessly breed more often than not are carelessly homed as well.

I really urge you not to support this breeder again. You can find better breeders out there but it takes work. Even for a Bernese, it has taken me a year, probably 30 names on my list, 20 odd emails, 7 phone conversations, and then driving a 7 round trip to get to the right breeder.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

BessieDog said:


> why would you consider for a moment breeding with another breed?


Just how did your breed, or the RR come into existence in the first place? They weren't always around. 

Take a look at the Leavitt bullldog as one example.

Then you also have to consider hybrid vigor and outcrossing to solve a specific problem. Fiona the dalmation is another example of one reason to produce a cross.

In regards to Hip scores, whilst there is a genetic element diet can also have a major impact. Are you reducing the gene pool removing dogs from breeding simply as their diet has been wrong? Never black and white unfortunately. Luckily I never intend on breeding. Don't think my poor brain could cope with all the ins and outs.

I'd have another beagle/cocker mix without hesitation, over getting a beagle or a cocker. I've met a couple of litters as there are yearly puppy meets at the breeders. The breeder's first was an accidental mating. They then decided to actually breed them again as they were pleased with the results as were all the owners.


----------



## Alice Childress (Nov 14, 2010)

Burrowzig said:


> I don't see that as tosh of any kind. I take CCs statement as saying that he/she couldn't find a dog of the size, looks and temperament he/she wanted without health problems. Many people looking for a dog the size, looks and temperament of a CKCS come up against the same dilemma.


When people say that there are enough pedigree dogs to fit everyone's tastes and needs, I pretty much agree. However, the one cross that personally, just for me, I do feel is "better" than a pedigree version, is the Cavachon  For COMPLETELY shallow reasons I may add. If I wanted a low energy, almost lap dog, the choices are... cavalier, bichon, shithtzu, pekingese etc and although I love all of these little dogs characters, I am not a fan of how any of them look (although I can come around to seeing something in any dog's looks if exposed to enough, they don't instantly appeal). There is a choice for me there in terms of personality and lifestyle, but one that also fits my aesthetic tastes? No  However, the average Cavachon I've seen appeals a lot more than either the Bichon nor the Cavalier physically.

I don't think I'd ever get one as 1. I like big dogs, and 2. I'm not sure I could find a breeder that I would be happy to support.

However, in terms of the idea that there are enough pedigrees for everyone's needs... I almost agree, apart from the odd exception  However! This exception is down to completely shallow reasons I am ashamed to say. Of course, there may well be the perfect, rare low energy dog that I am not aware of that (please feel free to tell me if you think of any  )

Just to add, of all the reasons for getting a specific breed/cross breed, looks are at the bottom for me... but ya know, there is a feeling you getting about a dog where you can just see yourself with them and probably looks comes into this. A bit


----------



## Guest (Feb 4, 2013)

Just to clarify, you're not going to create hybrid vigor by crossing the same species. Great danes and chihuahuas are still the same species.

You may widen the gene pool by mixing breeds, or you may just add in more faulty genes. It's like making stew. You're not going to get rid of the carrots by adding celery in to the stew. You just minimize how many carrots you get in your bowl. But they're still there.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

ouesi said:


> Then that's not a responsible breeder. Being a responsible breeder is more than a few health checks. It involves keeping up with the puppies you produce, making sure they are doing well in the homes you selected for them, knowing what issues they may be having etc. The reason you don't see responsible breeder dogs in rescues is because a responsible breeder makes sure their dog doesn't end up in rescue! It's like a doctor saying they never see healthy people. Duh... healthy people don't go to the doctor!


Quite right. Ferdie is nearly seven years old but if I could no longer care for him, I would only have to pick up the phone and his breeder would be arranging to take him back.


----------



## Shadowrat (Jan 30, 2011)

Alice Childress said:


> When people say that there are enough pedigree dogs to fit everyone's tastes and needs, I pretty much agree. However, the one cross that personally, just for me, I do feel is "better" than a pedigree version, is the Cavachon  For COMPLETELY shallow reasons I may add. If I wanted a low energy, almost lap dog, the choices are... cavalier, bichon, shithtzu, pekingese etc and although I love all of these little dogs characters, I am not a fan of how any of them look (although I can come around to seeing something in any dog's looks if exposed to enough, they don't instantly appeal). There is a choice for me there in terms of personality and lifestyle, but one that also fits my aesthetic tastes? No  However, the average Cavachon I've seen appeals a lot more than either the Bichon nor the Cavalier physically.
> 
> I don't think I'd ever get one as 1. I like big dogs, and 2. I'm not sure I could find a breeder that I would be happy to support.
> 
> ...


I completely agree.
Im not generally a small dog person either, but even though I have a nutty dobe with a head made of concrete who could run all day, and love him, there is always a part of me that sometimes craves a small, fluffy, mellow lap dog to just sit with me and watch TV, and let me carry it about. 
At the moment, I fill that hole with a big, fat, old buck rat, who does the job nicely! Not so welcomed on the train with him, though!

But, like you, most of the reccommended 'mellow lap dog' breeds don't appeal to me either, in looks or health.
CKCS scare the crud out of me with their health, pekes have that flat face I find uncomfortable to look at, and bichons and shihtzus just aren't a dog I like visually (though like you, I could eventually come to find any features familiar and appealing once I'd gotten used to them and lived with them, but they're not dogs that grab me or appeal to me from the start).
In this respect, if someone could breed a small/medium, spitz/wolfy looking dog with a mellow temperament, low prey drive, that would be happy to sit with me and cuddle all day, I'd be made up!

But again....totally shallow! And I'd never say a whole new breed should be invented just to serve that purpose for me! It would be a little creepy having dogs 'created to order', almost.

But I do think more 'new' breeds _will_ emerge, because what people want from a dog changes with each century. Some jobs become obselete, other new purposes are created, and dogs have to change with it.
Some breeds that were created to do a certain job no longer have that job to do, and found themselves struggling to survive as a breed (otterhounds, as an example). 
Whereas these days, the role of dogs is slowly changing once again. They're far more companions only these days than they ever were in the past, well, because people couldn't afford to have a dog just as a pet back in the day, it had to earn its keep! 
Was a day when most dogs had a job _as well_ as being a pet, not so much any more, they're 'just' pets. Thats not to say working dogs don't exist any more, of course, or that people don't work their dogs; they do.
But with how the world has changed, a lot of dogs aren't 'needed' as they were in the past.
We have the luxury and comfort and disposable income now to be able to have a dog purely as a companion without him needing to bring home the bacon.
And in 200 years, there will doubtless be another 'use' for dogs, and they'll turn their hand to something else, and other breeds we once thought of as common will slip out of favour, even struggle, while new breeds emerge.

My breed is a very new breed, but totally ingrained in our heads to the point where we almost forget they haven't been around very long at all.

So I think its unavoidable that new breeds will emerge, to suit people's new demands from dogs, new purposes, new jobs. 
I actually don't _really_ mind the creation of new breeds, if the purpose seems to be something that would endure, and be in reasonable demand, and that no other breed fills.
I'd love to be around in 1000 years, just to see how dogs have changed, and what we've created.

I think, sometimes, that people who can't get what they _really_ want in a breed will often 'make do' with the similar looking breed, but that breed might be totally unsuited to their lifestyles.
Look at huskies. Popular with more and more of the wrong people because of their looks alone, people will always been drawn to wolfy looking dogs. But how many are ending up in rescue because people can't handle the actual realities of a husky?
If a large, wolf looking breed came about that was calm, mellow, low energy and 'easy', a ton of the wrong people who go and get huskies they can't cope with, would get this breed instead, and probably do much better with it, leading to less dogs being abandoned.
Or....in theory. Might not be that simple in reality. But Im sure a lot of the huskies that are currently in rescue after being given up for being 'too hard', are there because the owners were won over by the breeds good looks primarily, and didn't realise how hard the breed can be....or they underestimated/brushed that aside in their eagerness to own a dog that looked a certain way.

So to me, there is an argument that creating a new breed to fit a purpose would cut back on people getting the 'next best thing' and struggling with it, because it wasn't exactly what they wanted but happened to look the part.

But who knows.


----------



## Alice Childress (Nov 14, 2010)

Shadowrat said:


> In this respect, if someone could breed a small/medium, spitz/wolfy looking dog with a mellow temperament, low prey drive, that would be happy to sit with me and cuddle all day, I'd be made up!


How about a Eurasier?  Created to be a companion dog I believe. Or a Finnish Lapphund? Stated as 'calm' in the breed standard...  Ok, so they are probably too big to carry around, but close ish to a wolfy looking, calmer dog that would like a cuddle


----------



## BessieDog (May 16, 2012)

Goblin said:


> Just how did your breed, or the RR come into existence in the first place? They weren't always around.
> 
> Take a look at the Leavitt bullldog as one example.
> 
> ...


I agree with you - Irish Setters were designer dogs designed for a purpose - as were all dogs otherwise we'd just end up with one type.

The problem to me is that people cross x with y and sell it as a breed with a fancy name. Now without a lot of careful breeding over a number of generations that will never be an actual recognised breed. I do wonder how many people (not the type who come on here!) go on to mate their xy breed with another of the same supposed xy breed thinking they'll get a litter of puppies that will be the same as the parents. And I wonder what offspring have emerged as the result?


----------



## missRV (Nov 9, 2012)

Alice Childress said:


> Off topic, but MissRV it really worries me that you would even consider going back to the breeder (be it tomorrow, or 10 years time). Yes, Rosie is fantastic, but the link you gave to your breeders website was really shocking. They were breeding so many litters, of many random breeds/cross breeds, with promises of many more to come in the coming months. You may have rejected a breeder that was blatantly a back yard breeder, but it sounds as though you ended up going with a puppy farm instead.
> 
> There are other breeders that are better than a someone breeding so so many litters and using bitches as money making machines, there really are. And if there are not... then do not get a cavachon. I have absolutely nothing against cross breeds, and in fact, cavachon's are one of my favourites, however I am against unethical breeding and if there were no ethical breeders of the dog I wanted, I would get another dog. There is no excuse for supporting a puppy farm (and it may not have seemed like one, but to be breeding that many litters they had to be, even if they were not keeping dogs in the worst possible state).
> 
> ...


How much nicer put 

If there is a universal standard then puppy farms won't exist or they'll fail to succeed without the recognised mark of approval which potential new owners should look out for.


----------



## tonysoprano (Feb 2, 2013)

@- shadowrat- please do not assume I have no knowledge of the health, temperament benefits of neutering! I have been studying this very issue for 20 years. My father is a vet who has also has assisted me in this.

I think the work you do with rats is amazing and I congratulate you on the good work.

You are not understanding what I am saying!

Last year I had to witness 30 plus healthy dogs, being put to sleep every day for months on end.

Again I will say - I am not against all breeders, but I really think we are falling over unwanted dogs at the moment and if someone really wants a dog then there are thousands at rescues to choose. 

If you have little knowledge of dog rescue, then please respect those who do! I would never comment on rat rescue as I have no knowledge.

As I have stated I have fostered over 200 dogs in my home and have contacted those that came from reputable breeders where some originally came from, with no interest in taking them back. Many of these dogs where very healthy bred specimens. what is the point of breeding healthy dogs that have no home?

Please stop assuming I am against breeders, I am against breeding in the current climate.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

tonysoprano said:


> @- shadowrat- please do not assume I have no knowledge of the health, temperament benefits of neutering! I have been studying this very issue for 20 years. My father is a vet who has also has assisted me in this.
> 
> I think the work you do with rats is amazing and I congratulate you on the good work.
> 
> ...


The problem is you did say that nobody should be breeding and that all dogs should be neutered. That sounds to me as if you are against breeders.

You have to remember that we are not all in a position to have a rescued dog. I have always refused to consider one because my son is over the top with animals and could easily unnerve a dog who has had a bad time.

Also a lot of rescue organisations will not consider everyone for various reasons, some of them downright stupid.

It is really not the amount of dogs but the sort of people who think they can just get a dog like a new novelty and when the novelty wears off, they want to get shot of it. They do not think of dogs as part of the family, whereas nearly everyone on this forum will never abandon their dogs any more than they would their kids.


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

tonysoprano said:


> @- shadowrat- please do not assume I have no knowledge of the health, temperament benefits of neutering! I have been studying this very issue for 20 years. My father is a vet who has also has assisted me in this.


Then your father should have spoken to you about the cons of neutering and spaying as well, which are numerous. Did you know for example that a fixed dog has 4 times the risk of cardiac tumours? Did you know if you spay or neuter many large breeds of dog before the age of 1 then have a 1 in 4 chance of suffering from bone cancer in their lifetime? If your father didn't know this, or didn't wish to impart this knowledge upon you I suggest he is far too biased to be relied upon for balanced opinions.



> As I have stated I have fostered over 200 dogs in my home and have contacted those that *came from reputable breeders where some originally came from, with no interest in taking them back*. Many of these dogs where very healthy bred specimens. what is the point of breeding healthy dogs that have no home?


How is it you believe they are reputable breeders if this is the case?


----------



## Alice Childress (Nov 14, 2010)

tonysoprano said:


> _*As I have stated I have fostered over 200 dogs in my home and have contacted those that came from reputable breeders where some originally came from, with no interest in taking them back.*_ Many of these dogs where very healthy bred specimens. what is the point of breeding healthy dogs that have no home?
> .


If the breeders would not take the dogs back, then by my definition of an ethical breeder, these "reputable breeders" were not ethical! Decent breeders take back their pups, whenever, whatever or find them suitable homes to go to instead. Hence, ethical breeders are not responsible for the breeding crisis.

Every dog alive comes from a breeder. Few come from ethical breeders. The vast majority of members on this forum would agree that we want unethical breeders to stop breeding, or improve their ways. However, the few decent, fantastic breeders out their are a godsend to dogs and puppy buyers and do not add to the rescue situation.


----------



## Shadowrat (Jan 30, 2011)

tonysoprano said:


> @- shadowrat- please do not assume I have no knowledge of the health, temperament benefits of neutering! I have been studying this very issue for 20 years. My father is a vet who has also has assisted me in this.


I would argue that if you cannot see why some people would rather keep their dogs intact, then you're not fully clued up on all the details about neutering. 
There is a reason I opt to keep my boy entire, and it certainly isn't for any reasons other than his own health and welfare.

You are free to neuter any dogs you own for the rest of your life, Im not concerned. 
I _do_ get bothered, however, when people make statements about how they can't understand why anyone wouldn't neuter when there are valid reasons why people don't.
And if you understand the potential cons to neutering, Im failing to see the opposition to those who choose to leave their dogs entire?



tonysoprano said:


> Again I will say - I am not against all breeders, but I really think we are falling over unwanted dogs at the moment and if someone really wants a dog then there are thousands at rescues to choose.


But you're failing to realise that many _do not want a rescue dog_.
You're falling back on the old thing of 'if breeders didn't breed, everyone would rescue instead!'
They _wouldn't_.
As I'd said, I specifically wanted a dobe from a breeder, I did not want a rescue. 
Why? Loads of reasons.
As a first time dog owner, I wanted breeder support, someone who had owned the breed for 30+ years and was at the end of the phone 24/7, who knew the breed inside and out, who could sit and talk to me about dobes for hours (and did), who let me meet the mum and even the dad so I had a good idea of what my pup might be like, who health tested his dogs, who raised them in a way I agreed with, who fed them in a way I thought best, who could guide me and advise me on which pup was best.

The health and temperament were the biggest reasons, though, that I opted for a breeder dog. 
My breed is in a bit of a crappy situation with its health, prone to lots of serious inherited conditions (its not that this breed has _more_ health concerns than others, just that the ones it does have can be extremely serious) and many dobes die of DCM at ridiculously young ages. It is a huge problem with the breed.
Also, as a 'power breed' they attract people who really shouldn't be owning or breeding them, and are creating dogs of unsound temperament.

As a first time owner, I did not feel experienced or confident enough to deal with a dog that might have serious health problems, or even temperament problems, so I chose to go the route that would safeguard me against this the most.
I could not get that safeguard with a rescue.
As most, if not all, dogs that end up in rescue are originally BYB or puppy farm bred (as discussed, good breeders don't have their dogs ending up in rescue routinely) that meant the risk of me getting a dog with health or temperament issues was greater.

And thats not a problem IF you're an experienced dog owner who is knowledgable enough to deal with those issues.
I am not.
And it would be irresponsible of me to pretend otherwise, and end up with a dog I couldn't cope with or had serious problems that I was ill equipped to help with.

There were many other reasons too, including the fact that I have cats and a small garden, meaning a lot of rescues would have dismissed me from the start.

But please don't assume that if people couldn't get a breeder dog, they'd get a rescue instead. It doesn't work like that. 
I had very firm, and reasonable I think you'll agree, reasons for wanting a breeder dog, and I believe this was the most responsible choice for me. 
A rescue would not have been a suitable 'alternative'.

Maybe in a few years when Im more dog savvy and have lots of experience under my belt, I will rescue. Im not oppose to it, Im just opposed to it for me at this precise time.
I didn't even start rescuing rats until I'd owned them for 5 years, because I didn't feel ready to at the beginning.



tonysoprano said:


> If you have little knowledge of dog rescue, then please respect those who do! I would never comment on rat rescue as I have no knowledge.


Well, ok, for a start, I worked in dog rescue for many years  I spent most of my young adult life volunteering at various shelters, dog walking, socialising, and helping line up suitable homes. 
So I think your above comment is a bit out of line, and perhaps a lesson not to make assumptions in future?

No, I no longer do anything in dog rescue as I don't have time, and I focus on the rat rescue instead. But that doesn't mean I won't ever be involved again in the future, Im only 31 

But besides that, there really isn't much diffence between dog and rat rescue, you know. There really isn't. The same issues occur with both.
There are too many BYBs for both species, too many farms/petshops churning them out, too many health issues running rampant in them (particularly the poorly bred ones), too many people getting them on a whim then getting 'bored' or 'the kids get bored' and dumping them on the nearest rescue, too many people who just turn them loose when they've had enough, too many people keeping them in cruel confinement and squalor, too many people treating them like objects and items you can just pass on, too many being given away free online and snatched up to be used for ominous purposes, need I go on?

There is little difference. It doesn't matter what species you rescue, its generally the same things over and over.



tonysoprano said:


> As I have stated I have fostered over 200 dogs in my home and have contacted those that came from reputable breeders where some originally came from, with no interest in taking them back.


Then they are not reputable breeders, are they?
Reputable breeders DO take back their dogs. 
What is making you think these are reputable breeders in the first place?



tonysoprano said:


> Please stop assuming I am against breeders, I am against breeding in the current climate.


Its hard not to, given most of what you've typed. You've certainly not demonstrated that you understand the difference between a good breeder and a bad one, as you seem to lump them all into one category.

You don't seem to understand that if all the good breeders quit right now, today, this second, we would not have any dogs left in 20 years.

Surely, given that the 'current climate' is so dire, it is actually better that the good breeders push on, breeding healthy dogs, then just up and quit?


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

> As I have stated I have fostered over 200 dogs in my home and have contacted those that came from reputable breeders where some originally came from, with no interest in taking them back.


If only most rescues took this view. Firstly, I would say that if they had no interest in taking them back, then they weren't from what I would call reputable breeders! Sadly, I have heard of breeders that have found out one of their puppies is in rescue and the rescue has refused to hand them over and has certainly NOT contacted them. There is a post earlier (I think in this thread) when a volunteer suggesting contacting the breeder and was told they would not contact them. It is far more common (and having volunteered in rescues it is my experience) that they will not contact breeders on the whole.


----------



## tonysoprano (Feb 2, 2013)

I cant remember the last time I read so much drivel and delusional claptrap. 

you carry on getting all you info from the internet.

your last comment makes me realize that you just having a laugh!!!!!!


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

> Many of these dogs where very healthy bred specimens. what is the point of breeding healthy dogs that have no home?


Well, they obviously did have homes, it is that those homes rejected them! 

Far too many breeders will hand over their puppies to easily. I could have sold my last litter ten times over. As it happens, although I had to turn away a few good homes, the majority were homes that I did not think were suitable for the puppies I had bred. No doubt, they will find a puppy from somewhere though!


----------



## tashi (Dec 5, 2007)

Fleur said:


> I do understand that each breed is very different and even if you are breeding a pedigree from 2 fully health tested parents you cannot guarentee a problem free pup but I would of thought the vast diffference is size and shape of a Lab and Dachshund would likely cause hip or similar problems - I personally think if this had been a deliberate breeding it would of been one of those I can't believe it moments


Not necessarily I just used that one as an example as Dolly was so bad, but I know it has happened in lab x golden as well, both parents health tested but puppy had problems with hips.

I just wanted to point this out as it is misleading to think that the health tests on cross breeds do equal a healthy puppy.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

tonysoprano said:


> I cant remember the last time I read so much drivel and delusional claptrap.
> 
> you carry on getting all you info from the internet.
> 
> your last comment makes me realize that you just having a laugh!!!!!!


As you have failed to reply to my earlier posts, I will ask again. If everyone was to neuter and all breeders stop breeding where will the dogs of the future come from?


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

tonysoprano said:


> I cant remember the last time I read so much drivel and delusional claptrap.
> 
> you carry on getting all you info from the internet.
> 
> your last comment makes me realize that you just having a laugh!!!!!!


Welp, there goes the idea of healthy debate. 

I'm sorry you get all your information from your father, perhaps looking at peer reviewed scientific data 'from the internet' might be helpful for you to get a balanced picture instead though?


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

rocco33 said:


> As you have failed to reply to my earlier posts, I will ask again. If everyone was to neuter and all breeders stop breeding where will the dogs of the future come from?


Who cares, right? Just neutering every animal out there would solve every issue we have!


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

Tonysoprano - over what time period were your 200 foster dogs and was it all in your home, or were they infact in your family home?

200 seems very excessive unless they were mosotly very, very short term fosters, or unless it was over a period of many, many years in which case I suspect perhaps your family fostered them and not yourself judging from your posts so far.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

tonysoprano said:


> Firstly - whoever said ( I haven't time to scroll through ) No I am not saying neuter working/service dogs, I am not stupid!
> Also there is only health benefits to neutering/ spaying. Why do you think all rescue centers do this?
> *Responsible breeders? Please tell me where they are! When I ask people who are handing in their dog, whether they have contacted the breeder where the bought the dog, 95% of the time they say the breeder will not take the dog back! *
> 
> ...


You come across as a typical bigoted rescue worker who only sees one side of the story and thinks they have all the answers


----------



## Guest (Feb 4, 2013)

tonysoprano said:


> Again I will say - I am not against all breeders, but I really think we are falling over unwanted dogs at the moment and *if someone really wants a dog then there are thousands at rescues to choose. *


That's a very narrow view of what people may be looking for in a dog. Not everyone wants the same thing from their dog.

I have 3 rescues right now, who are wonderful dogs, but if I were a serious competitor, in need of a guide dog, a search and rescue dog, or any of the other multiple very specialized jobs dogs are asked to do, the odds of finding that right mix of health, conformation, temperament, and traits in a shelter dog are not very high.

As much as I treasure my rescues, and support rescue efforts, I would never presume to tell someone what they should or should not want from the dog that they choose to bring in to their home.


----------



## Bijou (Aug 26, 2009)

Goodness this thread has legs ! - Tonysoprano yours is an over simplistic view based on the fact that the dogs that end up on rescue and tat you have experience of, by definition come from unethical breeders -good breeders do not add to the rescue problem

I am a breeder - here is the page from my website outlining the way that I breed - take a look and tell me just how I am adding to the rescue problem ?

http://www.simplesite.com/grondemon/15516333

( note to mods, all the pups from this litter are now booked so NOT advertising  )

I can tell you exactly where every single one of the pups I've bred are ( going back over 20 years ) I send their owners Christmas cards and e-mails and they send me photos and updates regularly - I ALWAYS guarantee to take back any dog I've bred if the need arises - the last one I had back was 10 years old when his owner developed cancer and could no longer keep him ( he stayed here until his death a few years ago )

MisRV called for a universal Breeding Standard encompassing ALL breeders so that puppy buyers can easily identify those that are doing it right and those that are not - the Dog Advisory Council is also calling for this too, here is their proposed version http://www.dogadvisorycouncil.com/resources/breeding-standard-final.pdf

and there is already the KC's Assured Breeders Scheme Assured Breeder Scheme (information for pedigree puppy buyers) - The Kennel Club

puppy buyers need to vote with their feet and use these schemes when looking for a pup - THAT is the real way to solve the rescue crisis.


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

missRV said:


> Like I said hopefully in the next 10 years puppy farms will be forced to change.


The only thing that will make them change is if people STOP buying from them.


----------



## Alice Childress (Nov 14, 2010)

tonysoprano said:


> View Post
> Responsible breeders? Please tell me where they are! When I ask people who are handing in their dog, whether they have contacted the breeder where the bought the dog, 95% of the time they say the breeder will not take the dog back!


Your logic is missing a key point though. If the breeders had taken the dogs back, then the people would not be handing them in to the rescue, hence, _obviously_ you would only hear about the people whose breeders would not take the dog back!

Working in a rescue, by default, you will not see the dogs that come from ethical breeders, as the ethical breeders will have taken there dogs back before they could go into rescues. Can you not see that?

You are going to be faced with the absolute worst sort of breeders out there. The kind that the vast majority on this forum would like to see stop breeding, or improve their practices, as well! What you seem to be missing is that not all breeders are like this and that the good ones do a fantastic job.


----------



## Shadowrat (Jan 30, 2011)

tonysoprano said:


> I cant remember the last time I read so much drivel and delusional claptrap.
> 
> you carry on getting all you info from the internet.
> 
> your last comment makes me realize that you just having a laugh!!!!!!


Who, exactly, are you talking to?
Because if its me, you're waaaaaay off. But hey, its easier to just spew vitriol than actually consider that the other person might have a valid point, eh? I notice you didn't address any of my questions or points....why? No valid answers?
I _run_ a damn rescue! But no, no, all my info comes from the internet, clearly 

You know what? Its people like you who make me embarassed to say Im a rescuer, because whenever I do, people think Im one of you: looking down on anyone who doesn't rescue, thinking Im some angel of animal salvation, acting like 'no-one knows the troubles I've seeeeeen!', bashing any and all breeders, acting like only I know how life works.
I have people phone me, obviously scared to death talking to a rescuer, trying to justify everything they say to me, like they think Im going to leap down the phone and tear them a new butthole for having to give up their pet, or for having once dared buy a rat from a pet shop.
Its basically sad, really sad, that people view rescuers like this.

But after your posts, I can totally understand why.

Im actually going to guess you're either very young, or you haven't been actively working in rescue for very long (I don't mean shovelling some poo or walking some dogs, I mean actually going out and getting hands on with saving animals, running it yourself, making those hard decisions yourself..) because in my experience, this 'holier than thou' attitude is something mostly people new to rescue have. 
Once you've been doing it a while, you get over yourself a bit and just muddle through and get things done as efficiently as possible.


----------



## Skandi (May 4, 2012)

Becasue people want them, that is why, and also if no one had ever cross bred then we would not have the huge number of breeds we do at the moment. who's to say in a few decades which of the crossbreeds going round today will be registered as breeds in their own right?

Personlay I do not like pedigre dogs, it's a personal thing but I have found that people get way to snotty about them, my criteria is that the dog is fit for the perpose it is bred, since I have no wish to show but did want an active dog that would be "easy" to train and a medium size without breaking the bank I have a bc/lab cross, her parents are both working farm dogs (fit for their perpose) and she so far has proved to be fit for hers. 
As it happens she's going to be going back to being a farm dog, and I really hope she can herd.. but that I didn't know when I got her.


----------



## missRV (Nov 9, 2012)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> The only thing that will make them change is if people STOP buying from them.


And if I can find a better breeder then I'll go for them  In the meantime I'm happy with my puppy but regret not asking for health testing details or ethical information before buying her but I don't regret buying her at all... we've been lucky up to now. The breeder we went for was the lesser of 3 evils.

There IS a target market for crosses and hopefully times will move on!


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

Shadowrat said:


> *Im actually going to guess you're either very young, or you haven't been actively working in rescue for very long *(I don't mean shovelling some poo or walking some dogs, I mean actually going out and getting hands on with saving animals, running it yourself, making those hard decisions yourself..) because in my experience, this 'holier than thou' attitude is something mostly people new to rescue have.
> Once you've been doing it a while, you get over yourself a bit and just muddle through and get things done as efficiently as possible.


I would hazard a guess at this too. To have been 'working in it for 20 years' you would have to be at least 35 years old imo, and to then get all your information from a parent instead of various sources does not seem like the behaviour of an adult to be honest. To have had 200 foster dogs (instead of, as I suspect is actually the case that his father has had 200 foster dogs) you would have had to be either taking multiples in at a time or fostering for decades.


----------



## tonysoprano (Feb 2, 2013)

Phoolf said:


> Tonysoprano - over what time period were your 200 foster dogs and was it all in your home, or were they infact in your family home?
> 
> 200 seems very excessive unless they were mosotly very, very short term fosters, or unless it was over a period of many, many years in which case I suspect perhaps your family fostered them and not yourself judging from your posts so far.


They are taken into my own home, from rescues that are full, or very difficult dogs that are aggressive or have stranger issues, or come from violent homes. I try to rehabilitate them and they are all, but the medically unfit, re homed. This I have been doing for 7 years with no family help, so please don't think I have no judgement

you really think that dogs will die out with a neutering campaign? please....!
I could bombard you with facts but I have real work to do.

I will refrain from name calling, like bigot! the truth usually ruffles a few feathers and brings out the businessmen.


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

missRV said:


> And if I can find a better breeder then I'll go for them  In the meantime I'm happy with my puppy but regret not asking for health testing details or ethical information before buying her but I don't regret buying her at all... we've been lucky up to now. The breeder we went for was the lesser of 3 evils.
> 
> There IS a target market for crosses and hopefully times will move on!


Im sorry but how was this a lesser evil? Its a clear as day puppy farm!!!

If you couldnt find a better one, you would go back.


----------



## Shadowrat (Jan 30, 2011)

tonysoprano said:


> you really think that dogs will die out with a neutering campaign? please....!
> I could bombard you with facts but I have real work to do.


If all dogs were neutered, there would be no more dogs. Thats not really hard to grasp, is it? 
Also, please do bombard with me 'facts'.


----------



## Alice Childress (Nov 14, 2010)

tonysoprano said:


> They are taken into my own home, from rescues that are full, or very difficult dogs that are aggressive or have stranger issues, or come from violent homes. I try to rehabilitate them and they are all, but the medically unfit, re homed. This I have been doing for 7 years with no family help, so please don't think I have no judgement
> 
> you really think that dogs will die out with a neutering campaign? please....!
> *I could bombard you with facts but I have real work to do.*
> ...


That's convenient. Considering you have been unable to answer simple questions nor see basic logic, I am sure we would love to read some actual facts from you. Please enlighten us.


----------



## missRV (Nov 9, 2012)

I am happy with my dog, bottom line! I know it's tricky for you to understand, there were NO better cavachon breeders available and yes I wanted a CAVACHON not a BICHON not any other dog! To imply that I should consider a bichon instead of a cross in future is outright rude! 

I'd love for the laws to change, for monitoring to be necessary but as you say they're not! I can't believe that I'm still being attacked for saying I'd check before buying again! 

I don't know how I'll feel when Rosie does go... maybe I'll move onto a different type of dog all together. Who knows!

SOME attitudes will never change and SOME will never tolerate crosses!


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

> I will refrain from name calling, like bigot! the truth usually ruffles a few feathers and brings out the businessmen.


As I was the one used the word 'bigot' then it has ruffled no feathers with me. I am no businessman (or woman), certainly not where my dogs are concerned. LOL

Sadly, there are many problems with dogs, poorly bred, poor ownership - that result in the problems we are facing today. The answer is NOT to stop breeding - that is a ridiculous solution to the problem. I would be the first to say that the majority of dogs being bred shouldn't have been bred, however, to say that all dogs should be neutered and breeding should stop is ridiculous.

However, you obviously know everything there is to know about dogs so there's little else to say.

Except - how come in the Scandanavian countries where dogs are not neutered routinely (including pets), they do not have the rescue problem that we have here?


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

tonysoprano said:


> They are taken into my own home, from rescues that are full, or very difficult dogs that are aggressive or have stranger issues, or come from violent homes. I try to rehabilitate them and they are all, but the medically unfit, re homed. This I have been doing for 7 years with no family help, so please don't think I have no judgement
> 
> you really think that dogs will die out with a neutering campaign? please....!
> I could bombard you with facts but I have real work to do.
> ...


So by my calculations, to have had 200 foster dogs in 7 years you have them for an average of 12.775 days each. Lots of time to rehabilitate them then.  Where does the 20 years come into it then? Or are you saying you worked in rescue for 20 but only fostered for 7?

The truth is you are very naive and uninformed, with an obvious bias and no desire to learn anything else which is truly sad.


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

Shadowrat said:


> If all dogs were neutered, there would be no more dogs. Thats not really hard to grasp, is it?
> Also, please do bombard with me 'facts'.


Where would his facts come from though if not 'from the internet'?  Perhaps he will scan in books from the library instead.


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

rocco33 said:


> Except - how come in the Scandanavian countries where dogs are not neutered routinely (including pets), they do not have the rescue problem that we have here?


Oh rocco getouddaahere with your internet facts!


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

> you really think that dogs will die out with a neutering campaign? please....!


You did not say a 'neutering campaign' you said ALL dogs should be neutering and breeding stopped!

Although, did your extensive research look into the problem in Ireland (which is far worse than ours) who had a 'neutering campaign' offering free neutering because their rescue problem was so severe? Didn't help at all, we are still bringing rescues over here because their rescues are overflowing many years later. And they still have a strict policy that any dog surrendered is pts immediately and any strays are pts at 7 days if not claimed because they cannot cope with the number of dogs coming into rescue. That 'neutering policy' didnt' work!


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

missRV said:


> I am happy with my dog, bottom line! I know it's tricky for you to understand, there were NO better cavachon breeders available and yes I wanted a CAVACHON not a BICHON not any other dog!
> 
> I'd love for the laws to change, for monitoring to be necessary but as you say they're not!
> 
> I don't know how I'll feel when Rosie does go... maybe I'll move onto a different type of dog all together. Who knows!


So no better breeders means go to a puppy farm for what you want.

Isnt that just the culture we live in. It doesnt matter that your pups mum is a breeding machine so long as you have what you want!!!!


----------



## missRV (Nov 9, 2012)

If LEGISLATION becomes necessary for ETHICAL BREEDING! IE: mum not being used exclusive for breeding!

Seriously!


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

missRV said:


> If LEGISLATION becomes necessary for ETHICAL BREEDING! IE: mum not being used exclusive for breeding!
> 
> Seriously!


Are you being serious?!!!!

So until the time it comes in it is fine for you to buy from someone abusing their dogs by churning out litter after litter because you want a 'cavachon' and that's the only way to get one. Don't worry about the poor dogs being abused, you have your fluffy dog!

Seriously!!!

They wouldn't need the legislation if people didn't go there in the first place!!!:mad2:


----------



## Guest (Feb 4, 2013)

I'm sorry to say but while puppy farms exist people will go to them.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

Phoolf said:


> Oh rocco getouddaahere with your internet facts!


Not from internet from Swedish friends and acquaintances.


----------



## missRV (Nov 9, 2012)

I have my gorgeous fluffy cavachon thank you  I've said the whole way through the thread that I won't be looking for another one in the near future and hopefully by this time legislation will be in place with the growing demand. IF ETHICAL BREEDING IS ENFORCED THEN THIS WILL NOT BE THE CASE!

Failing that IF it is not then I'll look at an alternative.

I'm saying the standards for cross breeds SHOULD be the same as pedigrees!


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

missRV said:


> I have my gorgeous fluffy cavachon thank you  I've said the whole way through the thread that I won't be looking for another one in the near future and hopefully by this time legislation will be in place with the growing demand. IF ETHICAL BREEDING IS ENFORCED THEN THIS WILL NOT BE THE CASE!
> 
> Failing that IF it is not then I'll look at an alternative.
> 
> I'm saying the standards for cross breeds SHOULD be the same as pedigrees!


Aw I' really happy for you.

Look out for her mum on manytears site huh?

There wouldn't need to be any legislation if people like you didn't keep going to obvious puppy farms. but so long as you are happy with the puppy, to hell with all the dogs suffering in the puppy farm!


----------



## koolchick (Apr 5, 2011)

Some mixed breeds are so cute. Over all I think mixed breeds are cuter than some pedigrees. Now I have a full Boarder Terrier who is lovely and so cute but I've had cross breeds in past who were as cute. Some single breeds I don't think are as cute as mixed breeds like poodles long haired breeds bull dogs.


----------



## L/C (Aug 9, 2010)

missRV said:


> If LEGISLATION becomes necessary for ETHICAL BREEDING! IE: mum not being used exclusive for breeding!
> 
> Seriously!


I don't understand this as a response to Emmaviolet's point. Not trying to be difficult but you seem to be defending buying from a puppy farm because they were the best of a bad bunch.

Wanting a specific cross breed doesn't excuse you from responsibility - trying to argue that you couldn't get the dog you wanted anywhere else isn't a defence. If you can't get the breed/x-breed you want from an ethical breeder or rescue then you choose another.

Otherwise you're part of the problem.


----------



## missRV (Nov 9, 2012)

No I'm saying I didn't KNOW it was a puppy farm when I got her! I was NOT a member on the forum when I got her, I was clearly swayed by the "ethical breeding badge" on display the claims of health testing... silly me! 

You're misreading everything I'm saying (and blatantly twisting it) I'm going to ask to agree to disagree, hope that things change and times move on, puppy farms cease and ethical breeders succeed. I do however hope that cross breeds carry on growing in popularity!

I'm moving away because this is now becoming nasty and will cause the rule to be re enforced! Obviously my wording is confusing some of you! If I'm at fault for this confusion I apologise, I'm not condoning puppy farming, I'm not planning on getting another dog soon (Rosie takes up all my time) lol. 

Hey maybe I'll end up getting a rescue next time! Who knows I've done that before!


----------



## westie~ma (Mar 16, 2009)

Can we bring this thread back on topic, thank you


----------



## tonysoprano (Feb 2, 2013)

Phoolf said:


> So by my calculations, to have had 200 foster dogs in 7 years you have them for an average of 12.775 days each. Lots of time to rehabilitate them then.  Where does the 20 years come into it then? Or are you saying you worked in rescue for 20 but only fostered for 7?
> 
> The truth is you are very naive and uninformed, with an obvious bias and no desire to learn anything else which is truly sad.


Oh dear! you have come to the conclusion that I take in one dog at a time! if only it was that easy. I currently have 9 dogs, that not including my own 4 rotties and 2 Akitas what is sadder is that you have taken the trouble to work it out at all. 
If you think I am sad and naive and uniformed well I hope it makes you happy and stops you from getting out your calculator.

as for supplying the facts - this will never happen as the facts contain many breeders names........I am not that naive.

I met a breeder last week who is only selling dogs to owners who sign a form to agree to neuter the dog when of neutering age, or they will not get the dog. Now that is responsible breeding.


----------



## Shadowrat (Jan 30, 2011)

tonysoprano said:


> I met a breeder last week who is only selling dogs to owners who sign a form to agree to neuter the dog when of neutering age, or they will not get the dog. Now that is responsible breeding.


Depends on your definition, I suppose.
I'd never buy a pup from someone that insisted I neuter it, as, as I've said before, the health risks associated with neutering are not something I want to subject my dog to. In my mind, they'd be insisting I take a gamble with his health and welfare......no. Not for me.

Most reputable breeders don't insist on this, as far as I know, they do often put endorsements on the pup though.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

> Originally Posted by tonysoprano
> 
> I met a breeder last week who is only selling dogs to owners who sign a form to agree to neuter the dog when of neutering age, or they will not get the dog. Now that is responsible breeding.


I'd like to see what happens if he tries to enforce it! While I don't have a problem with this and put various conditions in my contract of sale, enforcing them is a different matter. A dog is considered 'goods' in UK law and once possession has passed to the new owner, they can do what they like with it.


----------



## westie~ma (Mar 16, 2009)

Hello, my phone died on me so now I'm having to fire up the big pc to delete threads, despite having asked for this to stay on topic.

Keep barracking each other and temp bans will be handed out, consider this a warning.

Most of the thread is fine, its a minority *before I get loads of pms pointing out this*


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

westie~ma said:


> Hello, my phone died on me so now I'm having to fire up the big pc to delete threads, despite having asked for this to stay on topic.
> 
> Keep barracking each other and temp bans will be handed out, consider this a warning.
> 
> Most of the thread is fine, its a minority *before I get loads of pms pointing out this*


Oops - sorry - can you not split the thread rather than deleting it?


----------



## westie~ma (Mar 16, 2009)

rocco33 said:


> Oops - sorry - can you not split the thread rather than deleting it?


Should have read "delete posts" not "threads", typing in a temper cos my big pc is clunky and takes FOREVER to fire up


----------



## tashi (Dec 5, 2007)

rocco33 said:


> I'd like to see what happens if he tries to enforce it! While I don't have a problem with this and put various conditions in my contract of sale, enforcing them is a different matter. A dog is considered 'goods' in UK law and once possession has passed to the new owner, they can do what they like with it.


We had just this discussion yesterday with an official from the Kennel Club


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

westie~ma said:


> Hello, my phone died on me so now I'm having to fire up the big pc to delete threads, despite having asked for this to stay on topic.
> 
> Keep barracking each other and temp bans will be handed out, consider this a warning.
> 
> Most of the thread is fine, its a minority *before I get loads of pms pointing out this*


Aw sorry.

My point was about puppy farms in general though, not to do with crossbreeds.

I won't write any more on this thread.


----------



## Sosha (Jan 11, 2013)

On an afternoons walk, watching a friend's collie cross & my mostly JRT the other owner remarked:

"They'd have cracking pups"

"Wouldn't they" I replied.

"Probably be great for flyball too"

"Probably pretty good for Agility"

I'd have had one, She'd have had one. Could think of at least two other people who'd be wildly enthusiastic without trying.

Obviously it's never going to happen - even if it was possible.


----------



## Cay (Jun 22, 2009)

When you can get a working cocker for £450 and a cockapoo from a working cocker goes for £950, it is clear that breeders are profiteering. The majority of cross breeders seem to own pedigrees and breed crossbreeds. It really annoys me that crossbreeds have made endorsements worthless .


----------



## L/C (Aug 9, 2010)

I volunteer in rescue - it takes up a huge amount of my time. I am passionately pro-rescue and often defend them on here. I have taken on one dog who has needed extensive rehabilitation to just be able to function and go outside and another with a physical injury that will probably end up costing me a lot of money (pre-exisiting so not covered by any insurance). I have fostered 5 dogs over the past year and all of them are happily settled in homes. I do on average 3 or 4 homechecks a week and about 2 hours of admin.

My next dog will be from an ethical breeder. For various reasons including but not limited to wanting to raise a well-bred puppy, wanting a dog for a specific sport, wanting a breed that I am not comfortable taking on with possible behavioural difficulties, wanting to minimise potential health issues as much as possible (I have one dog with an old racing injury and another with brain damage and possible arthritis at 6 years old) and it being a breed that doesn't often end up in rescue.

More importantly - as long as I am not supporting puppy farmers, BYB breeders or any other unethical producer of dogs _I don't have to justify my decision_. People should get the dog that suits them at the time that suits them - forcing people to take on rescues won't help.

As to neutering - both mine were done by the rescue. But although I understand why it was done and the logic behind it (we have absolutely no need for more greyhounds being bred deliberately or accidentally) it was the wrong decision for my boy. He is a nervous dog and would have always been a nervous dog but by neutering him and removing that extra bit of testosterone it has made him that bit more fearful and reactive.

Neutering is not always the answer, anymore then rescue is always the answer.


----------



## jenniferx (Jan 23, 2009)

I think that profit margins must vary *a lot *depending on where you are- In NI and ROI you can get very cheap first crosses that are "mongrel prices" (not saying they are good breeders, but they are available)- less even than you might pay as a donation to rescue. Certainly nothing even close to 1K. I just did a quick search and you can get JackXChi puppies for £57.


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

missRV said:


> I have my gorgeous fluffy cavachon thank you  I've said the whole way through the thread that I won't be looking for another one in the near future and hopefully by this time legislation will be in place with the growing demand. IF ETHICAL BREEDING IS ENFORCED THEN THIS WILL NOT BE THE CASE!
> 
> Failing that IF it is not then I'll look at an alternative.
> 
> I'm saying the standards for cross breeds SHOULD be the same as pedigrees!


Nobody is saying you should not be happy with your dog 

You've openly admitted, and fair play to you, that *when* you got her, you weren't yet on this forum and you genuinely didn't know about puppy farms V ethical breeders, etc.

I think the reason why *some* of us are finding your posts upsetting is that you ***seem*** to be saying/implying that, in future years, EVEN though you know your breeder was not ethical and didn't do her best for the dogs, you **would** still consider buying from her - because you are determined to have a 'cavachon'.

What you must then accept, is that it is *THIS *attitude that does enable puppy farms to continue. It's no good saying you hope puppy farms will 'improve' - that's a bit like saying one hopes a serial killer will be in a 'better mood' 

With all the info available, I think *some* of us might expect you instead to be saying something along the lines of: 'No way in hell would I ever return to that breeder *now that I know *what a puppy farm that was!'

Honestly - I'm not getting at you. Just trying to convey why I think a few of us are getting frustrated with some of what you say. No offence meant


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

Cay said:


> When you can get a working cocker for £450 and a cockapoo from a working cocker goes for £950, it is clear that breeders are profiteering. The majority of cross breeders seem to own pedigrees and breed crossbreeds. It really annoys me that crossbreeds have made endorsements worthless .


Where I live you can get a cocker cross for $250 and Cockers go for ~$600.

I can get a Cav cross for $800 with some health testing and a Cavalier with similar testing gets, minimum $2500.

Yes, there are breeders profiteering . . . of all types.

I truly don't think even $2500 is too much to pay for a dog from a breeder that puts in the effort I want, however the $$$ amount is not commonly higher for crossbreeds in many places and it VERY much depends on which crossbreeds you are comparing with which breeds.

CC


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

Skandi said:


> Becasue people want them, that is why, and also if no one had ever cross bred then we would not have the huge number of breeds we do at the moment. who's to say in a few decades which of the crossbreeds going round today will be registered as breeds in their own right?
> 
> *Personlay I do not like pedigre dogs,* it's a personal thing but I have found that people get way to snotty about them, my criteria is that the dog is fit for the perpose it is bred, since I have no wish to show but did want an active dog that would be "easy" to train and a medium size without breaking the bank I have a bc/lab cross, her parents are both working farm dogs (fit for their perpose) and she so far has proved to be fit for hers.
> As it happens she's going to be going back to being a farm dog, and I really hope she can herd.. but that I didn't know when I got her.


You dislike every single 'pure' breed on the planet....?

My goodness. I haven't even *met* every single breed out there!

If anyone declared 'I don't like crossbreeds' there would be an outcry.
But apparently it's fine for someone to state they dislike pedigrees....Though I *think* it's people's attitudes you're disliking and NOT the actual dogs....?

Personally, I don't know how anyone who loves dogs can also dislike an entire category *OF* dogs - be that category pedigrees *or *crossbreeds.


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

People often say 'I have nothing against mongrels but I'd only ever rescue one'. I have a mutt (bought, gasp) and a purebred (rescue). Did I do it the wrong way around?  
I happen to think your average random bred family mongrel is often more of an ethical choice than _some_ purebreeds with extreme conformation and/or many health issues. However, I would never go on someone's thread introducing their new Bernese Mountain Dog pup (for example) from a 'reputable' breeder decrying them for choosing a wreck of a breed that is likely to be dead before it's fifth birthday. I'd be a bit of a **** to do that. Doesn't stop certain people imposing their own ethics on designer crossbreed owners.



Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> If anyone declared 'I don't like crossbreeds' there would be an outcry.


It certainly gets said. I'm pretty sure Dandogman said as much on this very thread (or possibly another ongoing one that's covering the same ground, I can't keep track!). I manage not to get my knickers in a twist about it.


----------



## Miss.PuddyCat (Jul 13, 2009)

Sophie is a cross between a Maltese and Shih Tzu and my only concern with her is her back legs but after bringing it up with my vets a number of times Im told its normal.

When looking for dogs I wanted a meduim to a large breed. My mom is scared of Large to Meduim sized dogs so that ruled them out. I was never a fan of small breeds. 

My mom is the one that found Sophies ad and we bought her for 450$. I dont regret it one bit. Sophie has only been to the vets to be spayed, vaccs and kennel cough which any dog can get.

Sophie has opened my eyes to the the world of small dogs so now I love them. And even tho Im researching my next breed which wont happen for a while as plans have changed if I saw a ad for pups that were crossed, were raised in a loving caring home would I go look at them...............Yes I would, its my choice.

Would I rescue dont think so, after reading the different criteria for rescue my life doesnt fit it properly.

Ive tried getting into contact with breeders and have had a few replies before they stopped randomly, Ive never gotten a reply, or Ive been rebuffed in person So it is a turn off.


----------



## Shadowrat (Jan 30, 2011)

L/C said:


> People should get the dog that suits them at the time that suits them - forcing people to take on rescues won't help.


Indeed, I totally agree with your whole post.
But it always puts me in mind of the girl on a rat forum I saw who had her heart set on two breeder rats (wanted the better health and temperament/handleability as these were her first ever rats and she wasn't very experienced).
The rescue nazis (they exist in all pet species it seems!), in a passive aggressive way, kinda bullied her into getting rescues. 
So she scrapped her plans for breeder rats, and went for two older rescue boys, despite the fact that you could tell by her words that she was only doing it because she'd been made to feel bad by other people and ultimately, what she wanted was her breeder rats.

A few months on, she was on the forum asking for help as the boys were proving skittish, difficult and not the easy first time rats she wanted, or was told they'd be.
Long story short, they ended up back in rescue, and she eventually got the breeder boys she'd always wanted anyway. And as far as I know, had no issues.

I always remember this sticking in my mind because it was a perfect example of how people should not be bullied into getting an animal they don't want, it rarely ends well for the animal for starters!
I'd rather see someone get a breeder pup, if thats what they want, and be happy than be bullied into a rescue by pressure from others, and end up with a dog they don't feel they can cope with, which might even end up back in rescue later.


----------



## Alice Childress (Nov 14, 2010)

picaresque said:


> I happen to think your average random bred family mongrel is often more of an ethical choice than _some_ purebreeds with extreme conformation and/or many health issues. However, I would never go on someone's thread introducing their new Bernese Mountain Dog pup (for example) from a 'reputable' breeder decrying them for choosing a wreck of a breed that is *likely to be dead before it's fifth birthday*. I'd be a bit of a **** to do that. Doesn't stop certain people imposing their own ethics on designer crossbreed owners.


Well, I should hope not as that is untrue and hence an odd thing to say  It would also be very unfair if someone had gone to a breeder that was doing everything in their power to improve the health of the Bernese.

People seem obsessed with pedigree vs cross. It's not to do with that! It's to do with ethical breeders vs unethical breeders.

It may be your opinion that your average random bred family mongrel is the more ethical choice than some pedigrees, but it really depends on the definition of an ethical breeder. My experience of your 'average random breed mongrel' is that they are just that, randomly breed with no thought put into the breeding, the health of the pups, nor the future of them and without any purpose or reason for breeding beyond 'wanting a cute puppy' or making a quick buck.


----------



## dandogman (Dec 19, 2011)

Alice Childress said:


> Well, I should hope not as that is untrue and hence an odd thing to say  It would also be very unfair if someone had gone to a breeder that was doing everything in their power to improve the health of the Bernese.
> 
> People seem obsessed with pedigree vs cross. It's not to do with that! It's to do with ethical breeders vs unethical breeders.
> 
> It may be your opinion that your average random bred family mongrel is the more ethical choice than some pedigrees, but it really depends on the definition of an ethical breeder. My experience of your 'average random breed mongrel' is that they are just that, randomly breed with no thought put into the breeding, the health of the pups, nor the future of them and without any purpose or reason for breeding beyond 'wanting a cute puppy' or making a quick buck.


Exactly. It is not Pedigree Vs Cross, it is Ethical Vs Unethical breeders! 
You would find the same reaction to an unethical pure bred dog and cross breed dog. It really is about the breeders. I have no problem at all with Ethical cross bred dogs, they just seem to be few and far between!


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

Alice Childress said:


> Well, I should hope not as that is untrue and hence an odd thing to say  It would also be very unfair if someone had gone to a breeder that was doing everything in their power to improve the health of the Bernese.
> 
> *People seem obsessed with pedigree vs cross. It's not to do with that! It's to do with ethical breeders vs unethical breeders. *
> 
> It may be your opinion that your average random bred family mongrel is the more ethical choice than some pedigrees, but it really depends on the definition of an ethical breeder. My experience of your 'average random breed mongrel' is that they are just that, randomly breed with no thought put into the breeding, the health of the pups, nor the future of them and without any purpose or reason for breeding beyond 'wanting a cute puppy' or making a quick buck.


Totally agree with this.

The only reason I picked up on the comment about someone 'not liking pedigrees' is because, whatever PICARESQUE says, some of us **have** been bashed when crossbreeds have been discussed, even if we haven't been saying anything negative!

I totally believe the debate should be reframed as Ethical breeders V Unethical breeders.

I also happen to think it's absurd for anyone to declare they 'dislike' an entire category of dogs, be they purebreeds or crossbreeds.


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

Skandi said:


> Becasue people want them, that is why, and also if no one had ever cross bred then we would not have the huge number of breeds we do at the moment. *who's to say in a few decades which of the crossbreeds going round today will be registered as breeds in their own right?*
> 
> *Personlay I do not like pedigre dogs, it's a personal thing but I have found that people get way to snotty about them, *my criteria is that the dog is fit for the perpose it is bred, since I have no wish to show but did want an active dog that would be "easy" to train and a medium size without breaking the bank I have a bc/lab cross, her parents are both working farm dogs (fit for their perpose) and she so far has proved to be fit for hers.
> As it happens she's going to be going back to being a farm dog, and I really hope she can herd.. but that I didn't know when I got her.


If the crossbreeds that you currently love then become a registered breed will you then dislike them? Would you like RRs if they weren't registered because they were developed from a whole mix of breeds? The 'snotty' / 'snobby' pedigree argument is utterly ridiculous for so many reasons. Pulled out of the hat by people who have maybe not taken the time to get to know the owners and their dogs .



tonysoprano said:


> I met a breeder last week who is only selling dogs to owners who sign a form to agree to neuter the dog when of neutering age, or they will not get the dog. Now that is responsible breeding.


Responsible breeding is taking the time to choose your puppy owners carefully and trust that they will make the right decision about neutering or not for the benefit of the health and wellbeing of the dog. Mine are both endorsed which is responsible.


----------



## LexiLou2 (Mar 15, 2011)

Well I have a rescue and a pedigree.......

And I can honestly say I get a hell of a lot more support guidance and help from my pedigree labradors breeder than i do the rescue I got my other dog from.

When Nala was ill I posted about it on facebook and both the stud dog owner and the dams owner were messaging me with help and support. Any issues I can message either of them, ring them etc and they are there offering me advice.

With my resuce I have had 2 years of really bad bevaioural issues, it took them 8 months to respond to me the first time i tried to contact them.....

With regards to the cross vs pedigree to me its more ethical over unethical I would rather have a ethically health tested well bred well loved labradoodle than a puppy farmed labrador every time.

I ahve nothing against cross breeds, however the price surprised me, looking for a cockerpoo for my parents and the only litter i have seen so far that I would on paper entertain with all relevant health tests etc were £800, which is £100 more than I paid for Nala, and they aren't a rare cross or anything so I think the prices have gone a bit mad but I don't think they shouldn't exisit.


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

LexiLou2 said:


> Well I have a rescue and a pedigree.......
> 
> And I can honestly say I get a hell of a lot more support guidance and help from my pedigree labradors breeder than i do the rescue I got my other dog from.
> 
> ...


Totally agree with this.

If I was, hypothetically, going to get a pup from a breeder, then I wouldn't even *consider* a dog from non health tested parents. That holds true whether it's a crossbreed or purebreed.

For me it's all about the health tests and a breeder who cares about these things, plus temperament, socialisation, etc. I don't really understand why anyone would* knowingly* choose to line the pockets of a breeder who failed to health test.


----------



## LexiLou2 (Mar 15, 2011)

Owned By A Yellow Lab said:


> Totally agree with this.
> 
> If I was, hypothetically, going to get a pup from a breeder, then I wouldn't even *consider* a dog from non health tested parents. That holds true whether it's a crossbreed or purebreed.
> 
> For me it's all about the health tests and a breeder who cares about these things, plus temperament, socialisation, etc. I don't really understand why anyone would* knowingly* choose to line the pockets of a breeder who failed to health test.


This is the thing to me it doesn't matter what you are breeding it is how you are breeding and although there are a lot of bad pedigree breeders there seem to be more bad cross breed breeders hence why i think cross breeds sometimes get a hard press on here, its not the dog or the breed that people don't like it it the situation it comes from.

Like if my parents do get a cockerpoo I am sure as and when i post pics and state that parents are health tested good temprement etc etc that everyone will tell me its a nice puppy where as if i came on and said oh parents friend stuck male poodle to female cocker and look what happened I would expect a flaming!

Breeding is something that has crossed my mind with Nala however it would depend on a lot, she at 8 months old has an amazing temprement, she is chilled out and laid back but confident and comfortable in her own skin, she is polite meeting people (unless you are Terencesmum) and other dogs (unless you are Terence) and a joy in the home. She is shown but will never do overly well in the ring due to been 'dual purpose' in that she is both working and show bred that said I have had people look over her and say for her type she has a nice conformation and she has a great work ethic is very easy to train and will hopefully make a good gun dog.

However all of the above will have to stay the same on improve and every single one of her health tests will have to come back as needed then I need to decided what to do about stud dog, do i put her to a more show bred dog and get a heavier pup that will do well in the ring or do i put her to a working bred dog and get a more working dog, or do I stick with a smiliar mix and try and find something that compliments her that has a similar mix of working and show.........if all of that happens and the start aline in the right fashion on the third eve of the third move (sarcassm) I may look to breed. Anyway my point, regardless of what they were breeding this is the type of thought process I would expect any ethical breeder to go through before even making the decision to breed........I don't car if you are breeding pedigrees of a new phase of labracockoodledoodles its the thought and decision behind the litter, the care and consideration for the bitch and the amonut of love and effort you put into that litter that matters to me and that means having a bitch and dog with solid temprement, been fit for purposes and having solid health tests results as well as been a loved family member as a bare minimum.


----------



## Owned By A Yellow Lab (May 16, 2012)

LexiLou2 said:


> This is the thing to me it doesn't matter what you are breeding it is how you are breeding and although there are a lot of bad pedigree breeders there seem to be more bad cross breed breeders hence why i think cross breeds sometimes get a hard press on here, its not the dog or the breed that people don't like it it the situation it comes from.
> 
> Like if my parents do get a cockerpoo I am sure as and when i post pics and state that parents are health tested good temprement etc etc that everyone will tell me its a nice puppy where as if i came on and said oh parents friend stuck male poodle to female cocker and look what happened I would expect a flaming!
> 
> ...


I agree. I think some people like to have something 'different' and 'exotic' and that's where some breeders of crosses get the idea from. Again though, for me it all comes down to the health tests and thought put into the pairing of the two dogs.


----------

