Puppy Forum and Dog Forums banner

21 - 40 of 63 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
971 Posts
Discussion Starter #21
Sure wish I could find a small female girl. Our shelters are also filled with either dogs with problems, old dogs, big dogs, etc. We did leave our name at one place today. Personally I don't care if I get a pure bred or not. I am just loosing for a sister to our little dog.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Here are our 2, brother and sister. We have had them now for over a year. They are wonderful and bring so much joy to our lives.



We also have a 6 yr old Pure Golden(rescued at 2 years old)and a 5 month old Pure Newfie.



 

·
Banned
Joined
·
894 Posts
I was not stating that a mix breed is less valuable or less desireable; just that the cutsiepie names given to such offspring are not accurate. If you ask any quality breeder of mix breed dogs,(and yes, there are quality mix breeders) they will tell you that the breed of the sire is the determining factor.
Guide Dogs for the Blind has crossed Golden Retrievers with Labrador Retrievers, and the resultant offspring are known according to the breed of the sire; either a Golden cross, or a Labrador cross. They are by no means an inferior dog, in fact the training and testing have shown these crosses to be somewhat better for guidework than the pure lines of either breed.
Stating a fact is not revealing bias, but refusing to accept a fact is.

The term "Hybrid" is also misleading, because dogs are the only species involved in the breeding process, whereas "hybrid" denotes breeding between different species; an example would be a cat-dog cross would be considered a "hybrid" due to the different species involved.
Technically you are correct, but in common usage hybrid is used all the time do denote inter-species crosses done to obtain a specific result. Hybrid tomatoes and roses for example. Do you also object to the term being used for cars?

As for cutsiepie names, can you imagine how cumbersome it would be to use "cocker spaniel poodle cross" every time you refer to this particular type of dog that has been popular for 35 years?

We're not talking about a working dog where technical accuracy is important. We are talking about a dogs whose only purpose is to be a companion dog. Why would you want to deny people a cutsiepie name for the dogs they love just because it is not technically accurate?

Besides, the only people that object to the names are people that object to the dogs, so why should people who love them care?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
352 Posts
In reference to cars, they truly are hybrid---the mixing of internal combustion engines (one type of locomotion) with electric motors (a completely different and unrelated type of locomotion).
Same with tomatoes---different types of plants grafted onto the tomato stem to produce fruit. It may resemble a tomato, but a genetic test will show the difference.
They really are hybrid. The dogs arent.
Look, call them whatever you want. Just do not expect those of us who know what the truth is to abide by the misrepresentations. Dont expect us to believe a lie. Thats all.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
335 Posts
. . . As for cutsiepie names, can you imagine how cumbersome it would be to use "cocker spaniel poodle cross" every time you refer to this particular type of dog that has been popular for 35 years?

We're not talking about a working dog where technical accuracy is important. We are talking about a dogs whose only purpose is to be a companion dog. Why would you want to deny people a cutsiepie name for the dogs they love just because it is not technically accurate?

Besides, the only people that object to the names are people that object to the dogs, so why should people who love them care?
There is a very simple name for a "cocker spaniel poodle cross." That name is a "mixed breed," or, if that name is too complex, "mutt." The reason these cutesie pie names are so dangerous is because hobby breeders who care about improving breeds are under fire from punitive legislation started by animal rights activists who want to eliminate pet ownership. The reason these cutesie pie names are so dangerous because they legitimize these mixes as being something that they are not, allowing unscrupulous backyard breeders and commercial breeders to profit when it is their irresponsible behavior, not the responsible behavior of hobby breeders, that is contributing to owner-relinquished dogs in shelters. Hobby breeders take the time to test their breeding stock for hereditary issues, to match dogs to their prospective owners, and to take back their puppies--at any age--when those dogs need to be rehomed.

Please, I understand you love your dog, but after 35 years the so-called cockapoo has not moved beyond the Gen-1 stage. That is because they do not breed true, because there is no standard, and because there has been no effort made to do the kind of breeding required to register them with a legitimate registry. Please do not dignify them with the title of a "breed" and denigrate the efforts of all of the people who have made an effort to reduce the number of illnesses and genetic conditions that breeds are prone to and who have made every effort to keep their lines pure and bred to a standard. They are nowhere near the same. The cutesie names are so dangerous because they are a slap in the face of legitimate hobby breeders everywhere every time they are spoken and because they reduce their efforts to the level of backyard breeders everywhere. It's unfair, it's unjust, and it's just plain wrong. These designer breeds open all breeders up to the attacks of the animal rights activists and their hired lackey legislators.

That is the danger of "cutesie" names.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
894 Posts
In reference to cars, they truly are hybrid---the mixing of internal combustion engines (one type of locomotion) with electric motors (a completely different and unrelated type of locomotion).
Same with tomatoes---different types of plants grafted onto the tomato stem to produce fruit. It may resemble a tomato, but a genetic test will show the difference.
They really are hybrid. The dogs arent.
Look, call them whatever you want. Just do not expect those of us who know what the truth is to abide by the misrepresentations. Dont expect us to believe a lie. Thats all.
hy⋅brid   /ˈhaɪbrɪd/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [hahy-brid] Show IPA Pronunciation

–noun 1. the offspring of two animals or plants of different breeds, varieties, species, or genera, esp. as produced through human manipulation for specific genetic characteristics.
2. a person or group of persons produced by the interaction or crossbreeding of two unlike cultures, traditions, etc.
3. anything derived from heterogeneous sources, or composed of elements of different or incongruous kinds: a hybrid of the academic and business worlds.
4. a word composed of elements originally drawn from different languages, as television, whose components come from Greek and Latin.
–adjective 5. bred from two distinct races, breeds, varieties, species, or genera.
6. composite; formed or composed of heterogeneous elements.
7. composed of elements originally drawn from different languages, as a word.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hybrid

So it turns out you weren't even technically correct. My bad.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,451 Posts
hy⋅brid   /ˈhaɪbrɪd/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [hahy-brid] Show IPA Pronunciation

–noun 1. the offspring of two animals or plants of different breeds, varieties, species, or genera, esp. as produced through human manipulation for specific genetic characteristics.

So it turns out you weren't even technically correct. My bad.
You have appeared to miss th most important part of the deffinition given, that would be the part underlined.

Mixes like the cockapoo, labradoodle, puggle, etc. are not bred for any specific genetics. Yes some "breeders" hope for their dogs to be hypo allergenic but they don't know the specific genetics for that and they couldn't even conrotl them if they did. A hybrid plant or car will always result in 100% of the offspring/resultants being the same. A Lion crossed with a Tiger will always result in a Liger. It's not a case where the cross may be more like a tiger or more like a lion or anywhere in between.

And just because everyone else uses incorrect verbage or silly names for things doesn't mean we should.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,466 Posts
There is a very simple name for a "cocker spaniel poodle cross." That name is a "mixed breed," or, if that name is too complex, "mutt." The reason these cutesie pie names are so dangerous is because hobby breeders who care about improving breeds are under fire from punitive legislation started by animal rights activists who want to eliminate pet ownership. The reason these cutesie pie names are so dangerous because they legitimize these mixes as being something that they are not, allowing unscrupulous backyard breeders and commercial breeders to profit when it is their irresponsible behavior, not the responsible behavior of hobby breeders, that is contributing to owner-relinquished dogs in shelters. Hobby breeders take the time to test their breeding stock for hereditary issues, to match dogs to their prospective owners, and to take back their puppies--at any age--when those dogs need to be rehomed.

Please, I understand you love your dog, but after 35 years the so-called cockapoo has not moved beyond the Gen-1 stage. That is because they do not breed true, because there is no standard, and because there has been no effort made to do the kind of breeding required to register them with a legitimate registry. Please do not dignify them with the title of a "breed" and denigrate the efforts of all of the people who have made an effort to reduce the number of illnesses and genetic conditions that breeds are prone to and who have made every effort to keep their lines pure and bred to a standard. They are nowhere near the same. The cutesie names are so dangerous because they are a slap in the face of legitimate hobby breeders everywhere every time they are spoken and because they reduce their efforts to the level of backyard breeders everywhere. It's unfair, it's unjust, and it's just plain wrong. These designer breeds open all breeders up to the attacks of the animal rights activists and their hired lackey legislators.

That is the danger of "cutesie" names.
Excellent post! :D Welcome to the forum Loup.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
894 Posts
There is a very simple name for a "cocker spaniel poodle cross." That name is a "mixed breed," or, if that name is too complex, "mutt." The reason these cutesie pie names are so dangerous is because hobby breeders who care about improving breeds are under fire from punitive legislation started by animal rights activists who want to eliminate pet ownership.
Serouisly? Name one punitive legislation that is even being considered that could be remotely connected to Cockapoo breeding.

The reason these cutesie pie names are so dangerous because they legitimize these mixes as being something that they are not, allowing unscrupulous backyard breeders and commercial breeders to profit when it is their irresponsible behavior, not the responsible behavior of hobby breeders, that is contributing to owner-relinquished dogs in shelters.
So why are there so few hybrids in shelters?
Why are there so few hybrid being rehomed on craigslist?

Hobby breeders take the time to test their breeding stock for hereditary issues, to match dogs to their prospective owners, and to take back their puppies--at any age--when those dogs need to be rehomed.
The overwhelming majority of small purebred breeding is not done by reputable hobby breeders. This is not a hybrid issue, is a general breeding issue, especially with popular and lucrative small dogs. One is just as likely to find (or not find) a Cockapoo breeder that meets all the standards of a reputable hobby breeder (except showing of course) as they are to find a Yorkie, Maltese, or shit-tzu breeder that meet the standards of a reputable hobby breeder. The problem is most people looking for these dogs, hybrid or purebred, don't care.


Please, I understand you love your dog, but after 35 years the so-called cockapoo has not moved beyond the Gen-1 stage. That is because they do not breed true, because there is no standard, and because there has been no effort made to do the kind of breeding required to register them with a legitimate registry.
That's the whole point of hybrids. There is no intention of creating a breed. The traits that are desirable are the one obtained in 1st and 2nd generation crosses. There is no interest in making them a breed. To do so would result in less desirable dog. Creating another breed would do far more harm then good, at it would allow genetic defects to propagate into many generations, and would also encourage many bad breeding practices such as inbreeding.

As for legitimate registries, the reason people breed there pet store bought, puppy mill bred purebred is because the dogs are often AKC registered.

Hybrid buyers rarely intentionally breed their dogs and are much more likely to neuter them then purebred owners because the offspring of hybrids have no value, real or imagined.


Please do not dignify them with the title of a "breed" and denigrate the efforts of all of the people who have made an effort to reduce the number of illnesses and genetic conditions that breeds are prone to and who have made every effort to keep their lines pure and bred to a standard. They are nowhere near the same. The cutesie names are so dangerous because they are a slap in the face of legitimate hobby breeders everywhere every time they are spoken and because they reduce their efforts to the level of backyard breeders everywhere.
Hybrids by definition reduce the number of illnesses and genetic conditions that breeds are prone to because they are not a breed and any genetic defects end with the first of second generation.

For every purebred breeder that attempts to breed out genetic defects there are 100 that don't care, so hybrid breeders to more to keep genetic defects from entering the general population than 99% of purebred breeders.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
335 Posts
Serouisly? Name one punitive legislation that is even being considered that could be remotely connected to Cockapoo breeding.
That's like me saying "name one punitive legislation that is even being considered that could be remotely connected to Toy Fox Terrier or Collie breeding. Please. Every time someone says that "breeders" are responsible for the overflowing shelters, they point the finger equally at the hobby breeder who produces one litter every three years and the commercial breeder that pumps out hundreds of litters a year.

So why are there so few hybrids in shelters?
Why are there so few hybrid being rehomed on craigslist?
There are millions of "hybrids" being rehomed or being dumped in shelters. Every one of the mutts in the shelter represents one breed or another.

The overwhelming majority of small purebred breeding is not done by reputable hobby breeders. This is not a hybrid issue, is a general breeding issue, especially with popular and lucrative small dogs. One is just as likely to find (or not find) a Cockapoo breeder that meets all the standards of a reputable hobby breeder (except showing of course) as they are to find a Yorkie, Maltese, or shit-tzu breeder that meet the standards of a reputable hobby breeder. The problem is most people looking for these dogs, hybrid or purebred, don't care.
On the contrary. Most of the backyard breeders that produce cockapoos and other designer dogs start with or use substandard dogs that have purchased on a limited registration agreement from the AKC or have been otherwise purchased as a pet. They then scrap the original registration in favor of APRI, Continental Kennel Club, or other similar pet "registries" and sell their dogs for inflated prices. Physical environments are only a small part of the issue--most of these dogs have flaws that should not be reproduced, many of which they have not been tested for, and are bred to any available stud to make the cross instead of to carefully chosen mates that can better the breed.

That's the whole point of hybrids. There is no intention of creating a breed. The traits that are desirable are the one obtained in 1st and 2nd generation crosses. There is no interest in making them a breed. To do so would result in less desirable dog. Creating another breed would do far more harm then good, at it would allow genetic defects to propagate into many generations, and would also encourage many bad breed practices such as inbreeding.
Make them a less desirable dog? How so? If there is no consistency in cockapoos because they are a Gen-1 cross, then how can creating more consistency be less desirable? If the dogs are nothing more than a mix, then why give them a ridiculous "breed" name instead of calling them what they are: a mixed breed?

Hybrids by definition reduce the number of illnesses and genetic conditions that breeds are prone to because they are not a breed and any genetic defects end with the first of second generation.
What? okay, I'm going to try to make sense of this statement. No matter what, any dogs you produce are going to have genetic flaws. There is no such thing as an animal, anywhere, that is completely free of genetic flaws. Both poodles and cocker spaniels have issues with their knees and elbows, with PRA, and with a host of other problems. These issues don't magically attach themselves to a "poodle" gene or a "cocker spaniel" gene and not meet up when the two breeds are mixed. There is only a limited benefit to mixing breeds in terms of health--once the second generation is produced then all of those benefits disappear. So, the reason that cocker spaniel x poodle breeders do not want to create a true breed is because their limited claims to the benefits of their dogs would be gone in the second generation and their profits over keeping unregistered, un-health-tested dogs would be lost when they had to start keeping records that would comply with breed creation.

For every purebred breeder that attempts to breed out genetic defects that are 100 that don't care, so hybrid breeders to more to keep genetic defects from entering the general population than 99% of purebred breeders.
Show me the peer-reviewed research study that verifies this claim. The fact is that the vast majority of hobby breeders that I speak to at shows are extremely concerned with improving their breeds and reducing incidence of genetic issues. If hobby breeders were so disinclined to remove genetic issues from their breeds, then tell me why there are so many CERF and OFA clinics at dog shows. Tell me why the Canine Health Information Center program is already so strong and why so many additional breeds are adding CHIC database registration to their requirements of ethical compliance for breeders. Tell me why pedigrees and record-keeping and performance activities are such an important part of hobby breeding.

Your arguments are not fact-based. Please do your research and re-examine your position. I think you'll find that the production of mixed breeds is what is unethical and is flooding the shelters, not the hobby breeding of purebred dogs.

CHIC
http://www.caninehealthinfo.org/chicinfo.html

Kasey, you edited your post and, since I don't believe in editing unless it's to correct spelling or grammar, then I will respond here. You stated:
Creating another breed would do far more harm then good, at it would allow genetic defects to propagate into many generations, and would also encourage many bad breeding practices such as inbreeding.
The fact is that all dogs are inbred, purebred or not. There were very few of the original ancestors of dogs wandering the earth when they evolved so, in actuality, they all emerged from an extremely small gene pool. In fact, controlled inbreeding or controlled line breeding is beneficial to a breed. Good traits as well as bad are revealed and when bad traits emerge that particular line of dog can be selected against to help remove the issue from the gene pool.

As for legitimate registries, the reason people breed there pet store bought, puppy mill bred purebred is because the dogs are often AKC registered.
On the contrary--while the AKC does work with commercial breeders (one of the bones I have to pick with them and one of the reasons I prefer UKC as a whole), the majority of backyard breeders have abandoned AKC registration except for their Gen-1 dogs. Most of them now use APRI or other registries that will sell a registration for a few dollars without concern as to the dog being bred. I guarantee you that if I bred my collie to my TFT I could register a new "breed" called the Toy (or Mini) Foxollie" and make a fortune on the small, longhaired beasts with a cute name. I don't because I'm ethical and won't exploit my dogs the way that people who sell designer dogs for a profit do.

Hybrid buyer rarely intentionally breed their dogs and are much more likely to neuter them then purebred owners because the offspring of hybrids have no value, real or imagined.
That is just blatant misinformation. Generally, if a dog is perceived to have value, such as a dog that has a pedigree and a registration, it is perceived as being "worth" spaying, neutering, training--that is, sinking money into it. The people who dump their dogs are those that perceive the dog as having little to no value or those that have become bored with the animal. People who buy these hybrids are often uninformed about the reality of these designer dogs or, for that matter, many of the things that are involved with keeping dogs. They are more likely to view their dogs as status symbols and rarely spend a great deal of time training them because it it "unnecessary." Untrained dogs are more prone to getting loose and, if they are not spayed or neutered, are more prone to producing unwanted puppies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,236 Posts
So why are there so few hybrids in shelters?
Why are there so few hybrid being rehomed on craigslist?



Hybrid buyers rarely intentionally breed their dogs and are much more likely to neuter them then purebred owners because the offspring of hybrids have no value, real or imagined.




Hybrids by definition reduce the number of illnesses and genetic conditions that breeds are prone to because they are not a breed and any genetic defects end with the first of second generation.

For every purebred breeder that attempts to breed out genetic defects there are 100 that don't care, so hybrid breeders to more to keep genetic defects from entering the general population than 99% of purebred breeders.

Where do you live? You only have purebred dogs in your shelter area? look on petfinder, open your freaking eyes search for poodle on there, and i will guarentee you that you will find tons of poodle mixes.

Saying mixes dont get genetic issue is bulls hot. you are a idiot for even thinking that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,757 Posts
Thanks Loup, you said what I had in mind.

With Kasey's loose definition of "hybrid" which would also encumber every mixed bred dog (hey you're the one that points out that it's a mixed breed that makes it a hybrid) so all those mixed bred "hybrid" dogs in the shelters don't count...only the ones you want to?

I see lots of poodle mixes on my petfinder in my area, as to your definition, those would be considered hybrids. Your consistent argument that you won't see a hybrid on craigslist or on petfinder is ridiculous, I see them daily in our local shelter or posted on Craigslist because of a million reasons.

There's a Husky/GSD "hybrid" that is on Craigslist constantly, it's the same dog over and over...by your term, he is a hybrid. What's next? Will you argue it's because he's not a goldenwhatever is why he's constantly being rehomed?

I see far fewer purebred dogs in our shelter than I do mixes.
http://www.petfinder.com/shelters/jeffersonspca.html

Look there, there's a pug x boston terrier mix - isn't that a "BUG"? Isn't that a designer dog? I bring this up because by your definition, these designer dogs are not in shelters at all and cannot be obtained from such.

That is just one of 3 shelters within 10 miles from my house...the others don't even post on petfinder.

ETA: This shelter only takes what they feel will be easily adopted out, so the muttliest of mutts don't get this nice place, they end up at the local county run shelter (which I'm told is no longer a kill shelter, woohoo)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,605 Posts
Hybrid buyers rarely intentionally breed their dogs and are much more likely to neuter them then purebred owners because the offspring of hybrids have no value, real or imagined.
funny, out of the hundreds of dog owners I see in the store over a week, so far I have met ONE person who wanted to breed her dog. It was a mix. She wanted to breed it with either another mix of that same kind, or a different mix. She figured she could have just one litter for the dog's sake and sell the puppies for a lot of cash! Because they would be cute and fluffy little cockaloadapooshis or some crap. She was ignorant about breeding and wanted to breed her "registered" mutt for the hell of it. Yaaay "hybrids".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
269 Posts
There is a very simple name for a "cocker spaniel poodle cross." That name is a "mixed breed," or, if that name is too complex, "mutt." The reason these cutesie pie names are so dangerous is because hobby breeders who care about improving breeds are under fire from punitive legislation started by animal rights activists who want to eliminate pet ownership. The reason these cutesie pie names are so dangerous because they legitimize these mixes as being something that they are not, allowing unscrupulous backyard breeders and commercial breeders to profit when it is their irresponsible behavior, not the responsible behavior of hobby breeders, that is contributing to owner-relinquished dogs in shelters. Hobby breeders take the time to test their breeding stock for hereditary issues, to match dogs to their prospective owners, and to take back their puppies--at any age--when those dogs need to be rehomed.
I don't think it's appropriate to call a breeder responsible or irresponsible based soley on the type of dogs they are breeding. Just because you are breeding purebreds doesn't mean you are a responsible breeder and just because you are breeding a crossed/mixed/hybrid/whatever doesn't mean you are an irresponsible breeder.

I think people here sometimes do a disservice to their efforts to educate others about responsible breeding and how to choose a breeder by becoming so hung up on the breed/type of dog the person is interested in. Does it matter if they want a labradoodle if the breeder they choose meets the standards of responsible breeder? Would you support them getting a purebred lab or poodle from an irresponsible breeder? You can argue that there aren't responsible breeders of these mixes but if you educate the person on the importance of finding a good breeder they'll find one or find another breed--either way it's a win for the buyer, the breeder and the dog.

Personally, I'm less concerned about putting an end to the breeding of certain dogs and more concerned about putting an end to irresponsible breeding of any dogs.

Also, I'm not aware of any legislation that is seeking to put an end to mixed breed dogs and would be interested in viewing your source on that. To be honest, I'm not aware of legislation seeking to put an end to breeding of any dogs (mixed or pure) aside from BSL targetting "vicious" dogs. I'm sure the extremists are all for eliminating pets but they're also interested in eliminating all meat from the supermarket and I don't see that happening either.

Just for fun, I did a search at OFA and found these results that prove someone somewhere is OFA testing their cockapoos! I think there is more that responsible breeders do and I'm not inclined to go on a hunt for a responsible cockapoo breeder since I'm really not in the market for one but we all know that even that small bit is more than some do when breeding purebreds.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
971 Posts
Discussion Starter #36
We almost thought we had a dog today. There was a female chiwawa (spelling off I know) in a town forty miles away. We had gone home to get a carrier and a collar and leash and told the woman we would be there in a hour. Just ready to leave and she leaves a message on my phone that her daughter decided to keep the girl. ERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR We were not happy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,451 Posts
So why are there so few hybrids in shelters?
Why are there so few hybrid being rehomed on craigslist?
Serouisly? Serouisly? I don't know what cloud you've been hanging out on but here on earth we have a site called petfinder. Have you heard of petfinder? Or ever looked at the site?
They even have dogs specificaly listed as "Cockapoos". If you browse thru the different breeds you'll also notice that a good amount are listed as being mixed with another breed. And of the ones that only have one breed listed it's quite obvious that many of them are mixes.

One is just as likely to find (or not find) a Cockapoo breeder that meets all the standards of a reputable hobby breeder (except showing of course) as they are to find a Yorkie, Maltese, or shit-tzu breeder that meet the standards of a reputable hobby breeder.
For every decent Cockapoo or mixed breeder you can find, you can just as easily find half a dozen purebred breeders. I've only seen a small few Labradoodle breeders that have made an attempt to be responsible breeders. And I've never seen a responsible Cockapoo breeder. Perhaps you can enlighten us all and show us where they've been hiding.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
335 Posts
I don't think it's appropriate to call a breeder responsible or irresponsible based soley on the type of dogs they are breeding. Just because you are breeding purebreds doesn't mean you are a responsible breeder and just because you are breeding a crossed/mixed/hybrid/whatever doesn't mean you are an irresponsible breeder.
I don't claim that every breeder of purebred animals is automatically responsible. Please notice I keep saying "hobby" breeder. A "hobby" breeder is typically someone who has an active interest in the dog fancy, whether through conformation or performance events, who breeds their dog to the standard of at least one legitimate registry, who typically health tests and competes with their registered dogs. Not every hobby breeder is a responsible breeder, but they comprise a good portion of those breeders.

However, yes, I would typify anyone who breeds mixed breed dogs to make a profit as being irresponsible. I have no use for so-called "cockapoos," "labradoodles," or "border jacks" or any of their ilk. It used to be that cockapoos were given away by the people who had "oops" litters. Labradoodles were bred for a time in Australia in an effort to produce hypoallergenic guide and service dogs. The experiment was acknowledged as a failure, since the dogs did not breed true for coat or ability, yet many people still use this experiment to legitimize the "labradoodle." I have utterly no use for "border jacks:" dogs that are produced by breeding border collies and Jack Russell terriers together to create a "super" agility and flyball dog. I wonder what happens to those mixes that are not super performance dogs--what homes do they end up in and how quickly are they abandoned in shelters when they prove to have too much drive for the average owner? I don't care so much about lurchers and farm collies as long as they are used on farms to perform the jobs for which they were purportedly bred.

I think people here sometimes do a disservice to their efforts to educate others about responsible breeding and how to choose a breeder by becoming so hung up on the breed/type of dog the person is interested in. Does it matter if they want a labradoodle if the breeder they choose meets the standards of responsible breeder? Would you support them getting a purebred lab or poodle from an irresponsible breeder? You can argue that there aren't responsible breeders of these mixes but if you educate the person on the importance of finding a good breeder they'll find one or find another breed--either way it's a win for the buyer, the breeder and the dog.
I agree that education is the key. However, by definition the labradoodle breeder *is* irresponsible because they are breeding solely to make a profit and not for the betterment of a breed or for the perpetuation of a rare breed or for the creation of a new and purposeful breed. That's exploitation, no matter how you slice it and exploitation is irresponsible.

Personally, I'm less concerned about putting an end to the breeding of certain dogs and more concerned about putting an end to irresponsible breeding of any dogs.
I never said otherwise. However, since breeding mixed breed dogs is irresponsible by definition and because there are far more mixes in shelters, I think the public needs more education on the harm that the designer dogs are doing. The AR sound byte of "if you breed or buy another dog in the shelter dies" is only accurate to a point: most people who buy a registered purebred dog do not want a mixed breed dog. However, if a person wants a mixed breed dog and is suckered into buying a high-priced "designer" dog instead of adopting a dog with a similar mix from a shelter, then the sound byte is correct--because of that designer dog an equally worthy dog of similar breeding died in a shelter.

Also, I'm not aware of any legislation that is seeking to put an end to mixed breed dogs and would be interested in viewing your source on that. To be honest, I'm not aware of legislation seeking to put an end to breeding of any dogs (mixed or pure) aside from BSL targetting "vicious" dogs. I'm sure the extremists are all for eliminating pets but they're also interested in eliminating all meat from the supermarket and I don't see that happening either.
Please show me where I said that any legislation was being made to end breeding of mixed breeds. I could only wish that was the fact. What I did say, however, was that because of the irresponsible "breeders" responsible breeders are being made to suffer ill effects. There are a great deal of AR sponsored bills out there right now that involve breeder licensing, setting USDA standards for hobby breeder "kennels" (even when dogs are bred and raised in homes), warrantless entry of property (not a domicile), and so on. Hobby breeders have been targeted by AR representative working with local animal control agents; they have had dogs seized or destroyed, or have been forced to pay punitive fines for no other reason than having intact dogs or dogs with cropped ears or docked tails on the property.

Please name one other legal avocation that requires fingerprinting and criminal background checks (other than those requiring firearms), license fees in the hundreds of dollars annually, minimum space requirements per incident, maximum numbers for possession, and so on? All you need to do is look at the legislation in Louisville, Kentucky and in Dallas, TX to see that there are laws in place that make criminals out of people for no other reason than owning and breeding dogs.

Just for fun, I did a search at OFA and found these results that prove someone somewhere is OFA testing their cockapoos! I think there is more that responsible breeders do and I'm not inclined to go on a hunt for a responsible cockapoo breeder since I'm really not in the market for one but we all know that even that small bit is more than some do when breeding purebreds.
A single person listing hip or knee results with OFA is not the sign of a group of breeders being responsible. When there is a useful database for cocker spaniel/poodle mixes, then I'll consider the possibility of some responsibility.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,451 Posts
To be honest, I'm not aware of legislation seeking to put an end to breeding of any dogs (mixed or pure)
Ever heard of mandatory spay & neuter??

... but we all know that even that small bit is more than some do when breeding purebreds.
A small bit is more than some do when breeding any dog purebred or otherwise.
 
21 - 40 of 63 Posts
Top