# Ever heard of a shepadoodle???



## Angie's Bella (Dec 28, 2008)

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!!!


----------



## craven.44 (Sep 10, 2008)

Very cute. I once came across a rescue that had pit/poodle mixes... they were adorable.


----------



## zimandtakandgrrandmimi (May 8, 2008)

craven.44 said:


> Very cute. I once came across a rescue that had pit/poodle mixes... they were adorable.


*facepalm*

..I hope that was just an oops litter...


----------



## BoxMeIn21 (Apr 10, 2007)

zimandtakandgrrandmimi said:


> *facepalm*
> 
> ..I hope that was just an oops litter...


Totally...


----------



## sheltiemom (Mar 13, 2007)

I've seen a sheltiedoodle, looked like a grooming nightmare...loooong sheltie fur, but also curly.


----------



## Thracian (Dec 24, 2008)

This is the first I've heard of it. Hope this one is adopted quickly. Very cute.


----------



## Angie's Bella (Dec 28, 2008)

zimandtakandgrrandmimi said:


> *facepalm*
> 
> ..I hope that was just an oops litter...


Yea, I would think so!! Not really what you would consider a designer pup, cute, but I just don't see there being a market for the shepadoodle.


----------



## BigBlackDogGal (Mar 16, 2009)

Wow that looks a lot like my pound adoptee. He was listed as a Wolfhound/Lab mix but he's not large enough to be a wolfhound. And now that he's cleaned up he has some waviness in his coat. Doesn't have the non-shed gene though, dang


----------



## zimandtakandgrrandmimi (May 8, 2008)

Angie's Bella said:


> Yea, I would think so!! Not really what you would consider a designer pup, cute, but I just don't see there being a market for the shepadoodle.



I was referring to the (hopefully not) Pitoodles..

the very last thing the APBT breed needs right now is to get roped into the whole "Doodle" Debacle....

course I hope the Shepoodle was an oopsie too...


----------



## craven.44 (Sep 10, 2008)

zimandtakandgrrandmimi said:


> *facepalm*
> 
> ..I hope that was just an oops litter...


The situation I was talking about was definitely an oops litter as far as the rescue was concerned.


----------



## Angie's Bella (Dec 28, 2008)

BigBlackDogGal said:


> Wow that looks a lot like my pound adoptee. He was listed as a Wolfhound/Lab mix but he's not large enough to be a wolfhound. And now that he's cleaned up he has some waviness in his coat. Doesn't have the non-shed gene though, dang


Hey, he does look like a shepadoodle!! How cute! Is he real smart? If so, that would be the poodle trait! (just kidding GSD lovers! I think they are great as well, I am just partial to the poodle)


----------



## Sammgirl (Feb 6, 2009)

What a pretty dog!!


----------



## Keechak (Aug 10, 2008)

I think it's amusing that they put in there that one of the dog's parents was a "pure bred german shepherd AKC registered with pedigree" As if it somehow matters


----------



## KimV143 (Dec 14, 2008)

I was actually at a "pet Expo" this past weekend, and one of the German Shepherd rescues that was there had two "shepadoodle" puppies... they were super CUTE!!


----------



## 3212 (Feb 4, 2007)

zimandtakandgrrandmimi said:


> I was referring to the (hopefully not) Pitoodles..
> 
> the very last thing the APBT breed needs right now is to get roped into the whole "Doodle" Debacle....
> 
> course I hope the Shepoodle was an oopsie too...


Agreed! However the thought of a curly pit bull sounds pretty dang cute LOL

I once saw a pit/springer spaniel mix come through from the humane society. It was literally the collar and coat of a liver colored springer spaniel with the body/head shape of a APBT. Very cute and sweet!


----------



## Equinox (Nov 11, 2008)

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


----------



## MrsJohnnyG (Jan 31, 2009)

Boy, I feel so left out... I have mere poodlepoodles!! or maybe I could call them poodledoodles so they sound cuter?


----------



## Equinox (Nov 11, 2008)

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*)


----------



## Angie's Bella (Dec 28, 2008)

MrsJohnnyG said:


> Boy, I feel so left out... I have mere poodlepoodles!! or maybe I could call them poodledoodles so they sound cuter?


Hey, I have a poodledoodle, too!!! 

I am thinking that people are mixing these wonderful poodles with other dogs because they are so smart!!


----------



## zimandtakandgrrandmimi (May 8, 2008)

Equinox said:


> They're actually listed on the dogbreedinfosomethingortheother website. And apparently, they are being purposely bred.
> 
> *bangs head against wall*
> 
> ...



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*


----------



## HersheyPup (May 22, 2008)

So how safe is it to adopt a dog through craigslist?
I am looking for another dog, but I live in California. How do you know what your getting when you adopt a dog from across country??


----------



## Angie's Bella (Dec 28, 2008)

zimandtakandgrrandmimi said:


> it isn't "doberdoodle"...its...doodleman pinscher....


That made me laugh out loud!!!

I agree, they do mix poodles with EVERYTHING and it is crazy!! But really being a mutt these days has become cool. Even puppy mills have gotten in on the mixes. Why can't they justbe poodles, why shepadoodles and yorkiepoos and whoknowspoos or whatchadoodles???


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

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!


----------



## MrsJohnnyG (Jan 31, 2009)

> (*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! 


> I am thinking that people are mixing these wonderful poodles with other dogs because they are so smart!!


So true!


----------



## Ankaa (Mar 29, 2009)

I know a miniature poodle/chihuahua mix that is ridiculously cute, and very well behaved, not to mention she is ridiculously cute!  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.


----------



## Angie's Bella (Dec 28, 2008)

Ankaa said:


> 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?  Bella is the first one I have ever owned and I can't believe I missed out on the best dog ever until now! They may look all fru fru, but they are ALL dog and if I didn't already mention it before, they are really smart!


----------



## MrsJohnnyG (Jan 31, 2009)

Angie's Bella said:


> 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?  Bella is the first one I have ever owned and I can't believe I missed out on the best dog ever until now! They may look all fru fru, but they are ALL dog and if I didn't already mention it before, they are really smart!


Ditto ditto ditto to ALL of that!! It's a joy having a dog who is just so incredibly smart and playful and fun and so funny, too! I was missing out the first 29 years of my life by not having a Standard Poodle! (I was a Golden/Lab girl before that and thought poodles were frou-frou and yappy!)


----------



## HersheyBear (Dec 13, 2008)

craven.44 said:


> Very cute. I once came across a rescue that had pit/poodle mixes... they were adorable.


Would that be a Pootbull?


----------



## mostlymutts (Jan 10, 2009)

I want a cockerdoodle.

Oh wait! I have one!

(It's called a rooster.)

Sorry. Could not resist.


----------



## bigfan (Jul 7, 2010)

@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.


----------



## Equinox (Nov 11, 2008)

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.


----------



## spanielorbust (Jan 3, 2009)

BigBlackDogGal said:


> Wow that looks a lot like my pound adoptee. He was listed as a Wolfhound/Lab mix but he's not large enough to be a wolfhound. And now that he's cleaned up he has some waviness in his coat. Doesn't have the non-shed gene though, dang


He does have one - he is at least Wh/wh at the non shed/shed locus (called wire hair locus). Paired with the short coat gene this produces a coat type with that slight bearding like his all the way to quite fluffly. Non-shed is dominant at its locus, and when Wh/wh is paired with l/l (long coat) it produces the non-shedding continuously growing coat (Poodle, Bichon, Shih Tzu, Maltese etc). With short coat (L/L or L/l) it shows a bunch of varieties of wire coat, dependant upon other modifiers. Many JRTs have this genotype. The Curly locus also must be considered - of course. 










Here is a fluffier one:










If the point was that he still sheds - well yeah - but I happen to see alleles when I look at dogs so had to point out he has at least on Wh (wire hair - lo shed) allele which would confirm he has at least one non-shed or wire haired parent.

SOB


----------



## MissMutt (Aug 8, 2008)

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..


----------



## Papilove (May 20, 2010)

MrsJohnnyG said:


> Boy, I feel so left out... I have mere poodlepoodles!! or maybe I could call them poodledoodles so they sound cuter?



Yes you can call them POODLEDOODLES: THE ULTIMATE DOODLE! LOL


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

They're not nearly as popular as the other 'doodles' though, thank God


----------



## stafinois (Jun 16, 2010)

zimandtakandgrrandmimi said:


> the very last thing the APBT breed needs right now is to get roped into the whole "Doodle" Debacle....



I dunno, after pulling nasty little barbed APBT hairs out of my furniture, clothes, and skin for years, it sounds intriguing! LMAO


----------



## spanielorbust (Jan 3, 2009)

MissMutt said:


> 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


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

spanielorbust said:


> 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?


The thing is, are these even breeds? Will they produce the same set of traits or will you end up with whotheheckknows like you would breeding two other mixes together? 

I don't mind out-of-the-box thinking, but what's the end goal? What's the point of all this -doodling going on? Sheapadoodles? Pitdoodles? What? Really? What's the end goal there. I can see why the first Labradoodle was thought of. It was an attempt with a clear end goal that made sense and would fulfill a purpose, but it didn't pan out. However, I can respect that because the effort was towards something of value outside of "they are cute and I can sell them because people will think they are adorable."

I don't think AKC is the be-all of breed lists. Heck, my own dog isn't AKC recognized. I'm sure there's pure bred dogs that AKC or UKC don't recognize (like the Blue Lacy zim introduced me to) but they are breeds that have developed traits and were developed with an explicit purpose or to fill a direct need.

Do the -doodles have developed traits that stay constant? Is that even the goal? I could see if there was like a new breeder club starting looking to develop something from -doodle (or other "designer") mixes and we don't hear of it until the end dog is developed and his traits breed true. But as far as -doodlizing everything under the sun because curly coat is cute - I'm with MissMutt, I don't see the point - especially when these dogs aren't actually being developed towards something. It's like "hey come here with your poodle and lets make some doddles and we can sell them"

To use your analogy, if running in the hall was just "because we can" I wouldn't run even though I'm one that feels more constrained than secure by universal, always applicable rules. To me, there has to be an end goal for running for me to consider it, if I'm going to break an established rule, it has to be for a reason, like civil disobedience in the 60's. "Fun" isn't enough because I can have fun in other ways that don't risk me running afoul of authority (not that I particularly cared, but it's inconvenient and my mother certainly would care!), or even the slight risk of injury (worse that could happen with my playing Nintendo is sore thumbs LOL)

Likewise, breeding -doodles "just because we can" to me isn't a good end goal. I can have a good, cute, happy dog in other ways.

If ever own an intact poodle - I'm going to make a shirt that says "No, I won't -doodle with you. Don't ask."


----------



## spanielorbust (Jan 3, 2009)

KBLover said:


> The thing is, are these even breeds? Will they produce the same set of traits or will you end up with whotheheckknows like you would breeding two other mixes together? ."


It does not matter one iota that the dog produced is or is not a breed if the breeder is placing with care and backing for life? You did notice I mentioned 'breeders doing all they should' right? When my mom bred working farm collies she ran on the litter, minimally, 4 months before placing so she knew temperament well and could match it. That is part of the job of a breeder. The pups they produce don't have to be identical if they take their time getting to know before they place, and match to homes.



KBLover said:


> I don't mind out-of-the-box thinking, but what's the end goal? What's the point of all this -doodling going on? Sheapadoodles? Pitdoodles? What? Really? What's the end goal there. I can see why the first Labradoodle was thought of. It was an attempt with a clear end goal that made sense and would fulfill a purpose, but it didn't pan out. However, I can respect that because the effort was towards something of value outside of "they are cute and I can sell them because people will think they are adorable."


Do you believe that you can know everyone's end goal by what they are producing, or that people motivations and goals can be shifted into slots all the same? Truly? Do you believe people should not be allowed to come up with their own idea of what they'd like to produce? The motivation of one 'shepadoodle' breeder might be completely different to anothers - just as the motivation of one Cavalier Spaniel breeder might be completely different to anothers. (Some for money, some for glory and ego, and others, cuz they truly love the breed, love the potential of producing a wonderful pet, etc.)

3 of 4 dogs brought into homes have to come from breeders. Once the decision is made to purchase, it is up to me to decide if I appreciate the reason for the pairing - that means meeting the parents and getting to know the breeder and their motivation. No-one else has the right to try to limit that from me for fear that I'm one of the dumb ones that wouldn't do my homework.



KBLover said:


> I don't think AKC is the be-all of breed lists. Heck, my own dog isn't AKC recognized. I'm sure there's pure bred dogs that AKC or UKC don't recognize (like the Blue Lacy zim introduced me to) but they are breeds that have developed traits and were developed with an explicit purpose or to fill a direct need..


The direct need, now, is shifting toward more 'pet' temperaments. This is a fine purpose, but I notice many want to religate it to be of lesser value. I don't share that sentiment.



KBLover said:


> Do the -doodles have developed traits that stay constant? Is that even the goal? I could see if there was like a new breeder club starting looking to develop something from -doodle (or other "designer") mixes and we don't hear of it until the end dog is developed and his traits breed true. But as far as -doodlizing everything under the sun because curly coat is cute - "


I am an original admirer of the Cockapoo - knew my first one 35 years ago (and yes it went by that portmanteau name). I happen to know some combinations are more predictable in first gen than others, and this is one, as is the Cavapoo and Goldendoodle. Genetic study of coat traits in these first gen mixes also proves this out for coat type at least - all Wh/wh,l/l which is much more predictable than the poo x short hair mixes. On the genetics list I can guarantee you that I know poo-mix breeders that have an incredible knowledge of what they are putting together.

I'm as annoyed as anyone else with the 'slapping' together, without proper considerations, of any two dogs, whether they be from the same breed and registered and under the mentorship of an old time breeder in a club (who as often as not has not updated their scientific studies for 30 years) or whether they are mixes (doodle or otherwise). I believe most share that sentiment.



KBLover said:


> I'm with MissMutt, I don't see the point - especially when these dogs aren't actually being developed towards something. It's like "hey come here with your poodle and lets make some doddles and we can sell them"


And you see, I have no need to see someone wanting to 'develop' anything that I might not be able to immediately fathom. I also have no problem with pet production as long as it is done strictly within caring parameters. 3 of 4 dogs (minimally) need to come from breeders - I have no need to limit what those breeders want to see fit to produce, although I do see welfare concerns that mean providing parameters for the WAY (care) they produce.



KBLover said:


> To use your analogy, if running in the hall was just "because we can" I wouldn't run even though I'm one that feels more constrained than secure by universal, always applicable rules. To me, there has to be an end goal for running for me to consider it, if I'm going to break an established rule, it has to be for a reason, like civil disobedience in the 60's. "Fun" isn't enough because I can have fun in other ways that don't risk me running afoul of authority (not that I particularly cared, but it's inconvenient and my mother certainly would care!), or even the slight risk of injury (worse that could happen with my playing Nintendo is sore thumbs LOL)"


That's funny and telling. It reflects what I mentioned about personality types. Fun IS PLENTY a good enough reason for me as long as I have taken risks into consideration FOR MYSELF. The other reason . . . . simply because someone else has thought to try to impose the rule! Why would I choose to have fun in other ways when I can thumb my nose at someone trying to impose misdirected authority? That is the most fun of all. After all breed clubs/registries/people with opposite opinions truly are not in a position of authority to dictate, are they? Is there a reason I've missed that they should be?



KBLover said:


> Likewise, breeding -doodles "just because we can" to me isn't a good end goal. I can have a good, cute, happy dog in other ways.


Why should I accept direction in 'the way' in which to have a good, cute and happy dog when I COULD have a doodle if that was my desire? I would see nothing wrong with someone producing a good, cute, happy dog because they have the knowledge and ability to do so. The idea of breeding dogs, knowlegeably, for pets, should be reclaimed as a valuable cultural contribution. It needs to be taken back out of the hands of the 'professional' commercial or puppymill breeders, as far as I am concerned. I would never want that role filled only by those breeding purebred dogs - ever.



KBLover said:


> If ever own an intact poodle - I'm going to make a shirt that says "No, I won't -doodle with you. Don't ask."


That would be your choice, then, wouldn't it? Myself, I'd have no problem if the bitch was of merit and the breeder knew what he/she was doing. I do know of other Poodle breeders that feel the same - one, in fact, (the Aunt of my friend that has had a string of Cockapoos now for 25 years) that supplies stud services from her champion occasionally to a couple approved Cocker bitches - ssssshhhhhhhh - the Can KC would have a bird.

A breeder long admired by me for her genetic and scientific knowledge and just all around dog knowledge has been in Cockers since the 40s - and now breeds solely mixes with the co-operation of some long time friends. I'd have a pup from her in a second if I had any appreciation for the bearded face of the non-shedding dogs and that I despise travelling to where she lives. 

Her point in breeding - she KNOWS the pups she creates have a great chance because of her long-practised nurturing capabilities, placement instincts, and hands-on ancestral knowledge of dogs in their pedigree. 

She has no desire to produce Cockers any more - as she considers what was best about them has been lost (I agree), bred out by those supposedly preserving the breed (she was a big part of that world, and fought hard within it, for 30 years). She produces what SHE wants to. None are sold at prices any higher than a purebred could be sold for. For every litter or two a year she produces there is one less litter sold from a mill. That is of importance to me (and I know, to her as well).

I have known two other long time 'companion purebreed' breeders as well that bred mixes in their latter years, using years of breeding expertise. I just cannot fathom why someone would demand the purpose they breed for now be different than the one they bred for when they were producing champions - they knew that they could utilize their personal qualities and knowledge to produce and place well pups that would make outstanding pets. 

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_".

SOB


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

HersheyPup said:


> So how safe is it to adopt a dog through craigslist?
> I am looking for another dog, but I live in California. How do you know what your getting when you adopt a dog from across country??


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.


----------



## Pai (Apr 23, 2008)

> 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.


----------



## spanielorbust (Jan 3, 2009)

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


----------



## Pai (Apr 23, 2008)

Oh, i wasn't aware they were private mailing lists. No prob.

I'm a member of a couple of breeding/genetics Yahoo groups, so that's why I was curious. =)


----------



## KBLover (Sep 9, 2008)

spanielorbust said:


> 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?


----------



## spanielorbust (Jan 3, 2009)

KBLover said:


> 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.


Last that I remember the Cotons are in the AKC Foundation Stock Service, with still a lot of politics surrounding that. The UKC tends to be a club with a bit of a different focus than the AKC, from what I understand, and in many breeds that means more emphasis on purpose driven breeding - I believe again, just as in the AKC, what is focused on might be dependent upon the clubs. I am not American so can't comment first hand.



KBLover said:


> 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?


Yes, all those options are in existance, but I am in Canada and here the registry holds exclusivity, not like in the USA where upstart registries are allowed. The Continental Kennel Club, for instance, is legally not allowed to register and record pedigree of my own mixbreed dogs as I have a Canadian address.

That is a problem for someone like myself who would like to see those who want to breed something other than what is CanKC approved here, those that are trying to do their own thing as best as possible, have some type of supportive organization, and a method of contact for those like myself who have sought out caring mixbreed breeders. 

I do know of a Canadian Mi-Ki breeder, that also breeds purebred dogs in this country, BUT she only registers her purebreeds, even, with the AKC and therefore doesn't face fines. At the same time it prevents her from finishing her dogs, some which are of quality, without a ton of travel. That, of course, means others can point and say 'see, she is not reputable, was never reputable, she has no CHs in her pedigrees', feeding those flames for those that like to fly that flag.

It saddens me when I know of a Carlin Pinscher breeder in Canada that is afraid to let on what he is doing and is therefore limited in his advertising because he has used CanKC registered stock. It would be better for dogs, their breeders and buyers IF the organization of more with a true interest in breeding forward from mixbreeds was facilitated, but the CanKC has set itself up in a monopoly position very much limiting the ability of those wanting to, in any way, officialize the pedigree of their mixbreeds in an openly accessible registry . . . forcing them, through intimidation of fines, to do this independently and privately (thank dog for personal computers).

SOB


----------



## MissMutt (Aug 8, 2008)

> 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.


----------



## poodleholic (Mar 15, 2007)

Angie's Bella said:


> That made me laugh out loud!!!
> 
> I agree, they do mix poodles with EVERYTHING and it is crazy!! But really being a mutt these days has become cool. Even puppy mills have gotten in on the mixes. Why can't they justbe poodles, why shepadoodles and yorkiepoos and whoknowspoos or whatchadoodles???


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.


----------



## spanielorbust (Jan 3, 2009)

MissMutt said:


> 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. 



MissMutt said:


> It doesn't sit right with me...


Good to know that is where you are coming from.



MissMutt said:


> 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. 



MissMutt said:


> 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.



MissMutt said:


> 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.)



MissMutt said:


> 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.



poodleholic said:


> 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


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

> 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*


----------



## MissMutt (Aug 8, 2008)

> 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.


----------



## spanielorbust (Jan 3, 2009)

Xeph said:


> 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.



Xeph said:


> 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


----------

