Puppy Forum and Dog Forums banner

Ever heard of a shepadoodle???

21K views 50 replies 28 participants last post by  spanielorbust 
#1 ·
OK, this is a new one for me! Someone on Craigs List is giving away a shepadoodle which is a gsd and standard poodle mix. Is that not the funniest thing you have ever heard of?? There is even a picture of her, look........
http://dothan.craigslist.org/pet/1084655877.html

If I was in the market for another big dog, I would adopt her!!!:):)
 
#2 ·
Very cute. I once came across a rescue that had pit/poodle mixes... they were adorable.
 
#16 ·
They're actually listed on the dogbreedinfosomethingortheother website. And apparently, they are being purposely bred.

*bangs head against wall*

I'm sorry, but those are one of the most ridiculous mix I've ever heard of. It looks like everything the German shepherd should not be. The Craigslist dog is one of the cuter pictures I've seen, but shepadoodles... >.< gahh.

There's also a Doberdoodle or something like that. And a Huskydoodle. I wouldn't be surprised if there WAS a Pitidoodle
 
#20 ·
it isn't "doberdoodle"...its...doodleman pinscher....


Poodles are alright dogs. I've met a few poods that I had some fun with.

But man...if I was a poodle person Id be kind of concerned about all these poodle crosses...

its like

I meet like twenty different doodles a day. in the past five years I think I've run across like maybe five or six pure poodles....


and as for the "pitoodle" thing...Im sorry but the idea makes me want to retch...The PROPER pure APBT is actually a rare dog these days and getting rarer. With horrid breeding practices, dogfighting, BSL and the whole dang world against the breed...adding APBTs to the whole "doodle" trend is going to cause zilch but trouble...




Equinox....mind if I join you?
*bangs head against the wall next to Equinox*
 
#17 ·
Boy, I feel so left out... I have mere poodlepoodles!! or maybe I could call them poodledoodles so they sound cuter? :D
 
#18 ·
Poodoodles are cuter as puppies and prettier as adults than any designer mix I've seen (*hint**hint*we do not see enough pictures of your dogs, Julia*hint*)
 
#40 ·
Adopting locally off craigslist where you can meet the dog and have your dog/other family members meet the dog is generally fine. You won't have the advantage of the spay/neuter, vetting and shots etc that a shelter gives but then again, I see a lot of already s/n and vetted dogs on craigslist- especially around military bases. And you can assess the whole situation pretty well if you meet someone at their house and see how they've been treating the dog.

But from a distance? NO NO NO. A very good rule of thumb on craigslist is NEVER do business without being able to see the dog/table/car etc in person and "test drive" it before paying in cash. And it is always buyer beware.
 
#23 ·
I do not understand sheltiedoodles. Oy what an awful grooming situation, lol! The border doodles I saw the other day were a new one. For those allergic farmers, I assume. ;)

Agreed! However the thought of a curly pit bull sounds pretty dang cute LOL
I met a pit x poodle (to the best of the owner's knowledge). It was erm.... intriguing looking? Hahaha!
 
#24 ·
(*hint**hint*we do not see enough pictures of your dogs, Julia*hint*)
Heh, they have been such mud-puppies I haven't had a chance to take too many photos... they get filthy as fast as I bathe them... they have a grooming appointment on Monday so I'll be sure to do some portraits of them in the 5 minutes before they get dirty again! :D
I am thinking that people are mixing these wonderful poodles with other dogs because they are so smart!!
So true! :D
 
#25 ·
I know a miniature poodle/chihuahua mix that is ridiculously cute, and very well behaved, not to mention she is ridiculously cute! :D I can't see much of the poodle in her though, except maybe the longer hair on her face? I don't know much about poodles though.
 
#26 ·
I don't know much about poodles though.
I don't know alot about the little poodles, but the standards are WONDERFUL!!! I have owned a lot of different kinds of dogs and the standard poodle is way better than any dog I have ever know. They are smart, fun, loving, playful, sweet, smart, beautiful, and did I mention smart? :rolleyes: Bella is the first one I have ever owned and I can't believe I missed out on the best dog ever until now!:D They may look all fru fru, but they are ALL dog and if I didn't already mention it before, they are really smart!
 
#30 ·
@equinox and others that doubt the shepadoodle. last december of 2009 i had to put down my beloved GSD. i wanted another but members of my family are allergy sufferers, which complicates the GSD's constant grooming needs. I searched through all types of non-shedding dogs and never quite found the same traits that my GSD possessed. I came across the shepadoodle and did a little poodle research. I was surprised they are gun dogs, and likely of German descent. So, I contacted the breeder and then many puppy and dog owners of both F1 crosses (50% each) and F1B (an F1 back bred to another poodle).

Jenji is a 50% cross (dam was a black and red GSD and sire a brown standard Poodle). 50 pounds now, 7 months, plays hard and shows GSD guard instincts but is very submissive to our family. She does not shed, and she has some Poodle traits, choosing a certain toy, communicating more directly than my GSD. The sire was an active gun dog, and she shows prey drive. I think I could train her to be a gun dog, she has webbed feet and likes the water more than my GSD ever did.

In my house, I was not going to get another GSD just out of family dynamics. This cross is as close as I get, and I can honestly say she's a really good dog. Different than my GSD, but ever bit as quality.
 
#31 ·
What's with all the old threads being brought up?

But bigfan, I'm not quite sure what you're looking to tell me. You have one dog, one GSD x Poodle mix. I've met Labrador x Poodle mixes that do not shed at all, and Labrador x Poodle mixes that shed like crazy. I know many that act like Labs, many that act like Poodles, some with the best of both, and some with the worst.

So... lucky you? I hope you enjoy your pup and am glad you are happy with her.
 
#33 ·
The BYBness of this whole.. thread.. is really reflected in the SHEPA part of this designer mix's name.. you know, German 'Shepard'..

Don't see why we can't just make do with the breeds that are already developed instead of adding poodle to everything under the sun..
 
#37 · (Edited)
The BYBness of this whole.. thread.. is really reflected in the SHEPA part of this designer mix's name.. you know, German 'Shepard'..

Don't see why we can't just make do with the breeds that are already developed instead of adding poodle to everything under the sun..
MissMutt, just as a point of conversation, I honestly find that kind of thinking astonishing . . . . . probably because I was born an out of the box thinker (as well as defiant of any authority) and would never consider choosing from a pre-assigned list in any other aspect of my life. I don't believe I am unique in my personality qualities (know I am not as in my profession I worked with teens diagnosed as oppositional-defiant).

I have absolutely no problem with those that produce dogs - purebred, mixbreed, or mutts - as long as they are doing so with all the proper care.

Understanding genetics very well, I see advantages to many different ways of breeding. I see dog associations such as JRTCA, where the dogs are bred within an open registry and breeders that want to participate still have the advantages offered by club association, as offering the best leadership. Still, as a libertarian and coming from a long line of pioneers (independence and a true dislike of thinking 'with' the group runs through the veins) I'd always have allowances for breeders who are incredibly independent. Many breed developers/originators were, BTW.

From a genetics POV I honestly find the attempt by some to direct dog breeding/buyership toward only accepting a narrow model of purebred registry wonderfulness as pernicious and misdirected as PETA attacks . . . not good for dogs in the whole.

Living where I have helped in rescue a very long time, and where I am fully aware that 'pet-overpopulation' is a misnomer as we have homed all healthy and adoptable for almost a decade (our rescue system can only supply ~20%) I happen to KNOW 3 of 4 people (conservatively) looking for dogs NEED to purchase. I KNOW where I live that commercial breeders are well aware of this, and are happy to supply.

The 'then they should rescue' phrase is of absolutely no merit in determining what should be bred/purchased - the numbers are not there to support it.

I have absolutely no understanding, then, for the idea, that those 3 of 4, (Nathan Winograd has shown the same types of numbers apply across much of the USA) should then be instructed to choose from someone else's designated list of breeds. First of all that a breed list created in the 20th or 21st Century should be frozen for time as suitable for-ever-after, when we know the world of humans is changing and their relationship with dogs is, is a nonsense idea.

Can you offer me your reasoning of WHY people choosing should want to stick to a designated list of breeds, other than that it annoys you that they don't?

I truly think what one supports comes down to personality type.

It makes me think of a kid that used to instruct "don't run in the hallways" when in the hallway were just me and him - no chance of collision there - but he was the type for whom boundaries and rules offered a feeling of security. For me, they offer too much confinement and they have to be reasoned through. BTW, I have two children born close together - one of each type. It has been a joy!

SOB
 
#35 ·
They're not nearly as popular as the other 'doodles' though, thank God
 
#41 ·
None of these three, BTW, utilize Poodles and I met them all through internet lists where the science of breeding is the topic discussed and where the politics of breeding topic is highly moderated. Good place to meet breeders (of purebreed and mixed) who truly want to continue with their learning and do best by their dogs.

A quote from one list just this morning "Even better would be for breeders to free themselves from the mindset of breeding to win titles, and get back to simply breeding good healthy functional dogs . . . There must be some better way of assessing and comparing good breeding stock than competitive dog shows as they have been for the last 150 years".
Can you pm me the names of some of these lists? I'm also really interested in this topic.
 
#42 · (Edited)
Pai, as two are/were CanKC club breeders I would have no desire to give anyone their names that they have not given themselves. They can be faced with hefty fines and not be allowed to register purebred dogs again. I know well a Tibetan Spaniel breeder (of Champions) who has already had this done to her simply because she chose to use her purebred stud with another breed, experimentally with two litters. Word got out to the wrong informant.

No need to ask how I feel about that little self-protective/promotive undertaking by the Canadian Kennel Club and the exclusivity policies that have done more to harm dogs than any home breeder ever could do. This policy also manages to discourage those who might want to form mixbreeder associations from doing so - how competitively convenient.

I have been wracking my brain for over a year now, after recovering from the fear of the threats made and gettting back on the internet, to try to spearhead a way of organizing those that want to breed outside the registry purebred system. I've yet to come up with an idea that would offer enough benefit, let alone feel 'safe' enough for most that would want to be involved.

The other - an AKC breeder - has in the past told me she has no desire to be sought out by those in the AR and protects her program closely. As, when I used to post and occasionally revealed my own name to 'friends', I recieved two threatening emails toward my dogs and family simply for posting my opinions (one from a commercial Cavalier breeder) I understand this. This is not a position of risk that I feel any need of getting any breeder into. If they get there by their own devices, so be it.

I'm sure you are well aware that points of discussion can be kept to their own merit.

Frankly, after the situation I was previously put in, my heart gives an extra bump and my spidy senses go into overdrive when anyone asks for names.

I do have a question. Why not a push for the opening of the registries so that those who do see out-of-the-box can become included at least?
Those that don't want to co-operate with them, don't have to, simple as that. Somebody please give me a hint.

Is the idea of 'pure by lineage' and 'predictable by exact phenotype' that incredibly ingrained in those within the purebred dog world that it cannot be overcome?

Because as I see it we have the option of
1. clubs and closed umbrella registries or
2. clubs with their own registries (JRTCA, ABCA)
3. old fashioned breeding chaos letting breeders do their own thing, hopefully with the aid of internet tracking of pedigrees and following modern standards for health testing

I prefer 2 to the lot, but would take 3 before 1 any day of the week if 1 continues unabated in its determination to bring too many dogs breeds to their knees as it has done with my two favored breeds - the American Cocker and the Cavalier, breeds I would have been glad to see continued in their primitive 'type' form (toy spaniel, small cocking spaniel, blenheim spaniel), rather than what they are now.

SOB
 
#44 ·
I prefer 2 to the lot, but would take 3 before 1 any day of the week if 1 continues unabated in its determination to bring too many dogs breeds to their knees as it has done with my two favored breeds - the American Cocker and the Cavalier, breeds I would have been glad to see continued in their primitive 'type' form (toy spaniel, small cocking spaniel, blenheim spaniel), rather than what they are now.
I don't know anything about Cockers, unfortunately, but this reminded me of one thing I read when I first got Wally as to why Cotons aren't in the AKC - CCA (Coton Club of America) thinks that AKC recognition would harm the breed so they fight hard against the breed's acceptance under AKC. They probably wonder about things like you mention happened to Cockers. I believe the larger Coton clubs in the USA don't want AKC recognition. It does make me wonder about the difference between UKC and AKC since Cotons are registered and recognized there.

About #3 - doesn't that already exist? There's good breeders doing their own thing and bad ones doing their own thing. Actually, aren't all those options in existance? There's "lesser" registries that have their own listing, there's AKC, UKC, FCI, etc, and then there's breeders that do their own thing, some good and some bad. I don't see it as mutually exclusive or am I missing something?
 
#46 ·
Can you offer me your reasoning of WHY people choosing should want to stick to a designated list of breeds, other than that it annoys you that they don't?
Please remember the second half of my statement.. that it bothers me that people simply mix Poodle with other breeds instead of sticking to the developed breeds. Meaning, there is no other thought given. I'm not saying that the majority of people will go for this (they obviously don't given the fact that Doodle breeding is so popular) but I just don't like it. It's just what I believe.

It doesn't sit right with me. The majority of Doodle breeders are not breeding because they want to develop a breed. They are breeding dogs for companion purposes only, not trying to develop a breed. The idea of a companion mix being marketed as a new breed is something I just don't like. There IS physical, health, and temperamental variation in these dogs and they are therefore NOT the superdogs that people make them out to be. I have much less of a problem with those mixed breed breeders who are not sticking to the first generation dogs and are truly trying to develop a line of healthy dogs that breed true. Still don't find it necessary in the case of the Doodles, but breeding to develop a breed is much different IMO than breeding two completely different dogs (even if they are health tested and what not) simply to sell first-generation puppies.

I have NO problem with breeds like the Tamaskan, which was actually developed in to a real breed, or working crosses. But the idea of crossing two purebred dogs together to form a hypoallergenic mix (who isn't even always hypoallergenic) without any final end product that breeds true is something I just cannot get behind. Not fond of sport dog mixes, either.
 
#48 · (Edited)
Please remember the second half of my statement.. that it bothers me that people simply mix Poodle with other breeds instead of sticking to the developed breeds. Meaning, there is no other thought given. I'm not saying that the majority of people will go for this (they obviously don't given the fact that Doodle breeding is so popular) but I just don't like it. It's just what I believe..
Point taken . . . it is the Poodle mixin' that bothers you most. The 'no other thought given' is a blanket statement and does not apply to all.

Thank you for stating that you just have a desire to direct people toward already established breeds . . . . because it is just something you believe. We all have the right to believe in what we want.

I do happen to believe very differently to you and have no desire to see the current list of breeds remain static. To me, that is a stick in the eye of evolution. A reflection of the fact that some self appointed people in clubs who think they are doing better, are trying to force their model of breeding on the rest of us. Dog evolutions was never meant to remain static after the onset of the 20th Century.

I also happen to really put a lot of stake in my freedom of choice.

It doesn't sit right with me...
Good to know that is where you are coming from.

The majority of Doodle breeders are not breeding because they want to develop a breed. They are breeding dogs for companion purposes only, not trying to develop a breed. ...
In today's society with our needs, a fine reason for breeding . . . right there. If a breeder is truly working for these qualities, and doing all they should to ensure a sound pup that is backed for life, I won't slight them.

The idea of a companion mix being marketed as a new breed is something I just don't like. ...
I agree with you here. I don't like the 'marketting' of dogs by gimmicks at all. This includes, of course, the many gimmicks that unscrupulous purebred breeders use as well as those that unscrupulous mixbreed breeders use.

There IS physical, health, and temperamental variation in these dogs and they are therefore NOT the superdogs that people make them out to be. I have much less of a problem with those mixed breed breeders who are not sticking to the first generation dogs and are truly trying to develop a line of healthy dogs that breed true. Still don't find it necessary in the case of the Doodles, but breeding to develop a breed is much different IMO than breeding two completely different dogs (even if they are health tested and what not) simply to sell first-generation puppies....
Many people (like me) are not fools thinking that their crosses will be 'superdogs'. I actually think very few people go into a pup thinking it will be such, and those that do would be sucked in by the unscrupulous purebred breeder marketting their 'superdogs' just as easily.

There appears to be some, however, who believe that because we do have numpty buyers who'll believe anything out there, that the rest of us should suffer some kind of regulation . . . . we need to be protected some how from our own assumed stupidity . . . . not my kind of thinking.

I like many first gen crosses - have loved the Cockapoo forever and see no need to change that up. Some first gen crosses work more predictably than others, and there are easily identifiable reasons for that, by conformation and genetics. I am actually quite dismayed there are those organizing to try to make this a breed. (Although, come to think of it, if someone has an F1 x F1 smooth face - shedding coat Cockapoo planned for summer 2013, pmail, I'll be looking for a pack addition about then.;))

I have NO problem with breeds like the Tamaskan, which was actually developed in to a real breed, or working crosses. But the idea of crossing two purebred dogs together to form a hypoallergenic mix (who isn't even always hypoallergenic) without any final end product that breeds true is something I just cannot get behind. Not fond of sport dog mixes, either.
Wow, true hard core breed proponent then. Good to know. Very opposite to any of my feelings on the subject. If I had my way we'd be dumping a huge number of breeds' and mixing them back toward their generic landraces, keeping open registries, as there are just too many with too small gene pools. Failed experiments I would call them, and at the expense of the health of the puppies produced.

Because people who pimp their dogs do it for the money, and adding Poodle to the mix ups the price. Sadly, this is why a growing number of ethical Poodle breeders do pediatric neuters/spays. And, why it's very difficult for just anyone to obtain a quality female Standard Poodle.
This is not a situation reserved for those that breed mixed dogs though is it. I know of many a Poodle pimp working within the purebred system - pimping their studs to approved Poodle bitches with truly too little thought or knowledge as to what is being brought to them . . . . but I guess if its to a same-breed girl we'll just not mention it, hey?

Poodle breeders doing pediatric neuters are doing so to maintain control over the progeny of what they produce and protect their bloodlines from getting out . . . if they are producing quality this is incredibly selfish and short sighted, JMHO. They were doing so in many breeds long before mixbreeding became popular . . . . this is not a new idea.

In regards to pimping dogs, you might be interested in this little paper showing purebred studs hired for 20+ mounts in a month at an average stud fee of 1000 Euros. Pimps indeed!

The Stud Business in the SV Kennel Club, 2003-2007 - http://www.bloggen.be/hd/archief.php?ID=26860

SOB
 
#49 ·
but I guess if its to a same-breed girl we'll just not mention it, hey? This is not a situation reserved for those that breed mixed dogs.
That's not a fair statement. Many of us know that this goes on, and we do not condone it. The GSD is in such a state because of such thoughtlessness. This is not the fault of dogs, but of the human condition, and unscrupulous is unscrupulous, purebred or mixed.

That said, thanks to Celia, I've been thinking of my own breed of dog I'd actually want to create (it's not a herding breed, either!), and I can see it in my head, pretty as a picture *sigh*
 
#51 · (Edited)
That's not a fair statement. Many of us know that this goes on, and we do not condone it. The GSD is in such a state because of such thoughtlessness. This is not the fault of dogs, but of the human condition, and unscrupulous is unscrupulous, purebred or mixed.*
You're right. I was being a flippant b**ch. Apologies. Pity my OH today.

That said, thanks to Celia, I've been thinking of my own breed of dog I'd actually want to create (it's not a herding breed, either!), and I can see it in my head, pretty as a picture *sigh*
Me too, but I'd not want it to be a purebred breed (as in involved in the umbrella registries with a closed stud book) - following more like what the JRTCA does in encouraging a landrace type instead. A lot to take on, though, and I'd probably have to move from Canada because of the registry situation here, so not so likely to happen.


MissMutt, I'm sure it is just the fine points that are being disagreed on between the two of us and could be hashed back and forth for days, and as I reflected I have no doubt it happens to reflect our basic personalities . . . . some of us have just never been happy at coloring within the lines. :)

I do find that most involved in dog clubs are the kinds that like to though, as that is what that environment invites with its mentorship model. As a person with a love of everything dog, I find running into so many 'like in mind' very unsettling. I'd love to meet more like myself, but when I do I find they've been drummed out of any kind of club involvements. I find that unfortunate (for me and them, I'm sure the others are all quite comfortable without us there):)

SOB
 
#50 ·
Point taken . . . it is the Poodle mixin' that bothers you most. The 'no other thought given' is a blanket statement and does not apply to all.
But it does apply. They are crossing the Poodle in because of the coat and not much else. IE., no other thought given. I like Poodles very much and know many, so this has nothing to do with not liking them as a breed (it's pretty much the opposite).

I do happen to believe very differently to you and have no desire to see the current list of breeds remain static. To me, that is a stick in the eye of evolution. A reflection of the fact that some self appointed people in clubs who think they are doing better, are trying to force their model of breeding on the rest of us. Dog evolutions was never meant to remain static after the onset of the 20th Century.

I also happen to really put a lot of stake in my freedom of choice.
If I implied that I thought we shouldn't experiment at all with dog breeding (which I probably did), that's not really what I meant. Newer breeds show that getting a new breed to breed true is something that can be achieved. I dislike that new breeds are not being developed and people are sticking to first generation crosses. If you want something, I feel like you should TRULY create it. Someone might see a 'Shepadoodle' on the street and see a F1 dog with the personality traits of a Poodle, decide to go and get one for themselves and be shocked when it's hardwired with a Shepherd temperament. Making 'Shepadoodles' a distinct breed stands more of a chance at eliminating some of this variation in temperament after enough generations, IMO. This is why I said

There appears to be some, however, who believe that because we do have numpty buyers who'll believe anything out there, that the rest of us should suffer some kind of regulation . . . . we need to be protected some how from our own assumed stupidity . . . . not my kind of thinking.
Perhaps that is, in some ways, what I believe, and can certainly understand why people wouldn't like that. I feel that the majority of people that would buy Doodles are doing so because they either want a hypoallergenic coated dog or somehow believe that the mix is going to undoubtedly be the best of both worlds.

Of course, I don't believe in any laws that limit breeding of any breed or breed mix. Just simply believe in my viewpoint, and that if people are going to think along the same lines that I do, they it be their choice that they do.

Wow, true hard core breed proponent then. Good to know. Very opposite to any of my feelings on the subject. If I had my way we'd be dumping a huge number of breeds' and mixing them back toward their generic landraces, keeping open registries, as there are just too many with too small gene pools. Failed experiments I would call them, and at the expense of the health of the puppies produced.
Just as you feel that we shouldn't regulate the breeders of F1 dogs, I feel like opening all registries and going 100% back to the beginning would be a huge slap in the face to all of those breeders who have done the right thing for their breeds. I DO support outcrossing projects (to African Stock Basenjis, for example) and DO think that there are many breeds who have been hurt by the show ring or a too-small breed pool and need radical changes (Cavs come to mind immediately of course). But that's not all breeds.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top