# Portuguese Water Dog and Doodle - Compare and Contrast



## B-Line

Greetings folks.

I want to start this thread by saying, I really hope this will not turn into a Doodle bashing thread. That is not the intention, so lets keep the thread on topic and civil.

There have been a lot of questions raised about the differences and similarities of the _Portuguese Water Dog_ and the _Doodle_, so I thought I would take the time to address some of the questions that have previously been raised and address any new questions that may come up.
I'm not an expert on the breed, but I do have two. A puppy and a 12 year old.

There seem to be quite a few, and vocal, Doodle owners on this site but I think I am the only PWD parent. So I wanted to chime in with some facts and opinions for us to discuss.

I would also like to state that this thread is not, "my dog is better than yours" or "you should be ashamed, blah, blah, blah.." I'm honestly hoping to encourage, positive, friendly, debate.

I have heard from Doodle owners, that they considered a PWD but heard the PWD was too hyper, active and needed too much exercise. 

- So I decided to look up the breed traits on the internet of the 3 breeds, the Golden, the Standard and the PWD.

- Poodle
_The Poodle has about him an air of distinction and dignity peculiar to himself. Carrying himself proudly, *very active* and intelligent. _

- Golden Retriever
_Golden Retrievers MUST have regular opportunities to *vent their energy* and do interesting things. Otherwise they will become rambunctious and bored -- which they usually express by becoming destructive. Bored Goldens can make a shambles of your house and yard._

-Portuguese Water Dog
_willing to please, this is an obedient dog. *Spirited*, with great stamina, yet calm. Portuguese Water Dogs have a super sense of humor and love to be in the spotlight of attention. _

My point is, all three breeds are listed as being, highly energetic, in-need of exercise and stimulation and discipline. So why people think the PWD is crazy, while the Doodle doesn't have "high energy characteristics" is a little beyond me. All three breeds rate the same.

Here is a picture of a PWD, Wavy, coated:









and









Vs. xamples of Doodle's



















So, they are similar in temperament, coat type, size, appearance, etc. However, the PWD primary color tends to be black while the Doodle's range more commonly from white to black.

But there are variations of the PWD color also. Black, White, Brown and everything in between:


I just wanted to open this topic up for discussion. Again, neither breed is "better" and you Doodle owners have beautiful, sweet dogs.


----------



## B-Line

And here is a picture of a multi colored PWD puppy










I should also add, that one of the big reasons these dogs are compared is because, ideally,
They both have Hypo-allergenic coats. They don't shed.

They are also both medium sized, water retrieving, intelligent animals that are great family dogs.

So the question I have always asked,
Why have they invented a breed that has almost identical characteristics to an existing breed?


----------



## Pai

They _do_ look very similar!


----------



## wvasko

Golden Retriever, Poodle, Portuguese Water Dog are AKC recognized breeds. Doodle is a mixed breed.


----------



## Pai

wvasko said:


> Golden Retriever, Poodle, Portuguese Water Dog are AKC recognized breeds. Doodle is a mixed breed.


Yes... we all know that.


----------



## Motebi

PWDs are a working breed, bred for a purpose. Doodles aren't.  They are companion dogs and that's it.  

Having said that, I wonder how many underworked PWDs are out there........


----------



## lovemygreys

B-Line said:


> So the question I have always asked,
> Why have they invented a breed that has almost identical characteristics to an existing breed?


Good question. Though, doodles aren't a breed and PWDs are. And with a pure breed you get more predictability in physical traits and temperament as well. For families looking for a specific type of dog, a pure breed can be a better way to go. I love the texture of the PWD wavy coat. The 'doodles' I've met have had a variety of coats, none of which come close to the PWD. The handful of PWDs I've met have been extremely intelligent...and very active!

When the doodle craze hit, the dogs were a status symbol. I think that's waning a bit now (thank doG) and, if anything, there's even a bit of  when people refer to their poodle/whatever mix as a doodle. I'm sure, though, the responsible PWD breeders are quite happy to not have to had dealt with a PWD craze. Great dogs that they are, they aren't for everyone.


----------



## dog-man

as i mentioned, my experience with PWD is very limited.

i met two on vacation, and have a friend that has two.
in both instances, one was calm and was not.

so, i am only going to refer to a book that i used while researching dogs, and why i opted at that time for the goldendoodle.

the book rates different characteristics of dogs, on a scale of one to five.

i will compare PWD to golden retreiver.
the poodle ratings were very, very close to the PWD (except poodles were higher for ease of training).

my goal was to "soften" traits of the poodle with the golden.

Energy Level and Exercise Requirements:
PWD: 4 
Golden: 3

Playfulness, Affection Level, Friendliness toward other pets:
PWD: 4 
Golden:5

Friendliness toward dogs, friendliness toward strangers:
PWD: 3 
Golden: 5

Watchdog Ability: PWD: 4 Golden: 3
Protection Ability: PWD: 3 Golden: 2 
personally, i wanted LESS watchdog and protection nature.

Ease of Training: PWD: 3 
Golden: 5

the golden description fit my needs better, and it worked out the way i hoped.


----------



## wvasko

Pai said:


> Yes... we all know that.


Pai
1. You know there may be somebody viewing my reply that is not as dog knowledgeable as you. I'm going to bet that somewhere out in the world somebody has been given a set of registration papers for their Doodle that are obviously bogus.
2. In my opinion the recognized breed statement the only important compare/contrast feature.


----------



## lovemygreys

I've found very few books are actually good at describing dog breeds. I use the greyhound as my standard when I pick up an 'all breed' dog book b/c I know them better than any other breed - they are usually anywhere to slightly off to horribly wrong about temperament.

Ease of Training is always a sticking point with me. Ease of training _for what_ and _by who's_ standard or method? Any breed of dog that has historically been bred to do independent type work NEEDS to have the intelligence and autonomy to function without a human standing there barking orders. How that translates into the 'pet world' is that these types of breeds may just need a different training approach/motivation.


----------



## dog-man

lovemygreys said:


> I've found very few books are actually good at describing dog breeds. I use the greyhound as my standard when I pick up an 'all breed' dog book b/c I know them better than any other breed - they are usually anywhere to slightly off to horribly wrong about temperament.
> .


well, you have to start somewhere, and we can't have experience with all breeds as a novice.

i found that by comparing 2 or 3 different books, i got a pretty good picture of a general temperament and tendency.

when i meet a new breed, i look up in my books again, to see if that individual dog fit the description.


----------



## Dogstar

I would say that Porties and Poodles are definitely in the same class as far as intelligence, with labs just a touch lower. I'd rate the lab highest in trainability though.  Most of the Porties I've met have not been any more energetic than a standard poodle of similar age, and the lack of popularity (and higher percentage of responsible breeders) really seems to have a VERY positive impact on the breed's overall temperament and trainability. LOTS of Porties with titles at both ends, it seems. Almost all the ones I meet at dog shows are breed champions now competing in performance events.

Here's another doodle-lookalike, the Romano Lagotto- Spanish Water Dog. They're another all-purpose family working dog and companion and they're absolutely wonderful. This is a puppy. 









I also think it's funny how much Pumi resemble the schnauzer/poodle crosses that are used as illustrations in the designer dogs breed magazines and on websites. They're definitely a LOT more dog than the similar-looking mix, though.


----------



## FriendsOfZoe

dog-man said:


> Energy Level and Exercise Requirements:
> PWD: 4
> Golden: 3


3/5 for a goldens energy level? Ugh. 

It really really bothers me when people think that goldens are all like the old ones they've met who eat and sleep all day...no golden puppy is like that, and many aren't even well into adulthood.

I'm glad it worked out for you with Oinest, but I would put goldens and PWDs on a similar level of energy, with poodles probably right up there though perhaps needing a bit less sheer exercise and a bit more mental exercise.

I know a few PWDs from where I used to live. A girl in my building got one just a few months before I got Zoe and he's such a great dog. She is single and works full time, and just takes him to the park to run off-leash before work and goes for a long walk at night--and he is still a puppy!!! I love that dog, he and Zoe were such good friends, and she was the only other person in my building who could relate to having a dog that needed so much exercise. Another one lived nearby that was similarly a great dog. I am not much a fan of poodles myself, but if I were ever to look for a breed with that type of coat ("non-shedding" "hypoallergenic"), I would certainly get a Portie.

That said, B-line, if I were you, I would be glad that people want doodles and not porties...popularity is a curse, so relish your fabulous and relatively unknown buddies!!


----------



## dog-man

FriendsOfZoe said:


> 3/5 for a goldens energy level? Ugh.
> 
> It really really bothers me when people think that goldens are all like the old ones they've met who eat and sleep all day...no golden puppy is like that, and many aren't even well into adulthood.



golden puppies are another story.

Oinest loves activity and adventure, but he has a limit...there are some dogs at the dog parks, like pointers, that have no limit.

we're both ready to call it quits at the same time.


----------



## harrise

*Running in circles with arms flailing about* 

I LIKE SLED DOGS! I LIKE SLED DOGS!


----------



## Mr Pooch

Harrisse what about St Bernards.lol,the best!


----------



## wvasko

lovemygreys said:


> I've found very few books are actually good at describing dog breeds. I use the greyhound as my standard when I pick up an 'all breed' dog book b/c I know them better than any other breed - they are usually anywhere to slightly off to horribly wrong about temperament.
> 
> Ease of Training is always a sticking point with me. Ease of training _for what_ and _by who's_ standard or method? Any breed of dog that has historically been bred to do independent type work NEEDS to have the intelligence and autonomy to function without a human standing there barking orders. How that translates into the 'pet world' is that these types of breeds may just need a different training approach/motivation.


lovemygreys

*I've found very few books are actually good at describing dog breeds. I use the greyhound as my standard when I pick up an 'all breed' dog book b/c I know them better than any other breed - they are usually anywhere to slightly off to horribly wrong about temperament.*

You are so right it's scary. I have read some of the breed books and if I hadn't known I had that particular breed of dog in front of me, I would not have had a clue.


----------



## B-Line

FriendsOfZoe said:


> That said, B-line, if I were you, I would be glad that people want doodles and not porties...popularity is a curse, so relish your fabulous and relatively unknown buddies!!


I 100% agree and am confident, if the PWD was more popular, more people would breed them, including puppy mills and irresponsible breeders. That would probably then lead to the overall quality of the breed, diminishing.

Whereas now, the standards for the breed are so high and maintained by extremely responsible, caring and loving breeders.

The reason I speak with so much passion about them here is because of the misinformation that I believe is emanated by 'some' Doodle breeders and owners.

For example, Dog Man, while I'm sure has the absolute best of intentions, clearly has a view of the PWD that is not fitting. Of course there are always extreme examples and if you put an aggressive, alpha male, PWD in a room with a submissive, lethargic, Golden, you will be able to make the point that PWD's are higher energy, more skittish around strangers, etc. 

But truth is, in all my experiences, I have never met a Lab or Standard or Doodle or Golden, that was any less energetic, that was any better with strangers or easier to train. That's just nonsense.

I have consistently been told, by trainers I have worked with, by groomers, by dog sitters, etc. That they have never seen a dog/breed that was so loving, patient, smart, etc. (Yes, my puppy is a little crazy, but ALL puppies are crazy..)

So when I hear Doodle owners talking about these wild, hi-strung, PWD's, I have to say, "HUH" ?? - "What are you talking about?" My dogs live to please me. Yes, they are mischievous and comical, but not in a bad way.

All of the qualities that Doodle owners are looking for a breed are the same qualities that PWD's have. Smart, Hypo-allergenic, easy to train, good for families, etc.

As far as the way some book rates them, 3/5 intelligence, 3/5 ease of training, etc. The writers of those books have clearly never spent 5 minutes with a PWD.


----------



## Annamarie

I've only ever seen one PWD in real life and I assumed it was a doodle lol.. 

Who knows, way back in their history PWD's may have been doodles or part doodles. It's possible! Really, there's no such thing as a "purebred". Every breed at one point was started or refined by selectively breeding more than one "breed" together.


----------



## Laurelin

I've known labradoodles and a few porties...

TO ME... the biggest difference is that the doodles are bigger. Labradoodles I see are much bigger than standard poodles and labs... we're talking 80-100 lbs many times... 

The doodles vary a lot in temperament, but they seem a bit softer than your average PWD. 

The guide dog program doodles are very well trained as were my friends' pwds. 

PWDs have a much more consistent coat type. 

To me PWDs seem more active... just based on the ones I know. 

That's about all I've got. Either way, I'm more of a long, feathered coat type of person and a herding dog person so neither dog really is my cup of tea.


----------



## dog-man

B-Line said:


> As far as the way some book rates them, 3/5 intelligence, 3/5 ease of training, etc. The writers of those books have clearly never spent 5 minutes with a PWD.


the book i was quoting from is:
Encyclopedia of Dog Breeds, by D. Caroline Coile, Phd.

there was another book i used: The right dog for you, by Tortora.
but the book is from the early 1980's, and PWD was not in the book.
it seems they were recognized in 1984.
Tortora was very good at pointing out more potential problems than Coile did.


----------



## B-Line

Annamarie said:


> Who knows, way back in their history PWD's may have been doodles or part doodles. It's possible! Really, there's no such thing as a "purebred". Every breed at one point was started or refined by selectively breeding more than one "breed" together.


That is true. But the point I've been trying to make is,
The ideal Doodle, with few exceptions (coloring, etc.) has almost the exact same characteristics of the PWD. 
Essentially, trying to invent a breed that already exists, that already has proven standards, responsible breeders, etc.


----------



## Laurelin

B-Line said:


> That is true. But the point I've been trying to make is,
> The ideal Doodle, with few exceptions (coloring, etc.) has almost the exact same characteristics of the PWD.
> Essentially, trying to invent a breed that already exists, that already has proven standards, responsible breeders, etc.


This is a question I proposed on another forum...

How different does a breed need to be in order to be acceptable? There are tons of breeds that are very similar and perform similar jobs. Which ones are okay and which are just 'repeats'?

To the people that have these breeds, no other will do. Differences seem small from the outside, but owning one of these dogs, you'll probably much prefer your breed to another.


----------



## melgrj7

Haha, thats funny as the first few poodle mixes I saw, I assumed were PWDs. I even asked them about their PWDs as I had only seen two before in our area, and then I was like wow they got popular all of a sudden. The couple of PWDs I know are a lot less crazy than the several poodle mixes that I know. Either way, I am not drawn to that look of dog, I like herding dogs and bully breeds



Annamarie said:


> I've only ever seen one PWD in real life and I assumed it was a doodle lol..


----------



## FriendsOfZoe

Laurelin said:


> This is a question I proposed on another forum...
> 
> How different does a breed need to be in order to be acceptable? There are tons of breeds that are very similar and perform similar jobs. Which ones are okay and which are just 'repeats'?
> 
> To the people that have these breeds, no other will do. Differences seem small from the outside, but owning one of these dogs, you'll probably much prefer your breed to another.


Good point. Like the people who think that GOLDENS like ZOE are LABS and if you correct them, just believe that they're basically the same!!

That said, labs are growing on me over time, but still, I hate the insinuation that goldens are labs with longer fur.


----------



## dog-man

B-Line said:


> That is true. But the point I've been trying to make is,
> The ideal Doodle, with few exceptions (coloring, etc.) has almost the exact same characteristics of the PWD.
> Essentially, trying to invent a breed that already exists, that already has proven standards, responsible breeders, etc.


after the improvement of gun accuracy, there was a huge movement of mixing pointers, retrievers and spaniels, to create the ideal bird dog.

however, there were different terrains and different prey, that demanded subtle differences.

to many people, they couldn't see the differences.

but for those who had specific needs, the "subtle" differences were huge.

now that we have the AKC, crossing dogs is suddenly supposed to halt?
the breeders in the past did not have AKC type standards in mind.
they wanted a dog that fit a need the best.


----------



## B-Line

Dog Man,

It has nothing to do with the AKC..

Let me put it another way. If you want a PWD, in my experience, you need to prove, with applications, home visits when possible, etc. That you are going to raise the pup to a certain standard.

The breeders don't just give these dogs to anyone with a wallet. They want to place their pups in a great home.

- On the Australian Labradoodle website I just visited, on the front page, there is a request that people stop auctioning their dogs.
-- So, highest bidder wins !

It's not the AKC, it's the difference between breeders who do it for money and breeders who do it for the love of the breed. 

Am I making sense?

B

From the Australian Labradoodle Website: (This is highlighting the problem)

"NOTICE:

The Australian Labradoodle Club of America is strongly against any or all auctions of breeding dogs or pets. We are resolved as an organization to protect the Australian Labradoodle, and cannot sit quietly as dogs are being sold off to the highest bidder, the only criteria being a checkbook.

We are committed to protecting the health and well-being of the Australian Labradoodle in America and to always strive for excellence in our breeding practices in order to maintain and protect the integrity of the breed.

Recent auctions and the blatant disregard for the future living conditions of the dogs involved runs counter to the principles and foundation of the Australian Labradoodle Club of America. Our code of ethics requires that all breeder members agree to breed responsibly and ethically. All members are required to health test their dogs prior to breeding. At a bare minimum, hips and eyes must be tested. However, dogs on recent auction lists have been bred without first testing for any genetic issues and problems. These dogs are being bred haphazhardly and without regard to pedigree, health issues or quality of the breeding stock."


----------



## dog-man

B-Line said:


> Am I making sense?
> 
> ."


not really.

my point is that people have different tastes in dogs.

a PWD might be perfect for you.

a PWD might be good for me, but i'm not sure it would be perfect.

you might not appreciate the extra subtle features i am looking for.

there is no reason to believe that the breeds that exist already, fit every need.

the history of breeding dogs is the history of crossing dogs, to get closer to a new need.
dogs as family members rather than workers is a major change.
it is inevitable that new crosses are going to become popular.

the standards by which a breeder might be considered responsible is not an objective, obvious concept.

it is always important to have good breeders and educated consumers.
but the details of how that is EXACTLY defined..that is where we may part company.


----------



## kelliope

I don't know about anyone else, but I am really getting sold on PWD! I had read some really negative information on them from a breed club (I know they try to discourage casual purchasers, but this was BAD!) and now having read this thread and looked online again, they seem like good dogs!


----------



## MarleysGirl

B Line, thank you for starting this thread. I had never heard of a PWD untill today. Could you post some more pics of your dog on the picture forum?


----------



## B-Line

kelliope said:


> I had read some really negative information on them from a breed club (I know they try to discourage casual purchasers, but this was BAD!) and now having read this thread and looked online again, they seem like good dogs!


Kelliope, 

You hit the nail on the head. Many of the breeders, really do try hard to discourage casual purchasers. My breeder who had pups available in late December, wouldn't let any of her pups go until after New Years. She was trying very hard to discourage CHRISTMAS PUPPIES.

I even had a breeder who turned me down for a pup and I have a PWD.
(She eventually changed her mind, but I already went in a different direction.)

I'm happy to share more pictures and will post them in the pictures forum. But here is an appetizer:

Maggie, black and white, is a 6 month old, puppy.
Nikita, all black, is 12 yrs old.


----------



## dog-man

nice dogs.

helps that you have a pool.


----------



## mydogspot

Motebi said:


> PWDs are a working breed, bred for a purpose. Doodles aren't.  They are companion dogs and that's it.
> 
> *Having said that, I wonder how many underworked PWDs are out there........ *




So true!

Strange though...all but a few of the pups that my Labradoodle breeder put on the ground are WORKING in therapy. That's what they were bred for.

Bred for a purpose, that statement just doesn't hold any water anymore. Most dogs that I meet are simply ADORED family pets, regardless of breed.


----------



## B-Line




----------



## kelliope

I am wondering if a PWD would be a good choice for me if I were to ever get another dog?

Here is a little about me:

I've had dogs my whole life though we lived on an farm and did no formal training. The dogs seemed to train themselves!

I now have 2 small Chi's. Pretty active dogs that do go hiking, etc.

I am very involved in equestrian activities and horse shows and want a dog that could accompany me to these types of events.

I want an active dog that enjoys hiking, etc., but is still calm enough to be in the house and sleep in my bedroom (if not in the bed!)

I have no children of my own, but I have visiting children so I need a dog good with kids/visitors.

I do NOT need a guard-type dog. I'd rather a really friendly, happy-go-lucky type.

I need a dog that is absolutely NOT dog-aggressive or even small animal aggressive (i.e. cats) or could be trained to ignore smaller animals (we have done this with everything from our Rottie to our Doxie/Terrier mix).

We have a houseboat and spend a good deal of the summer there so a swimming dog would be great - even my little Chi swims!

So, do I seem like a good candidate for a PWD in the future?

B-LINE, your dogs are ADORABLE!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## B-Line

dog-man said:


> nice dogs.
> 
> helps that you have a pool.


Thanks Dog Man,

I'm fond of yours as well 

Though, I don't have a pool. My brother does. And my favorite thing to do in the world is spend all weekend swimming with them. Hopefully my next house will have a pool though.

Many PWD owners take their dogs to lakes, or friends pools, or ponds even.

And FYI, Dog Man,
Yes, the Portuguese Water Dog does have the name "Water" in it. But don't think, for even a second, that a Standard Poodle and a Golden Retriever aren't also, equally considered, "DOGS OF WATER". Because they are !!!

And you don't need to take a PWD swimming any more than you need to take a greyhound to the bus stop.

Kellipe,

The PWD is not a breed for everyone. But I see nothing in your description that would lead me to believe, you wouldn't make a great parent for a PWD and that you wouldn't be extraordinarily happy with the breed.

The only thing that sticks out a little, is these dogs need training. Not because they are wild, rather because they yearn for it.

They want you to teach them how to work, how to behave, etc. And yes, they will be mischievous. But in my experience, they are much happier dogs with a firm owner. And those people who have crazy PWD's, imho, haven't done their jobs as parents and have even ignored their dogs requests to train them properly.

My puppy comes RUNNING over to me at full speed when she knows it's training time. The biggest problem I have, is not knowing what else to train her to do. She already, sits, speaks, rolls over, gives paw, high five, stays, fetch and puts the ball in my hand. - I now need to find more complicated things for her to do..

I'm happy to discuss with you, more, at length, if you want to talk via email..


----------



## poodleholic

PWDs are wonderful dogs, and have had the pleasure of knowing one first hand. Smart, great temperament, and what sweet lovebuckets! LOL




> I would say that Porties and Poodles are definitely in the same class as far as intelligence, with labs just a touch lower. I'd rate the lab highest in trainability though.


I've never worked with a lab from puppyhood, so can't really say that labs are easier to train than Poodles, or vice versa. I can say that Standard Poodles are so smart that training them is like cheating in some way! They catch on very quickly, and once learned, they don't forget.


----------



## lovemygreys

dog-man said:


> well, you have to start somewhere, and we can't have experience with all breeds as a novice.
> 
> i found that by comparing 2 or 3 different books, i got a pretty good picture of a general temperament and tendency.
> 
> when i meet a new breed, i look up in my books again, to see if that individual dog fit the description.


I've found that talking to breed-specific rescues and _serious_ breeders are the best ways to learn about a breed. Basically, people who have experience with a LOT of individuals within that breed and aren't interested in "selling" the breed to anyone it's not a great match for (meaning, they're more likely to give you the "good" and "bad" aspects). Pet owners can also be a good resource, though their experience is usually more limited - often to only their own individual dogs. When I've picked up 2-3+ "all breed" books and none of them describe the greyhound accurately, there's no way I can trust their evaluation of other breeds - even when considered together.


----------



## Dogstar

poodleholic said:


> PWDs are wonderful dogs, and have had the pleasure of knowing one first hand. Smart, great temperament, and what sweet lovebuckets! LOL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've never worked with a lab from puppyhood, so can't really say that labs are easier to train than Poodles, or vice versa. I can say that Standard Poodles are so smart that training them is like cheating in some way! They catch on very quickly, and once learned, they don't forget.


Very much so, and that's why I'd rate their 'trainability' a touch lower- they seem to fare poorly with trainers who do a lot of repetition or who aren't smarter than their dogs. (And I'm pretty sure that poodles- especially spoos- are smarter than quite a few people I know. )


----------



## Laurelin

lovemygreys said:


> I've found that talking to breed-specific rescues and _serious_ breeders are the best ways to learn about a breed. Basically, people who have experience with a LOT of individuals within that breed and aren't interested in "selling" the breed to anyone it's not a great match for (meaning, they're more likely to give you the "good" and "bad" aspects). Pet owners can also be a good resource, though their experience is usually more limited - often to only their own individual dogs. When I've picked up 2-3+ "all breed" books and none of them describe the greyhound accurately, there's no way I can trust their evaluation of other breeds - even when considered together.


Oh I agree. Though if you find a completely obsessed pet owner like me, I've known hundreds of papillons (literally). 

I feel for the people who get papillons based on all breed books. They always sound much more reserved and much more like lap dogs than they really typically are.


----------



## reverend_maynard

dog-man said:


> now that we have the AKC, crossing dogs is suddenly supposed to halt?
> the breeders in the past did not have AKC type standards in mind.
> they wanted a dog that fit a need the best.


You just love blaming everything on the AKC, huh?

To my knowledge, they are not against creating new breeds. They're not going to grant breed status to first generation crosses, but a multi-generational breeding program that produces consistent results and a breed standard can eventually be recognized as a new breed.

The breeders of the past did not take 2 purebreds, mate them, and call it a day. They continued to breed and breed until they got consistent results from each breeding, so that the vast majority of pups would fit the need best. To the best of my knowedge, the Australian Labradoodle is the one doodle that is being handled in this manner. All other doodles, poos, etc. are first generation, crap-shoot, breedings. Do you really expect ANYONE to recognize that as a breed?


----------



## dog-man

reverend_maynard said:


> You just love blaming everything on the AKC, huh?
> 
> To my knowledge, they are not against creating new breeds. They're not going to grant breed status to first generation crosses, but a multi-generational breeding program that produces consistent results and a breed standard can eventually be recognized as a new breed.
> 
> The breeders of the past did not take 2 purebreds, mate them, and call it a day. They continued to breed and breed until they got consistent results from each breeding, so that the vast majority of pups would fit the need best. To the best of my knowedge, the Australian Labradoodle is the one doodle that is being handled in this manner. All other doodles, poos, etc. are first generation, crap-shoot, breedings. Do you really expect ANYONE to recognize that as a breed?


you misunderstood my point (even though i truly don't like the AKC).

i don't expect the AKC to recognize goldendoodles as a breed...and i don't want them too.

what i was reacting to, is the notion that cross-breeding is not legitimate, because it doesn't fulfil the value system of the AKC.

before the formation of kennel clubs, the purpose of creating a new breed was to find a dog that could fill a new niche...a new necessary function.

they were not obsessive about PURE breed, or exact conformation to a standard. 

i, for one, don't give a hoot about a dog fulfilling its original, obsolete function.

the new function that i care about, is to be a good family dog.
health and temperament, along with non-shed is important to me.

for those who want to be sure to preserve the original function, working dog breeders maintain that.

that leaves show dog breeders with very little purpose, to my mind, except that the show dog people enjoy it...nothing objectively important about it at all.
so, let them enjoy themselves...just like some people love Civil war parapanelia.
but don't think we all have to share the same priorities.


----------



## DobManiac

dog-man said:


> the new function that i care about, is to be a good family dog.
> health and temperament, along with non-shed is important to me.
> 
> for those who want to be sure to preserve the original function, working dog breeders maintain that.


Ok I have a question.

For you what are the qualities that make a dog breedable? Do feel that there should be any requirements besides a stable temperament and general health? How would you regulate which dogs are chosen to be breed? 

Sorry, that was a few questions


----------



## Curbside Prophet

dog-man said:


> the new function that i care about, is to be a good family dog.
> health and temperament, along with non-shed is important to me.


Phenotype is a poor indicator of what the dog does. So unless you have an arena to test the dog's function, the function you seek is simply subjective. And before you ask, the conformation ring isn't just an arena to test phenotype. 



> for those who want to be sure to preserve the original function, working dog breeders maintain that.


And so what of AKC performance events?


----------



## dog-man

DobManiac said:


> Ok I have a question.
> 
> For you what are the qualities that make a dog breedable? Do feel that there should be any requirements besides a stable temperament and general health? How would you regulate which dogs are chosen to be breed?



first of all, i have to clarify.

show dog breeders also "create" some excellent family dogs...so, for that, i consider them to be very relevant.
but not because they are coming closer and closer to some standard.

stable temperament and good health are the two main factors i consider important for breeding.

then it is a matter of the market, of which types people want.

there are many useful breeding techniques that experienced breeders use, that are not dependent on maintaining a PURE breed, with exacting standards of conformation.



Curbside Prophet said:


> And so what of AKC performance events?


if there are AKC breeders who consider function to be of more importance than form...and they are trying to maintain the skills of "original function", then i consider them to be "working dog" breeders rather than "showdog" breeders.

i believe most people will admit that the dogs who win ribbons for conformation are not the best dogs in the field anymore.


----------



## Willowy

There may be too much emphasis on conformation in shows, but, honestly, if you don't breed for conformation AT ALL, all the dogs will end up looking the same. You need to have some kind of standard to breed to. Otherwise there will be Labs who look like Danes, and Poodles that look like Westies, or whatever.


----------



## Love's_Sophie

Ugghhh...yet another doodle thread...

It's a mutt...the PWD is not...nough said...

As far as energy, EVERY single 'doodle mutt' I have met has had energy that would make me as a Border owner, go balistic...


----------



## DobManiac

dog-man said:


> first of all, i have to clarify.
> 
> show dog breeders also "create" some excellent family dogs...so, for that, i consider them to be very relevant.
> but not because they are coming closer and closer to some standard.
> 
> stable temperament and good health are the two main factors i consider important for breeding.
> 
> then it is a matter of the market, of which types people want.
> 
> there are many useful breeding techniques that experienced breeders use, that are not dependent on maintaining a PURE breed, with exacting standards of conformation.


 My problem with breeding in this manner is that too many dogs fit the bill. I think it's a little hypocritical of you to suggest that maintaining a pure breed isn't important considering the amount of research you put into individual breed traits. You clearly had a niche that only a dog of a certain temperament could fill. 

So how would you keep the integrity of the breed intact without using conformation as one of your requirements? Don't you worry that if we follow your plan, that in ten years the golden retriever will no longer even resemble what the golden is supposed to be? 

Family dogs come in many shapes and sizes. I would have thought you of all people would realize that.


----------



## Motebi

This may be a little bit OT now, but this is, how breeding is regulated in Germany:



Following are some requirements:

A breeder has to be a member of a breed club/registry and he/she has to register his/her kennel with them. A proposed kennel name is published in and in the breed register. A breeder is allocated a code, which will be used for tattooing puppies.

Both parents, dam and sire, of the prospective litter must meet breeding eligibility criteria: they must have a conformation rating of at least Sehr Gut ("Very Good") at the age of at least 9 months, they have to be at least 15 month old at the time of breeding and they have to be free of PRA (Progressive Retinal Atrophy) and cataracts (A special eye exam is required prior to the first breeding and then every two years up to age of 7).

If parents are not registered with the breed club/registry a special authorization for breeding is required from the club/registry prior to mating. 

A certificate of mating has to be completed.

A breeder has to report a litter to a breed warden within 8 days of whelping. He/She then will inspect the litter when the puppies are between 8 and 12 weeks of age. He/she will also tattoo the puppies at the same time. 

Mostly, the parents of the litters also have tests to show their ability to perform the tasks that are asked from the breed. (i.e. Hunting tests, tracking titles, retrieves.....etc.etc.) Breeders are very keen on breeding their bitches only to males that have proven themselves in their "field of expertise". 

Just a small interlude to show how it's done somewhere else.


----------



## Curbside Prophet

dog-man said:


> i believe most people will admit that the dogs who win ribbons for conformation are not the best dogs in the field anymore.


If we're going to be subjective, I believe most people will admit to knowing the difference. But I don't see how your "function" is any different than what the AKC does in the conformation ring, except minus the peer review and ribbons.


----------



## Love's_Sophie

dog-man said:


> f there are AKC breeders who consider function to be of more importance than form...and they are trying to maintain the skills of "original function", then i consider them to be "working dog" breeders rather than "showdog" breeders.
> 
> i believe most people will admit that the dogs who win ribbons for conformation are not the best dogs in the field anymore.


Ummm...that is not very true...I know several different breeders of several different breeds; from Dachshunds, Duck Tolling Retrievers, to Labradors, and Golden Retrievers...and EVERY single one of them breeds for usable dogs; NOT just pretty faces for the showring...These dogs title in their hunting trials, as well as everything from obedience, to agility, and utility...I don't consider these 'working dog breeders'; they are breeders who are just breeding for the actual breed standard set in their individual descriptions. The dogs win in the showring too...imagine that. 

And it's form follows function, anyway...if the dog is improperly put together, he is not going to do well in the showring, and he certainly is not going to stand up long in the field; the body HAS to be well conformed. It doesn't matter what sort of dog we are talking about. My BC mix has crappy hips...so she is limited in somethings; like I will never be able to really compete with her in agility like I had hoped...her form follows in the functions she can do. 

Plus, when you talk about 'working dog standard'...umm...well, that implies to me an insanely energetic, too scraggly looking Golden (or whatever)...NOT the actual breed standard. There is no 'working dog standard' for each breed only the actual breed standards; it's breeders who decide, well, my dog will only do well in the field, because he doesn't fit the actual standard, that 'creates' that sort of definition.


----------



## Motebi

As far as dachshunds go, that's admirable !  It's really sad to see where the American dachshund is heading. 99% of them are totally useless as hunting dogs. Partially, because they are just too crippled to run and jump. Lack of prey drive aside.


----------



## Love's_Sophie

Motebi said:


> As far as dachshunds go, that's admirable !  It's really sad to see where the American dachshund is heading. 99% of them are totally useless as hunting dogs. Partially, because they are just too crippled to run and jump. Lack of prey drive aside.


Yeah...her dogs are pretty amazing...I have watched her practice with them a time or two in her tunnel system (as I used to help her with her kennel), and the dogs were so quick and so precise; they definitely know their job and loved it! And then when they get in the confo or obedience ring, they know their job there too! She has a lot of imported dogs too; because she doesn't like alot of the 'American' bloodlines either, and the direction they have headed.


----------



## Motebi

That's great ! Is she by any chance a member of the NATC ?  If not, you may want to point that out to her.


----------



## Love's_Sophie

I believe she is...I haven't talked to her in a while...but I am pretty sure she is...she's been involved with Doxies and trialing them for..well...many many years


----------



## Alpha

I saw Portugues Water Dog in the title thread... 

We have a breeder at school as well as one client with two, not from the same breeder.

I would say size is the biggest difference between the two PHYSICALLY! lol

Most lab/golden doodles I've seen are pretty darned big, over 24", weighing in at around 80lbs.

All of the PWD's at school, are under 23" and weigh around 40lbs I'd say. Maybe less?

Also energy wise, from the doodles and PWD's I've come into contact with, I would use the word "rangy" to describe the doodles. And the PWD's seem to be very laid back.


----------



## dog-man

DobManiac said:


> My problem with breeding in this manner is that too many dogs fit the bill. I think it's a little hypocritical of you to suggest that maintaining a pure breed isn't important considering the amount of research you put into individual breed traits. You clearly had a niche that only a dog of a certain temperament could fill.
> .


you can maintain breed traits without it having to be a PURE breed.

you can introduce something here and there, to make some changes, and still keep the basics you want.
that is what breeding in the 18th century was all about.
and that is what experienced breeders can still do.

also, like a border collie, there could be a large variety in phenotype, but still all sharing the border collie abilities and personality.

yes, i wanted a dog with the golden traits.

so, when i say i want a dog with a good temperament, it doesn't mean i want some generic temperament.

personally, i am happy with a well-bred goldendoodle...i can take my chances with the result, because i think both breeds have such good traits.

however, if someone needs more of a "guarantee", they can go to a breeder who stresses more standard results.

but this concept of standard can be taken to an obsessive extreme as well.

it is the extreme measures of conformation that i am against...not the idea of maintaining breed traits, or even some of the unique phenotype beauty of each breed.


----------



## B-Line

Alpha,

My 12 yr. old PWD weighs in, at or near, 55-60lbs. (Female)
I am guessing, based on the size of our puppies mom, the little one will probably be near the same weight, 55lbs.

In my experience, that seems to be the size of the females, despite what the books say, 35lb-50lb females. 

They are medium sized, but at the top of the "medium sized" scale. 

At least, that's been my experience.


----------



## Alpha

Well I've never put them on the scale or asked how much they weighed.

I guess the reason my guess is so light because in comparison to my dog that's around the same height and weighs 65lbs they look pretty tiny. Completely different builds though so it can be deceiving.

This is one of the breeder's dog, she is a Ch.


----------



## MollyDoggie

Anyone ever lion cut a doodle?


----------



## B-Line

MollyDoggie said:


> Anyone ever lion cut a doodle?


Shhhhh, (don't let the PWD breeders hear me say this...)

But, PLEASE, PLEASE, don't do it... I loathe the lion clip.


----------



## poodleholic

> (And I'm pretty sure that poodles- especially spoos- are smarter than quite a few people I know. )


ROFLMAO! Oh, Dogstar, so true! SO true!


----------



## Quincy

B-Line said:


> Vs. Pristine examples of Doodle's


Oh I just noticed you used my Quincy's photo in the opening to this thread. I haven't got time to read all the thread, so what would you like to know about my Quincy, and where you seem to want to do some sort of "Compare and Contrast" 
.


----------



## dog-man

MollyDoggie said:


> Anyone ever lion cut a doodle?


no, but i've done a mohawk.


----------



## B-Line

Unfortunately, my girls got conjunctivitis. Maggie in her left eye first, then spread to her right eye, then Nikita got it in her right eye. I think Maggie got it in the small dog park by my office.

My point being, I took them to the vet today and they were weighed.

Nikita, 12 - weighs 53lbs. she is down from a top weight of 63lbs.
Maggie, 6 months - weighs a whopping 37lbs. already.


----------



## KaseyT

PWDs seem like wonderful dogs. Why are there so few of them?


----------



## dog-man

KaseyT said:


> PWDs seem like wonderful dogs. Why are there so few of them?



it seems they were first accepted by AKC in 1984.


----------



## B-Line

KaseyT said:


> PWDs seem like wonderful dogs. Why are there so few of them?


The million dollar question.. !

I would say, there are a number of factors, here is my best guess:

1) As of 1970, the breed was EXTREMELY close to instiction. There were only 50 known PWD's in the entire world. It wasn't until a famous shipping tycoon discovered the dogs on a trip to Portugal, feel in love with one, and made it his mission to rescue the breed, that the breed became known. It is argued that advancements in fishing technology, commercial, long line fishing, radar, etc. made the breed less vital to the fisherman.

2) The breed was then slowly popularized in the United States and have spent the past 40 years becoming greater in number. But still, are minute in number compared to the traditional, popular, dog breeds.

3) The breeders tend to be "guardians" of the breed. They are very careful about whom they allow to adopt a PWD. 12 years ago, when I got Nikita, there were long waiting lists for puppies. Now, it's not so hard, because there are more breeders, but for the most part, they make you jump through some hoops to get one. It's not a snobbery thing, or an elitist thing, quite the contrary. I think the breeders really prefer not to see people back yard breeding. That is also the same reason, the few examples you do see of the breed, are generally so high. I've also never seen a PWD in a dog store window or advertized in a local paper. There just not breed in mass quantity like that.

4) More does not always equal better. I think the PWD has largely benefited by not having it be more popular. Popularity generates financial motives and in my experience, PWD breeders only sell their dogs to recoup their expenses. Once you start bringing in the "Greed Breeders", a lot of quality falls to the waist side.

5) I actually do think, since I got my first PWD, that the dogs are becoming more well known and recognized. They are such amazing pets and most people that have spent any time around one, immediately want one.

-- A funny side note.. As far as my research goes, you know who the most famous of all PWD owners has been:
Who else: Jacques Cousteau !! LOL..


----------



## Quincy

dog-man said:


> it seems they were first accepted by AKC in 1984.


I think the PWD probably was on the Foundation Stock Service listing for some time till being recognized as a breed by the AKC. On the AKC website at the very bottom of their Breed Standard I see some dates mentioned Approved January 15, 1991 and Effective February 27, 1991
.



B-Line said:


> As of 1970, the breed was EXTREMELY close to instiction. There were only 50 known PWD's in the entire world.


Today some are quite concerned regarding some breeds, and in the past there were breeds who became extinct. Take for example the "Cavalier King Charles Spaniel" which became extinct and were recreated in the 1920s from the "King Charles Spaniel" and those that did the recreation were tight lipped as to what other breeds they may have used. Since recreation they had to be very carefull on a number of things, and with only so many of them particularly Coefficient of Inbreeding (COI) and by Kennel Club records the last time a "King Charles Spaniel" was used was 1980.

Talking of Coefficient of Inbreeding (COI) what is your PWD's COI, my dog's is ZERO and has been that for 3 generations. Well you did seem to want to do some sort of "Compare and Contrast" 
.


----------



## Pai

B-Line said:


> Shhhhh, (don't let the PWD breeders hear me say this...)
> 
> But, PLEASE, PLEASE, don't do it... I loathe the lion clip.


Aw, I love it -- it makes them look so unique, I think! But then, I like unusual-looking dogs, lol. =)
I don't like the clip at all in Lowchens, however, it just looks silly on them, imo. I think it's the difference in hair texture that makes it look good on one breed but not on another.


----------



## Quincy

People do like different "haircuts and styles" even on their dogs, and one can even see this in the show rings around the world. Say here are some "haircuts and styles" for Poodles via this link:-
http://www.poodlesinaustralia.com/trims.html

And Pai, we could talk about Cresteds even in this thread 
.


----------



## Pai

I actually like the corded Poodles a lot... that's a really old fashioned style for them, ya? It must take a lot of work though.



Quincy said:


> And Pai, we could talk about Cresteds even in this thread
> .


lol!


----------



## Quincy

Pai said:


> I actually like the corded Poodles a lot... that's a really old fashioned style for them, ya? It must take a lot of work though.


Well you will find people who love and are totally nuts about their dogs that they do not see it as a lot of work but quite the opposite in a sort of pleasurable way where they spend time with their dogs. Some feel the same even though they may like some sort of "non-trimmed natural look" but still spend time with their dogs doing other things even if just lounging about together. Well I think you understand what I mean 

Yeah LOL 
.


----------



## Canadian Dog

I wasn't aware of PWD until after I got Molly. A breeders website had indicated this was a breed that couldn't be off leash, but I have learned since this is not the case. There was one in the tricks class I attended with Molly and I was very impressed - very attentive to its owner and willing to please, and a beautiful dog. If I were considering getting another dog I would definitely consider a PWD and in fact probably would have gotten one if I had known of the breed.

I have been bashed on this forum for owning my mix and also on a doodle forum for questioning the prices asked compared to what purebred dogs cost. I had also stated I couldn't recommend anyone buying these mixes because of the unpredictability of the coats. Many owners end up shaving the dogs when they blow their puppy coat because of the matting. The administrator of the forum was not happy with me at all and basically gave me a bull$hit answer.

Molly seems to be at the end of the dreaded blowing of the puppy coat and I've managed to keep her long. I rake and comb her every day as I have the time and desire to do so, but I can't imagine someone with children, job etc spending at least an hour a day grooming their dog during this coat change. I have no idea what the requirements are for grooming a PWD.


----------



## Quincy

Canadian Dog said:


> I had also stated I couldn't recommend anyone buying these mixes because of the unpredictability of the coats. Many owners end up shaving the dogs when they blow their puppy coat because of the matting.


There are many mix bred dogs, which ones are you referring too?

And I better add what other things like size for instance, where a large dog may require more grooming time than if that same dog was of a small size. 
.


----------



## Canadian Dog

Quincy said:


> There are many mix bred dogs, which ones are you referring too?
> 
> And I better add what other things like size for instance, where a large dog may require more grooming time than if that same dog was of a small size.
> .


Sorry, I was referring to Golden Retriever/Standard Poodle which Molly is (F1B). She is 11 months and 52 lbs.


----------



## Quincy

Canadian Dog said:


> Sorry, I was referring to Golden Retriever/Standard Poodle which Molly is (F1B). She is 11 months and 52 lbs.


I'm sorry too, I cannot respond further as I've had no practical experience with coats on such a dog. If you've got practical experience I'm willing to listen 
.


----------



## Canadian Dog

Quincy said:


> I'm sorry too, I cannot respond further as I've had no practical experience with coats on such a dog. If you've got practical experience I'm willing to listen
> .


Perhaps you were under the impression my original post was responding to yours - it was not - it was regarding the OP comparing PWD and doodles. It had nothing to do with your post.


----------



## borzoimom

Laurelin said:


> This is a question I proposed on another forum...
> 
> How different does a breed need to be in order to be acceptable? There are tons of breeds that are very similar and perform similar jobs. Which ones are okay and which are just 'repeats'?...


 Most of the main reasons why so many breeds are similar in function, is the difference ( by sheer distance) of the country of origin. If you look at the country of origin in many of the retrievers, and remember at the dates of origin, travel was limited. 
As far as the PWD many years ago I had a co-worker that had this breed. One of the reasons as to why was because of their intellegence, their size, but also mostly because they did not have the genetic problems in the breeds as the poodles did. Also obviously more of a medium size dog. Delightful charming intellegent dogs.

On animal planet " breed all about it" the PWD is coming on in a few minutes..


----------



## flipgirl

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the poodle originate from the PWD? What is a doodle? All I know is that it's what I do when I'm bored at a meeting.


----------



## Canadian Dog

flipgirl said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the poodle originate from the PWD? What is a doodle? All I know is that it's what I do when I'm bored at a meeting.


Do a search and read the threads.


----------



## borzoimom

A "doodle" is a mix breed of a breed with a poodle. A PWD is a old recognized breed- necessary for fisherment to help with nets etc. Here is the history on the breed. As well as other information on the breed. 
http://www.pwdca.org/index.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portuguese_Water_Dog


----------



## Quincy

flipgirl said:


> What is a doodle? All I know is that it's what I do when I'm bored at a meeting.


Via this link is a video showing an Australian Labradoodle which some people refer to as a doodle. In the video you can see what the dog looks like including his temperament, maybe that dog might be related to my Quincy and I might later check to see if he is.
http://www.news10.net/video/player_news10.aspx?aid=29957&bw=
.


----------



## B-Line

borzoimom said:


> On animal planet " breed all about it" the PWD is coming on in a few minutes..


How was it? I was out of town for the weekend and missed it..


----------



## Quincy

B-Line said:


> Vs. Pristine examples of Doodle's


*B-Line* it's been several days since I noticed that you used my dog's photo in the opening to this thread as seen above, and where you mentioned in doing some sort of "compare and contrast". See I tried to respond in this thread, and if you wish to do some sort of "compare and contrast" with my dog then please do so and where I will be quite happy to reply, and over the days I've noticed you posting a number of time in the forum. If you do not wish to do your some sort of compare and contrast with my dog then I suggest that you remove my dog's photo from this thread, and you can quite easily do so with the edit function. And I will say again, if do want to do some sort of "compare and contrast" with my dog then please do so and where I will be quite happy to send a reply, if not then please remove my dog's photo from this thread.
.



Canadian Dog said:


> Perhaps you were under the impression my original post was responding to yours - it was not - it was regarding the OP comparing PWD and doodles. It had nothing to do with your post.


No worries, and maybe others can say no worries to me where I may have been under some impression 
.


----------



## Tink

In Australia where Labradoodles originated, they were infused with up to 6 different breeds: including Poodle, Labrador Retriever, Irish Water Spaniel, Curly Coat Retriever, American Cocker Spaniel, and English Cocker Spaniel.

I simply don't understand why people are so up in arms about certain hybrid dog types. They bash everything from their name to their prices. What is it that people find so threatening about them? If we all liked the same thing there would be no diversity. How bland that would be!

I, like everyone else, have my favorite types of dogs; yet I don't waste time sitting around bashing the ones that don't appeal to me. No one is forced to buy a hybrid. If you don't like 'em, don't have one. Simple enough solution it seems.


----------



## poodleholic

Tink said:


> In Australia where Labradoodles originated, they were infused with up to 6 different breeds: including Poodle, Labrador Retriever, Irish Water Spaniel, Curly Coat Retriever, American Cocker Spaniel, and English Cocker Spaniel.
> 
> I simply don't understand why people are so up in arms about certain hybrid dog types. They bash everything from their name to their prices. What is it that people find so threatening about them? If we all liked the same thing there would be no diversity. How bland that would be!
> 
> I, like everyone else, have my favorite types of dogs; yet I don't waste time sitting around bashing the ones that don't appeal to me. No one is forced to buy a hybrid. If you don't like 'em, don't have one. Simple enough solution it seems.



It's not about the dogs; it's about the greedy millers and bybs who are cashing in by making money off their dogs, who care nothing about who they sell their puppies to, because it's all about making a buck. 

There's a big difference between the motives and objectives behind the Australian labaradoodles, and other millers and bybs who are in it for money.


----------



## Quincy

Tink said:


> In Australia where Labradoodles originated, they were infused with up to 6 different breeds: including Poodle, Labrador Retriever, Irish Water Spaniel, Curly Coat Retriever, American Cocker Spaniel, and English Cocker Spaniel.


If one looks back in history within a number of pure breeds you will find more than 2 breeds were used in their development.
Example, in the Cavalier King Charles Spaniel it is well documented the breeds used were - The Grendin, The Phalene, Curly King Charles, The Truffle Dog, Cocking and Springing Spaniels, White Holland Spaniel, Welsh Springer, The Duke of Norfolk Sussex Spaniel, The Miniature Toy Trawler.

If anyone wants to know what breeds were used in developing the "Australian Labradoodle" then check with a developer, here is a link and I see information on their website:-
http://www.rutlandmanor.com/ASD.Index.htm
.



poodleholic said:


> It's not about the dogs; it's about the greedy millers and bybs who are cashing in by making money off their dogs, who care nothing about who they sell their puppies to, because it's all about making a buck.
> 
> There's a big difference between the motives and objectives behind the Australian labaradoodles, and other millers and bybs who are in it for money.


Irrigardless of what dogs become popular where people are willing to pay for them, then you will find bybs and millers who will breed and sell them. In the breed I just mentioned the Cavalier King Charles Spaniel, well I've seen prices of $2,000 for a pet, and yes you will find millers and bybs breeding and selling heaps of these.
Here is a thread on one of that breeds forums, read through and see how much people have paid for these dogs:-
http://www.cavalierboard.com/messageboard/viewtopic.php?t=438
.


----------



## Tink

Why is it assumed that ALL hybrid breeders are unethical? I happen to know quite a few personally and they test their dogs... OFA, CERF, DNA, etc... which is more than can be said for many of the purebred breeders I know.

No, they're not all perfect and as with any group you will also have your good and bad, but to assume they're all that way is just ignorance. It doesn't reflect badly on the good breeders to see the bashing that goes on here; it reflects badly on those who are making assumptions and judgments that have little basis in fact. 

There are some sound reasons for hybridizing. Widening the genetic pool to eliminate some of the damage done by inbreeding and line breeding are 2 of the biggies. Anyone who has truly studied genetics (which every breeder of EVERY type of animal should do before even starting) can vouch for the fact that more damage has been done by careless purebred breeders than anyone wants to admit.

For those truly interested in the facts, here's a good article giving the good and the bad of hybrids. http://www.family-pets.com/genetics.html
Most hybrid breeders don't want to create a new breed or produce puppies which are all identical - only puppies which are all healthy, intelligent, full of personality and with attributes which make them good family pets. If the parents are also well treated, tested and loved, I find it hard to fault the program. The ones I network with all take back a pup if at any time in it's life It can't be kept with it's family. 

I think it's just sad that so many refuse to take the time to know what they're talking about before they start preaching.


----------



## Curbside Prophet

Tink said:


> Why is it assumed that ALL hybrid breeders are unethical?


I assume all breeders are unethical and follow this mantra - all breeders are irresponsible until proven otherwise. Seriously, how could the mini St. Bernard be considered anything but unethical? Their ain't no St. Bernard in it! 



> but to assume they're all that way is just ignorance.


Actually it's not ignorance at all. Unfortunately this is the only way a consumer can protect themselves from unscrupulous breeders and their propaganda. Asking the tough questions is the only intelligent way to qualify a breeder. There should be more of this, and anyone calling it ignorance really isn't aware of the problem in dogdom. 



> it reflects badly on those who are making assumptions and judgments that have little basis in fact.


I can only assume you made this statement from a position of bias...since you're doing exactly what you claim the other side is doing. Otherwise, you too would realize that good breeders are far and few between, and the truths among breeders is even more fleeting. 



> Widening the genetic pool to eliminate some of the damage done by inbreeding and line breeding are 2 of the biggies.


Actually, inbreeding and line breeding are not the problem. Every dog, irregardless of source has at least 4 bad genes. So mixed breedings do not solve the problem any better than thoughtful breeding would in the first place. However, as I stated earlier, good breeders are far and few between, so any attempt to "widen" gene pools won't be realized in a selective breeding system. Breeders simply aren't organized in a way to realize genetic theories in a non-laboratory setting. The genetic theories may be there, but these theories came from a laboratory. Your average breeder simply can't reproduce a laboratory results in their home. It's simply not practical. 



> Anyone who has truly studied genetics (which every breeder of EVERY type of animal should do before even starting) can vouch for the fact that more damage has been done by careless purebred breeders than anyone wants to admit.


And mixed breeders are exempt from the carelessness of breeding? I think not. 



> Most hybrid breeders don't want to create a new breed or produce puppies which are all identical - only puppies which are all healthy, intelligent, full of personality and with attributes which make them good family pets. If the parents are also well treated, tested and loved, I find it hard to fault the program.


If these breeders really wanted to help dogdom, they would recognize there is already a surplus of mix bred dogs in our shelter system that are healthy, full of "personality", "intelligence" and favorable "attributes". And many have served as wonderful family pets. You won't win this argument. And I find it hard to fault the dog for being in the shelter in the first place. Why would we need more of the same? I know, I know, are "sames" are different - or so you think. 



> I think it's just sad that so many refuse to take the time to know what they're talking about before they start preaching.


And I find the disconnect among hybrid advocates disturbing. They preach a new vision that lacks substance and doesn't really address the real problem in dogdom...lack of structure among breeders. If we really want a healthy companionable dog the pressure should be on all breeders to get their crap together, not on a whim or by what flavor we want this week.


----------



## Tink

Curbside prophet, that response would be really well written if you knew what you were talking about. Sadly, you don't. 

It's the same propaganda I see preached by dog purists all over the net. I'm not trying to say all hybrid breeders are ethical; but neither are all "purebred" ones. But to insinuate that everyone is bad just makes me wonder what crappy things must have been done to you to make you so bitter and biased.

Many shelters aren't any more ethical than the puppy mills they claim to shut down... that's not to say there aren't good ones, but to say they're all good makes no more sense than to say all breeders are bad. Generalizations don't work any better than racial profiling does, and we see on the news how well that works.

My interest isn't to argue with you or anyone else. I will however share the other side of the story for those open minded enough to at least consider it in the hope that we can eventually put an end to the senseless fighting.


----------



## B-Line

Jeez Quincy,

A guy goes away for the weekend to see two of his friends joined in the sanctity of marriage and you make it seem as though I have pee'd in your Cheerios.

1) I was using your dog in the post because, to be quite honest, it was the cutest picture of a Labradoodle I have ever seen. I meant it as a compliment, not an insult.

2) Since the picture of your dog:









Reminded me a lot of this picture of my dog:









So I thought, the two, cute pictures, of our dogs, would be a nice catalyst for a conversation starter. 

If though, my use, of your dogs picture, has in any way, made you to feel as though I have, pee'd in your cheerios, I will gladly edit it out and use some other Labradoodle picture, which doesn't quite show how beautiful and refined, the dog can be: (a very cute dog, but not quite to "standard")









But I was really trying to be "fair", "objective" in this thread... But from now on, I'll be sure to use, "less than perfect" examples of Labradoodles to illustrate my point.. Thanks for chiming in..

B


----------



## Curbside Prophet

Tink said:


> Curbside prophet, that response would be really well written if you knew what you were talking about. Sadly, you don't.


I must have struck a chord since you seem to only want to make this personal and don't care to state what I said wrong. *shrugs* 



> It's the same propaganda I see preached by dog purists all over the net. I'm not trying to say all hybrid breeders are ethical; but neither are all "purebred" ones. But to insinuate that everyone is bad just makes me wonder what crappy things must have been done to you to make you so bitter and biased.


I don't know why I'm bitter...perhaps because I spend my time volunteering at the largest animal shelter west of the rockies. And if you read my post without bias you would have read the part where I stated all breeders (that would include purists) are irresponsible until "proven" otherwise. I think you're reading only what you want to read and by definition that is close mindedness. 

The consumer has to make this judgments based on the facts that are real to them. Not by what a few advocates claim to be the truth - your "story" is nothing more than an anecdote. Chances are they'll never find the truth because there ARE more bad breeders than good ones. If this were not true, we would not have a surplus problem. All dogs would be accounted for from the minute sperm met egg till death. Or did you not see my pointing fingers at how breeders are organized? I actually do think there is a place to remove breeds and add new ones, but that won't happen today or tomorrow - not until the system is changed. So I don't see the point in (pardon the pun) mixing it up even more. 



> Many shelters aren't any more ethical than the puppy mills they claim to shut down... that's not to say there aren't good ones, but to say they're all good makes no more sense than to say all breeders are bad. Generalizations don't work any better than racial profiling does, and we see on the news how well that works.


I don't recall speaking on shelter organizations or racial profiling. So what do these have to do with ethical breeding? Or do you have some unfinished preaching to do yourself? There wouldn't be a need for shelters if breeders were responsible for what they produce. But very few are, and that's no different in the "hybrid" world. 



> My interest isn't to argue with you or anyone else. I will however share the other side of the story for those open minded enough to at least consider it in the hope that we can eventually put an end to the senseless fighting.


I'm sorry, I thought you were singling out the critics in your last post. I didn't realize your criticism was part of your "story". Nor do I see how your criticism ends the "senseless fighting", unless you too lost a moment of sense. *shrugs*


----------



## borzoimom

Tink said:


> There are some sound reasons for hybridizing. Widening the genetic pool to eliminate some of the damage done by inbreeding and line breeding are 2 of the biggies. .....


 This statement cracks me up.. I could almost see the logic if we were talking mixed of two very rare breeds- but the ones being used as " hybrids" as you call it, are some of the most popular breeds of all of them. Needing to mix into gene pools??? With the breeds that has the most dogs available??? Surely you jest.. As a matter of fact, the over breeding of the popular breeds is what brought on the most problems- the people that have no clue about genetics or not willing to invest into " sound breeding stock" so to speak. 
I have 3 borzois in this house now- and if you look at the pedigree, althought totally different " lines" they have at least one dog in common on their pedigrees. Thank GOD the people that bred the dogs knew what the heck they were doing. Now THAT is a small gene pool- but comparing a breed like a Borzoi with barely over 600 registered per year with say Labs etc that average 5 figures or in the case of labs over 100,000, the arguement of " small gene pool" hardly holds water...
Given a choice- I would rather deal with a breed, although a smaller gene pool but those that know what the heck they are doing than a over bred breed any day.. Like the PWD- small in numbers but people that know what they are doing and guarded to protect the old breed to continue.


----------



## KaseyT

The overall impact of professional home breeders on the welfare of dogs is almost non-existed compared to the impact of cheap, free, and homeless puppies. Makes no difference if the motivation of the breeder is purely egalitarian or purely profit motivated. 

If breeders and owners wanted to help dogs they would support a federal, nationwide, spay-neuter law that would require breeders to pay a large fee to breed and force all other dogs to be neutered by 6 months.

Not only would such a law the dramatically reduce the number of of unadoptable dogs in shelters, it would make puppy mills and other large scale breeding operations unprofitable.


----------



## borzoimom

I agree KaseyT..


----------



## B-Line

I can't speak for other breeds or other breeders,
But I know I had to sign a very strict, no breeding contract.

I don't know how realistically enforceable the contract is, but I do know, I could not get AKC papers for Maggie until she was fixed.

I would assume that most good breeders would only allow you to breed and get AKC papers, if they were sure, you were doing your best, to generate great liters. And that BYB, puppy mill, etc. would not be allowed.

Again though, I'm sure there are all types of breeders and contracts.

And not to say that AKC papers are important. But it is a way for breeders to control what happens to their stock. Yes, I'm sure you can always buy a "grey market" non papered dog, but it's the hope that such methods, might prevent people from breeding without meeting certain standards.


----------



## Quincy

B-Line said:


> Jeez Quincy,
> 
> A guy goes away for the weekend to see two of his friends joined in the sanctity of marriage and you make it seem as though I have pee'd in your Cheerios.
> 
> 1) I was using your dog in the post because, to be quite honest, it was the cutest picture of a Labradoodle I have ever seen. I meant it as a compliment, not an insult.


No worries and thanks, your dog looks great 

Maybe now we can go on with what you wanted where you mentioned some sort of compare and contrast.

Firstly you referring to my dog as a Labradoodle. My dog is NOT a "Labradoodle" but an "Australian Labradoodle". Words used in names can mean completely different dogs, say like a "Cocker Spaniel" is NOT an "English Cocker Spaniel" and they are 2 different breeds, the added word English differentiates these dogs.

AKC - Cocker Spaniel
http://www.akc.org/breeds/cocker_spaniel/

AKC - English Cocker Spaniel
http://www.akc.org/breeds/english_cocker_spaniel/
.


----------



## afcgirl

B-Line,

Thanks for starting this thread, I enjoyed reading about the differences in the two dogs. I am very allergic to dogs and have been considering a PWD or an Australian Labradoodle for my next dog. I have a bichon poo puppy that I just adore.

Unfortunately, no matter how politely you asked, the doodle bashers just could not control themselves. I am amazed at the self-righteous arrogance displayed by some people on these boards (surprisingly, the women on the Purse Forum are less catty and more respectful to each other than some of the dog lovers on here).


----------



## FilleBelle

I'm with KaseyT!


----------



## Quincy

afcgirl said:


> B-Line,
> 
> Thanks for starting this thread, I enjoyed reading about the differences in the two dogs. I am very allergic to dogs and have been considering a PWD or an Australian Labradoodle for my next dog. I have a bichon poo puppy that I just adore.


You mentioned that you are very allergic to dogs, then you mentioned you have a bichon poo puppy, sounds like you are NOT allergic to that bichon poo puppy. I've worked many years in Hospitals and I've come across quite a few who are very allergic to dogs, and if they were walking down the street and saw a dog approaching them they would turn around and walk the other way rather briskly.

If indeed you are very allergic to dogs then I suggest that you seek the advice of your doctor and preferably allergy specialist, do not assume some sort of "breed thing". They may recommend several things in regards to allergies, and if you are considering any dog then they can allergy test you to saliva and dander samples from the dog that you might be interested in obtaining, and a breeder could send such samples in appropriate containers. Take care for people who are very allergy have been know to die from the things they are very allergic to. 
.


----------



## dog-man

Quincy said:


> Via this link is a video showing an Australian Labradoodle which some people refer to as a doodle. In the video you can see what the dog looks like including his temperament, maybe that dog might be related to my Quincy and I might later check to see if he is.
> http://www.news10.net/video/player_news10.aspx?aid=29957&bw=
> .


i once tried to read a book to Oinest, and he ran out the doggie door and left me.
actually, it was quite technical...maybe he needed something light.



Tink said:


> I simply don't understand why people are so up in arms about certain hybrid dog types. They bash everything from their name to their prices. What is it that people find so threatening about them? If we all liked the same thing there would be no diversity. How bland that would be!
> 
> I, like everyone else, have my favorite types of dogs; yet I don't waste time sitting around bashing the ones that don't appeal to me. No one is forced to buy a hybrid. If you don't like 'em, don't have one. Simple enough solution it seems.


didn't you know that goldendoodle breeders represent everything which is bad in the world of dogs?
and perhaps everything that is wrong with the world in general.

if you fight goldendoodle breeding, you are fighting evil at its very source.



Curbside Prophet said:


> I And if you read my post without bias you would have read the part where I stated all breeders (that would include purists) are irresponsible until "proven" otherwise. I think you're reading only what you want to read and by definition that is close mindedness.


CB, i have been on for a few months now, and i haven't seen you get passionate against breeders of well-bred purebreed dogs.
only when the subject comes to people claiming well-bred crosses.

do you actually take the SAME stand on all breeding?


----------



## Curbside Prophet

dog-man said:


> do you actually take the SAME stand on all breeding?


You must have joined after the AB1634 threads. The history of my responses to those threads I think is very telling. So yes, I have a very strict stand on breeding. "Buyer beware" is very much in effect with all breeders - it needs to be.


----------



## Quincy

Curbside Prophet said:


> You must have joined after the AB1634 threads. The history of my responses to those threads I think is very telling. So yes, I have a very strict stand on breeding. "Buyer beware" is very much in effect with all breeders - it needs to be.


I remember, and I too posted in the AB1634 threads, maybe later when the senate sits we might all post yet again in yet some more AB1634 threads  

To add as I just checked the Bill's Status and it's still an "Active Bill" and "Further hearing to be set", link to status:-
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_1601-1650/ab_1634_bill_20071204_status.html
.


----------



## afcgirl

Quincy said:


> You mentioned that you are very allergic to dogs, then you mentioned you have a bichon poo puppy, sounds like you are NOT allergic to that bichon poo puppy. I've worked many years in Hospitals and I've come across quite a few who are very allergic to dogs, and if they were walking down the street and saw a dog approaching them they would turn around and walk the other way rather briskly.
> 
> If indeed you are very allergic to dogs then I suggest that you seek the advice of your doctor and preferably allergy specialist, do not assume some sort of "breed thing". They may recommend several things in regards to allergies, and if you are considering any dog then they can allergy test you to saliva and dander samples from the dog that you might be interested in obtaining, and a breeder could send such samples in appropriate containers. Take care for people who are very allergy have been know to die from the things they are very allergic to.
> .



Thank you for your concern. I should clarify that when I say I am very allergic to dogs I mean that my eyes tear up and I sneeze. I never get asthmatic from them (although I do from cats). I never believed that I would ever be able to get a dog, but it is really unbelievable I have no reaction at all to my bichon poo, I can touch his fur and then my eyes and nothing. It is wonderful. I know if I get another dog I will still have to test it out carefully before purchasing even if it is supposedly hypoallergenic.


----------



## rosemaryninja

dog-man said:


> i once tried to read a book to Oinest, and he ran out the doggie door and left me.
> actually, it was quite technical...maybe he needed something light.


*cough* Tolkien? *cough*


----------



## Quincy

afcgirl said:


> Thank you for your concern. I should clarify that when I say I am very allergic to dogs I mean that my eyes tear up and I sneeze. I never get asthmatic from them (although I do from cats). I never believed that I would ever be able to get a dog, but it is really unbelievable I have no reaction at all to my bichon poo, I can touch his fur and then my eyes and nothing. It is wonderful. I know if I get another dog I will still have to test it out carefully before purchasing even if it is supposedly hypoallergenic.


Maybe you might be only mildly allergic to dogs. Just a thought, as some dogs may have lower levels of the proteins that you are allergic too this maybe below the levels required to produce an allergic response in you. Even those with mild allergies to dogs still need to take at least some care, and who knows just maybe the next bichon poo you come across just might cause you to have an allergy response.
.


----------



## KaseyT

Curbside Prophet said:


> You must have joined after the AB1634 threads. The history of my responses to those threads I think is very telling. So yes, I have a very strict stand on breeding. "Buyer beware" is very much in effect with all breeders - it needs to be.


There is no single group of home breeders more responsible for canine suffering then pit bull breeders. 

The search feature kinds of sucks so I may be mistaken, but quick search or your posts did not turn up any criticism of this group of the kind you regularly heap on mixed breed breeders.

I guess this is understandable considering the DF regulars bias for pits and against "designer dogs".


----------



## Pai

KaseyT said:


> There is no single group of home breeders more responsible for canine suffering then pit bull breeders.
> 
> The search feature kinds of sucks so I may be mistaken, but quick search or your posts did not turn up any criticism of this group of the kind you regularly heap on mixed breed breeders.
> 
> I guess this is understandable considering the DF regulars bias for pits and against "designer dogs".


Do you have proof that all pit bull breeders are irresponsible? You may want to clarify before you make a statement that is smearing all pit bull breeders as being responsible for the suffering of dogs. Abusive and irresponsible DOG OWNERS cause more canine suffering than anyone else, PERIOD. It's not _responsible_ breeders and owners dumping dogs in kill-shelters and neglecting and abusing them.

People on this board are biased against _bad breeders._ The very concept of 'designer dogs', being rooted in a fad and cute brand-naming of mutts in order to sell them as 'special hybrids' is, at it's core, a shady unethical concept. People then make the leap (rightly or wrongly) to say that_ all _people who participate in promoting hybrids, are guilty in some form of enabling the_ bad breeders_. The fact that the reason _99% of hybrids were originally created just to cash in on a fad_ is what upsets people. They feel folks who encourage and add to that are not doing the right thing by their dogs.

I still say that we're all arguing at cross-purposes here and missing the real issue we _all _ are really mad about, which is _unethical breeding practices._ That has nothing to do with hybrids or purebreds per se, but it affects _all _dogs equally. 

Arguing over whether or not hybrids should exist or be bred is not constructive, and there is no way to 'put the cat back into the bag' so to speak... you can 'undo' designer dogs. Therefore, we should focus on what CAN be fixed about the whole 'designer dog problem' and the larger 'dog breeder problem' itself -- which is _unethical breeding practices._ Laws need to be changed and enforced... buyers need to be educated, and communities need to step up and stop ignoring the problem. 

For too many years, people have been buying puppies blindly, not caring or knowing where they come from, or understanding why knowing that should be important in the first place... and THAT is what is allowing bad breeders to keep going... because if it wasn't doodles, they'd be breeding the same ol' purebreds that have been suffering in Mills for decades... the doodles themselves are NOT the core problem here. 

Bashing one or the other side in the designer dog debate here is just pointless infighting that is not going to make any positive difference in anything.It's just dividing two camps of dog lovers who should be working _together._


----------



## Curbside Prophet

KaseyT said:


> There is no single group of home breeders more responsible for canine suffering then pit bull breeders.
> 
> The search feature kinds of sucks so I may be mistaken, but quick search or your posts did not turn up any criticism of this group of the kind you regularly heap on mixed breed breeders.
> 
> I guess this is understandable considering the DF regulars bias for pits and against "designer dogs".


Is this what this is? Pits v. "doodles"? I'm unable to reason why a "doodle" advocate (if that's what you are) would want to include "doodles" in the same argument with Pits. 

I'm also unable to reason how one suffering is better than another. Perhaps you could explain that?

I also don't recall one incident where a pit breeder or advocate claimed their dogs were the best thing since sliced bred and the answer to all problems in dogdom...certainly not like how "doodle" propaganda is spread. In fact, the Pit advocates on our forum have always been quick to point out that these dogs are not for everyone, nor the answer to the problems of dogdom. So I'm not sure how I can argue with these people other than to applaud their stance. 

But rest assured if a Pit breeder or advocate makes a claim they they are void of all the problems in dogdom and "fresh," I'll have an argument to that. It's not my fault Pit advocates choose a better approach at the problem. So search away or consider the approach "doodle" fans use.


----------



## dog-man

Pai said:


> The fact that the reason _99% of hybrids were originally created just to cash in on a fad_ is what upsets people.


most of what you say in your post, i agree with.

but it is FACTS like this, "99% of hybrids", which get pulled out from some smelly spot of the human body, which i find difficult to chew on.



Curbside Prophet said:


> I also don't recall one incident where a pit breeder or advocate claimed their dogs were the best thing since sliced bred and the answer to all problems in dogdom...certainly not like how "doodle" propaganda is spread. .


i'm not sure where doodle people claim that doodles are the answer for everyone.

for people who love them, they are even better than sliced bread...personally, i think sliced bread is overrated.

the problems of genetics in purebred dogs is not to be solved by mere cross-breeding.
what i find objectionable is when people say the crosses are bad for genetics, when the opposite is probably true.

don't exaggerate our claims, and you won't have to fight our position so hard.


----------



## Curbside Prophet

dog-man said:


> what i find objectionable is when people say the crosses are bad for genetics, when the opposite is probably true.


I've explained this numerous times but why it's overlooked is beyond me. The mucks who breed purebreds are the same mucks who breed "doodles". The genetics mean nothing if you're working in a non-sterile environment. As evidence by the genetic problems that do turn up in your "doodles". 



> don't exaggerate our claims, and you won't have to fight our position so hard.


Don't assume my fight is with "doodles" and perhaps you'll get my position.


----------



## Pai

dog-man said:


> most of what you say in your post, i agree with.
> 
> but it is FACTS like this, "99% of hybrids", which get pulled out from some smelly spot of the human body, which i find difficult to chew on.


Do you really think that the recent explosion of 'designer dogs' is anything BUT a product of the fad started by Labradoodles and Goldendoodles? All these Puggles and Shi-Poos and Chi-Chis and whatever the heck else breeds that are being marketed under the 'designer dog' label (the fact that they're being sold under that title at all speaks volumes, in my opinion) are not being created by people who care about genetic diversity and health in dogs... they're being made to grab a buck because the average joe thinks these 'hybrids' are something cool and hip. 

Out of the thousands of 'hybrid' breeds out there now, I seriously doubt any LESS than 99% are being made simply for novelty sake, and nothing more. There is no proof towards even HALF of them being created for any intelligent, purposeful reason. ALL their breeders spout 'hybrid vigor' because its a SELLING POINT, not because they give two hoots about the actual health of their dogs. It's just as stupid as purebred puppylmillers who go on about 'registered' and 'papers' as if that makes their dogs somehow 'quality'. It's all just commercial shill. Truly reputable breeders would actually put their money where their mouth is, but most out there DO NOT, and it doesn't matter _what _they're breeding.


----------



## JDub

Give me a few months, and I'll really be able to give you a comparison between a PWD and a Golden. My family and I are getting a PWD over Memorial Day weekend...to replace a Golden that we lost last August. This is in large part thanks to B-Line who was a wealth of information on PWD's (we were torn between the portie and a doodle).

Cant wait to have my Portie puppy!


----------



## dog-man

Pai said:


> Out of the thousands of 'hybrid' breeds out there now, I seriously doubt any LESS than 99% are being made simply for novelty sake, and nothing more. .


here you go again.
where do you get this idea of thousands (or even hundreds) of hybrid breeds?

you can probably find many new names...and probably some litters have been experimented with for most of them...but there are relatively few that you can currently find any breeders for.

the truth is, that the ones which have significant numbers of consumers, are the ones that might have something positive to them.

and not all of us are motivated by fad.

people bought microwaves and cellphones, not because of a fad, but because it was a great idea.
same with new dog "breeds".
be open-minded to the POSSIBILITY that some might be a good idea, when a good breeders and educated consumers are involved.


----------



## ACampbell

Curbside Prophet said:


> Is this what this is? Pits v. "doodles"? I'm unable to reason why a "doodle" advocate (if that's what you are) would want to include "doodles" in the same argument with Pits.
> 
> I'm also unable to reason how one suffering is better than another. Perhaps you could explain that?
> 
> I also don't recall one incident where a pit breeder or advocate claimed their dogs were the best thing since sliced bred and the answer to all problems in dogdom...certainly not like how "doodle" propaganda is spread. In fact, the Pit advocates on our forum have always been quick to point out that these dogs are not for everyone, nor the answer to the problems of dogdom. So I'm not sure how I can argue with these people other than to applaud their stance.
> 
> But rest assured if a Pit breeder or advocate makes a claim they they are void of all the problems in dogdom and "fresh," I'll have an argument to that. It's not my fault Pit advocates choose a better approach at the problem. So search away or consider the approach "doodle" fans use.


Yes, pit's are the end-all-be-all of dogs and everyone should own one...no, not really, this was a feeble attempt at making light of how a Doodle post turns into Pitbull breeder bashing as mentioned in previous posts.
You know what has done the most damage to all dog breeds? Stupid, irresponsible and generally bad breeding/socialization/owners.

Personally, I don't agree with making hybrids to fit into a fad...just as I don't agree with the fad of people with the toy chihuahua's etc being carried around in purses or in dog strollers. Just because a celebrity does it or endorses it, does not make it right...gawd what a bunch of sheep. 
That being said, if you want to go out and buy any dog because it's a fad or it shows you have money and can afford such an animal...you're in it for the wrong reason. People that buy from breeders that are breeding for color or because it's whats "hot" today...are just as bad as the people breeding dogs for them.
These people producing doodles and poos and whatever else aren't doing it in the best interest of the breed or to make a new breed...they are doing it for money, plain and simple.



dog-man said:


> and not all of us are motivated by fad.
> 
> people bought microwaves and cellphones, not because of a fad, but because it was a great idea.
> same with new dog "breeds".
> be open-minded to the POSSIBILITY that some might be a good idea, when a good breeders and educated consumers are involved.


I didn't buy a microwave or cell phone because "it was a great idea" - people buy these items because they help their daily lives...by being able to call someone from the road if your car is broken down, being able to reach someone no matter where they are at...etc. Or by making defrosting food or cooking food faster and easier for an increasingly hectic world. 
If you could turn back time to one that wasn't as fast paced and people would stop and help each other or you have time to cook a full meal after work then these things wouldn't be a necessity.

No pet is a "necessity" unless it's being used for a service animal for someone who otherwise could not get around.


----------



## KaseyT

Pai said:


> Do you have proof that all pit bull breeders are irresponsible? You may want to clarify before you make a statement that is smearing all pit bull breeders as being responsible for the suffering of dogs. Abusive and irresponsible DOG OWNERS cause more canine suffering than anyone else, PERIOD. It's not _responsible_ breeders and owners dumping dogs in kill-shelters and neglecting and abusing them.


I believe I said, "There is no single group of home breeders more responsible for canine suffering then pit bull breeders."

That does not mean all pit breeders are irresponsible, it means that irresponsible breeders out number responsible breeders by about 1000 to 1.

The problem with pits isn't just back yard breeders, it's back alley breeders. Do you know haw many pits are STILL being bred as pit fighters and street fighters. Do you know how many pits are being sold at 5 weeks old to baggy panted hip hoppers and thugs on the street. 

There are 9,000 pits on petfinder available for adoption and probably the same number euthanized every month. 

Where did these pits come from? Not a pet store.


----------



## dog-man

ACampbell said:


> I didn't buy a microwave or cell phone because "it was a great idea" - people buy these items because they help their daily lives...by being able to call someone from the road if your car is broken down, being able to reach someone no matter where they are at...etc. Or by making defrosting food or cooking food faster and easier for an increasingly hectic world.
> If you could turn back time to one that wasn't as fast paced and people would stop and help each other or you have time to cook a full meal after work then these things wouldn't be a necessity.
> 
> No pet is a "necessity" unless it's being used for a service animal for someone who otherwise could not get around.



your response is actually irrelevant to my point...it's just not worth bothering to argue.


----------



## ACampbell

Hmmm, I see a lot of complaining about the "pit problem" but no real solutions here. 
Besides, since when does the whole doodle/hybrid/designer dog thing have anything to do with pits? Also, if you can convince gangbangers to start buying up Doodle or designer dog puppies...by all means, do so, it would save some of us who actually care a lot of headaches.



dog-man said:


> your response is actually irrelevant to my point...it's just not worth bothering to argue.


My point is that you are trying to justify something by making it seem to be a necessity, which is not the case. If you intend on making an analogy, use one that is related to the topic you are trying to prove, otherwise you lose your audience with the irrelevance.


----------



## Laurelin

rosemaryninja said:


> *cough* Tolkien? *cough*


*tries to figure out a way to turn yet another doodle thread into another LOTR thread*

Dog-man, I had to re-watch all the movies, and I blame you.

And Oinest.


----------



## dog-man

Laurelin said:


> *tries to figure out a way to turn yet another doodle thread into another LOTR thread*
> 
> Dog-man, I had to re-watch all the movies, and I blame you.
> 
> And Oinest.


did you notice there is a Tolkien thread on Off-Topic.

i started it here, but it was moved.


----------



## Laurelin

Curbside Prophet said:


> You must have joined after the AB1634 threads. The history of my responses to those threads I think is very telling. So yes, I have a very strict stand on breeding. "Buyer beware" is very much in effect with all breeders - it needs to be.


No! Don't bring it back up!


----------



## dog-man

ACampbell said:


> My point is that you are trying to justify something by making it seem to be a necessity, which is not the case. If you intend on making an analogy, use one that is related to the topic you are trying to prove, otherwise you lose your audience with the irrelevance.


i never called goldendoodles a NECESSITY...i called it a good idea.

and i remember the days when cell-phones and microwaves were very popular, but not yet a necessity.
(btw, even though my wife and kids have cell-phones, i dont...even though i am a salesman...i don't want to be found, and messages can wait.)

i don't see why you had to freak out about the analogy.

and IF i decide to get a dog, i do consider it a GOOD IDEA, and close to a necessity, to:
1) have a low shed dog
2) have a dog that is friendly and gentle
3) have a dog that is smart and obedient
4) have a dog that is athletic and strong


----------



## Laurelin

dog-man said:


> did you notice there is a Tolkien thread on Off-Topic.
> 
> i started it here, but it was moved.


Lol, no... I'm going to have to go meander over there then.


----------



## DobManiac

Laurelin said:


> *tries to figure out a way to turn yet another doodle thread into another LOTR thread*
> 
> Dog-man, I had to re-watch all the movies, and I blame you.
> 
> And Oinest.


Awww... poor Laurelin trying so hard to keep the peace.

I think the only way to solve this is a doodle thread rehab. 

But who will fund it?


----------



## ACampbell

dog-man said:


> i don't see why you had to freak out about the analogy.



Pfft, that is definetely not "freaking out"...don't be so thin-skinned.


----------



## Pai

KaseyT said:


> I believe I said, "There is no single group of home breeders more responsible for canine suffering then pit bull breeders."
> 
> That does not mean all pit breeders are irresponsible, it means that irresponsible breeders out number responsible breeders by about 1000 to 1.
> 
> There are 9,000 pits on petfinder available for adoption and probably the same number euthanized every month.
> 
> Where did these pits come from? Not a pet store.


Majority of puppies _anywhere_ are being sold by crap breeders. As long as the general public is too ignorant to tell the difference, it will continue. It doesn't matter WHAT breed we're talking about. It's the _ignorant masses that drive the market_. The only cure for that is PUBLIC EDUCATION and higher standards on breeders, enforced by law. We'll get neither of those things bickering amongst ourselves about whether doodles should be allowed to exist or not, because _that's_ a pointless debate.

And dog-man, you can claim that all these hybrids besides the two you like aren't enough to make a real difference, but you have as much proof to back up your belief of that as you say I have -- which is none. Actually, if you Google most of those hybrid names -- you'll get _plenty_ of breeder hits, even for weird ones like the 'Ori-Pei'.

In any case, the fact that people even think it's _okay_ to create them randomly as 'experiments to see if they'll be popular'_ at all_ is something I have an issue with just by itself. And the official 'Hybrid Dog Club' of America happily adds every 'random experiment' to that stupid registry on their site, so it shows how much_ they_ give a care about the welfare of any of those breeds or dogs, and shows what type of people are claiming to represent designer dogs and doodles to the world -- people that most of us who care about dogs would consider unethical, irresponsible people. If there are so few of these random hybrids, why are 'hybrid registries' bothering to accept them? Either because they hasve NO STANDARDS (notice there isn't any 'breed standard' or anything required for them to get recognized, only a cute name given to them by the breeder), or else because they _aren't_ that rare as you would like to believe. Either way, it's shady business. It's _not_ out of line for people to assume the worst about them and breeders associated with hybrids, based on those facts. 

You get judged by the company you keep, unless you make a _concentrated effort _to distance yourself from the crooks. Doodle breeders that want to aim for a higher standard of ethics and respectability are going to have to work HARD to get out of the stigma surrounding hybrids if they ever want to be seen as legitimate, because they sure as heck aren't being represented by the 'Official Voice' of hybrid dog breeders. That is just hard truth. I don't deny that there are people out there that honestly care about Doodles and their future. Their voices are _not_ the ones being heard the loudest, however. Does that suck for them? Yes, it does. But it's something they are going to have to fight against for a long time to overcome.

When you already have purebred dog lovers who've pushed for higher standards of breeders, and who have to fight against ignorance and perpetuation of puppy mills and BYBs every day as is, you can't blame us for coming down even harder on a sect of breeder that appears overwhelmingly to represent basically every bad practice we can imagine when it comes to dog breeding and puppy marketing. It has nothing to do with us being 'snobs' or 'bigots' against mutts -- we just hate seeing the years of education we've fought to get into the mainstream getting undermined by the whole 'designer dog' craze that seems to be legitimizing the very same irresponsible attitudes towards breeding that we've been fighting against for years. _That_ is the place where many of us are coming from in this argument.


----------



## Quincy

Pai said:


> Doodle breeders that want to aim for a higher standard of ethics and respectability are going to have to work HARD to get out of that stigma, if they ever want to be seen as legitimate. That is just hard truth.


A part of what Pai might mean I feel might include health issues. Here is something interesting via this link, and could easily be verified by contacting OFA and OptiGen:-
http://www.ilainc.com/PressRelease102607.pdf
.


----------



## poodleholic

Quincy said:


> Maybe you might be only mildly allergic to dogs. Just a thought, as some dogs may have lower levels of the proteins that you are allergic too this maybe below the levels required to produce an allergic response in you. Even those with mild allergies to dogs still need to take at least some care, and who knows just maybe the next bichon poo you come across just might cause you to have an allergy response.
> .


Bichons and Poodles are both hypoallergenic to a degree that many people who are allergic to dogs are asymptomatic with these breeds, so, it's likely that the next Bichon Poodle mix she comes across won't be a problem, either.


----------



## Pai

poodleholic said:


> Bichons and Poodles are both hypoallergenic to a degree that many people who are allergic to dogs are asymptomatic with these breeds, so, it's likely that the next Bichon Poodle mix she comes across won't be a problem, either.


I believe Bolognese are also one of those allergy-friendly dogs, as well. =)



Quincy said:


> A part of what Pai might mean I feel might include health issues. Here is something interesting via this link, and could easily be verified by contacting OFA and OptiGen:-
> http://www.ilainc.com/PressRelease102607.pdf
> .


See, that's an awesome development. I wish them all the best.


----------



## Xeph

I'm sorry, I can't stand it anymore..it's bothering me so much. Seriously.

....Irregardless is not a word.

Carry on xD


----------



## Quincy

poodleholic said:


> Bichons and Poodles are both hypoallergenic to a degree that many people who are allergic to dogs are asymptomatic with these breeds, so, it's likely that the next Bichon Poodle mix she comes across won't be a problem, either.


Yes, but keep in mind I have a tendency to look at allergies in regards to an individual person's immune system responses and such affecting proteins such as what I mentioned of which are found in DOGS including Poodles and Bichons, and this much preferably medically wise than to some sort of relation to group things in breeds or some cross of breeds. I feel that if one is allergic to dogs then they should allergy test themselves to the particular dog that they are interested in, rather than to assume some sort of breed or crossbreed thing.
.



Pai said:


> I believe Bolognese are also one of those allergy-friendly dogs, as well. =)


Within DOGS saliva plus their dander, urine and even poo is the dog's proteins that people could allergy react to. The 2 main proteins that affect people the most are called "Canine f 1 and f 2" (Can f 1 and Can f 2), but keep in mind there are others but the most focus tends to be on these two. May I suggest you and others do a search on these as it may help in learning and understanding about these proteins found in DOGS, but keep in mind it's a allergy specialist field and not all is on the internet.

Pai just to add, yes it looks like an awesome development. By the way, my Quincy's health test results are in Australia and officially well recorded, and I have certificates. 
.


----------



## Pai

KaseyT said:


> Did you just blow off all the horrors of irresponsible and often criminal pit bull breeding with a single sentence about education, and then go on a 4 paragraph tirade about doodles?


No, actually. If you really think I'm 'blowing off' irresponsible and criminal breeders, you obviously _missed my entire point._


----------



## Quincy

Some history - About 20 years ago Guide Dogs Victoria Australia certainly did allergy test individual dogs to people who were allergic to dogs, an example:-
There was a vision impaired lady in Hawaii that needed a Guide Dog, and it was her husband's allergy that was aggravated by dogs and they simply couldn't have a dog. Guide Dogs Victoria first thought was to try Poodles, so they sent coat which had dander in the coat and saliva samples from 33 different Poodles to Hawaii and all those samples were tested on the husband, unfortunately he was allergic to all the Poodle samples so they really couldn't have a Poodle.

The vision impaired wife still needed a Guide Dog and why Guide Dogs persisted in looking for a solution, and it was 2 years later that Wally Conran came up with the idea of trying a Labrador Poodle Cross. One such litter of 3 puppies was born and their coat, dander and saliva samples were sent to Hawaii, ONE of the 3 puppies was successful in NOT allergy aggravating her husband, that particular pups name was Sultan who was then brought up and trained as a Guide Dog for that lady. The other 2 puppies that were UNsuccessful and DID allergy aggravate her husband still went on to lead very useful lives but with other people who were not allergic to dogs, one as a Remedial Dog and the other as a Guide Dog.

The news went out nationally and internationally, and heaps of people who were allergic to dogs flooded calls to Guide Dogs Victoria wanting a dog such as Sultan. News of this also hit the millers and backyard breeders where they wanted to make $$$ and so the craze started and has been going since. But keep in mind that only a very small minority was interested in developing such dogs as Sultan and by breeding other Sultans to Sultans for generations, and by using those allergic to dogs as a guide in determining breeding stock.

It's been now quite a few generation in developing the "Australian Labradoodle", and here too I suggest not to assume in regards to allergies but test yourself to the particular dog that you are interested in. Yes even just like Guide Dogs Victoria Australia did many years ago.
.


----------



## poodleholic

> One such litter of 3 puppies was born and their coat, dander and saliva samples were sent to Hawaii, ONE of the 3 puppies was successful in NOT allergy aggravating her husband, that particular pups name was Sultan who was then brought up and trained as a Guide Dog for that lady.


That's all well and good, however, they got extremely lucky that the dog didn't wash out as a Guide Dog, as many excellent prospects bred and raised for the job do. Testing litters of puppies and then selecting one based on that puppy not causing allergy symptoms is a real crap shoot!


----------



## Quincy

poodleholic said:


> That's all well and good, however, they got extremely lucky that the dog didn't wash out as a Guide Dog, as many excellent prospects bred and raised for the job do. Testing litters of puppies and then selecting one based on that puppy not causing allergy symptoms is a real crap shoot!


Maybe you'd like to inform that Guide Dog Centre of what you just posted, and I'd really love to read their reply 
.


----------



## poodleholic

Quincy said:


> Maybe you'd like to inform that Guide Dog Centre of what you just posted, and I'd really love to read their reply
> .



I'm simply stating the facts; make of it what you will, it still stands true as I stated. Programs who breed, raise, and train Guide Dogs and/or other Service Dogs, have dogs who have gone all the way to placement, only to wash out for one reason or another. That's all I was stating. I'm sure that the above mentioned Guide Dog Centre would agree with me.


----------



## dog-man

Pai said:


> Majority of puppies _anywhere_ are being sold by crap breeders. As long as the general public is too ignorant to tell the difference, it will continue. It doesn't matter WHAT breed we're talking about. It's the _ignorant masses that drive the market_. The only cure for that is PUBLIC EDUCATION and higher standards on breeders, enforced by law.


i agree with this...up until and including "public education"...but the only enforcement of law i want to see is the really bad breeders.
after that, it can get very subjective, and not very American.



Pai said:


> And dog-man, you can claim that all these hybrids besides the two you like aren't enough to make a real difference, but you have as much proof to back up your belief of that as you say I have -- which is none. Actually, if you Google most of those hybrid names -- you'll get _plenty_ of breeder hits, even for weird ones like the 'Ori-Pei'.


ok, show me all the breeders of the Ori-Pei that you found...how about just showing me four (or two).



Pai said:


> And the official 'Hybrid Dog Club' of America happily adds every 'random experiment' to that stupid registry on their site, so it shows how much_ they_ give a care about the welfare of any of those breeds or dogs, and shows what type of people are claiming to represent designer dogs and doodles to the world -- people that most of us who care about dogs would consider unethical, irresponsible people. If there are so few of these random hybrids, why are 'hybrid registries' bothering to accept them? Either because they hasve NO STANDARDS (notice there isn't any 'breed standard' or anything required for them to get recognized, only a cute name given to them by the breeder), or else because they _aren't_ that rare as you would like to believe. Either way, it's shady business. It's _not_ out of line for people to assume the worst about them and breeders associated with hybrids, based on those facts.


i have to conclude that you are either ignorant or intellectually dishonest.

the AKC, the main registry for purebred dogs, is also JUST A REGISTRY.
the worst puppy mills can be have their dogs registered if the parent dogs were registered.

the hybrid registry doesn't represent anyone.

and i like the registry.
if all doodle breeders did participate, we could then know the actual numbers of each type of doodle that was bred...and eventually possibly get other relevant statistics.


----------



## Laurelin

KaseyT said:


> Where did these pits come from? Not a pet store.


Whoa whoa whoa.... why? 

Around here you'll nearly always find pit bulls at the local 'puppy store'.

Sure most aren't coming from there, but pits are definitely being sold in pet stores!


----------



## Quincy

poodleholic said:


> I'm simply stating the facts; make of it what you will, it still stands true as I stated. Programs who breed, raise, and train Guide Dogs and/or other Service Dogs, have dogs who have gone all the way to placement, only to wash out for one reason or another. That's all I was stating. I'm sure that the above mentioned Guide Dog Centre would agree with me.


I didn't know when I'd be back, well as I'm now back I'll reply with the following and with a view others maybe interested.

Your right and it's a fact, not all dogs go on to become Guide Dogs or Service Dogs.

Guide Dogs Victoria Australia have their own Breeding Centre and they use their own dogs, at times they may source a dog from another Guide Dog Organisations around the world. Guide Dogs Victoria bred their dogs for the function of being Guide or Service Dogs, and they breed to their particular standard and they will cross breed their dogs where they feel it's needed. Mostly the use Labradors, and they even have a smaller sized line of Labradors this so as to suite smaller sized people.

Their pups go into the puppy raising program using their selected puppy raisers. These puppy raisers must follow guidelines and provide some training. When they dogs are about a year old they are taken back to Guide Dogs for very carefull assessment. Those that pass this assessment will go on to be Guide or Service Dogs, those that do NOT pass are placed out in pet homes where you'll find it's the puppy raisers who really do want them.

It costs about $25,000 for each Guide or Service Dog, so the assessments are very strict where Guide Dogs cannot afford to loose money on dogs that "wash out". Their dogs are given away for $0 (free) to those who really need them and have applied, the organisation is totally funded by public donations plus government donations.

Now in regards to allergies the above still similarly applies. But note they did test the 3 Labradoodle Puppies saliva and dander samples to the person in Hawaii, one passed 2 failed the allergy test to that person. From then on those 3 had a high success rate with raising assessment and training, after all this the person in Hawaii received their trained Labradoodle Guide Dog which they had for many years, the other 2 Labradoodles as mentioned became a Remedial Dog and a Guide Dog and who were given to people who needed them and who were not allergic to dogs.

As to what happened to the 33 Poodles whose saliva and dander samples were sent to Hawaii to that allergy person and who allergy reacted to all of these Poodle samples, well I really don't know what happened to those Poodles.

Who knows maybe right now Guide Dogs Victoria may have an application for a Guide Dog, and this from a person who is allergic to dog. After testing that person to saliva and dander samples from their dogs it just might turn out to be ONE Poodle that this person does NOT allergy react too, and where that Poodle may go on as above to become a Guide Dog.

The point is in regards to allergies, they allergy test individual dogs to an individual person, they do not assume some sort of "breed thing".
.


----------



## B-Line

Ok then Dogman,

Why make a Doodle when a Portuguese Water Dog already exists?

They have the same activity level. They are both medium sized. They are both intelligent, hypo-allergenic, great family pets, warm to strangers.

Every trait that you have tried to pick apart about the PWD, I can find documentation or experienced owners that will argue, the PWD has the same qualities. The minor nuance's are a load of B.S. - Especially because the variation in Doodle coats, temperment, size, etc. Is so vast, that you're playing the genetic lottery.

I would say, the biggest difference between the PWD and the Doodle is: With the PWD, you know, within a very practical reason, what you are going to get. Coat type, size, temperament, health issues, - STANDARDS..

But with Doodles, it's a crap shoot. You may get the best of both breeds or the worst of both breeds. AT BEST THOUGH, the IDEAL Doodle, is almost EXACTLY a standard PWD.

And Dog-Man, your stance, that the slight differences between activity level between a PWD and a Doodle holds no water. As you have read by many others who have posted in this thread, most PWD's they have met are more laid back then the Doodles they have met. They require no less mental or physical exercise and no more. An active dog is an active dog.

My best guess is, you love your dog. I love your dog too. I actually LOVE Doodle's. It's the people behind the Doodle's I don't love and the uncertainty of what a liter may bring.

Dog-Man, all you have to do is concede, you are supporting a group in order to be more comfortable with previous decision to get a Doodle and protect the image of the dog you love.

But there is no harm in saying, "You know what guys, you're right. I love my dog, my Doodle. But if I were doing it all over today, I would most probably adopt a PWD, from a responsible, recognized, breeder, who has a vested interest in the betterment of the breed. I did not know much about the PWD before, I also did not know about Doodle breeders auctioning their dogs and dumping their less than perfect Doodle's at the pound to be terminated. 
I appreciate all the information you have shared with me and even though I feel it's my duty as a dog parent, to defend my pup. Looking back, I probably made the wrong decision. And in the future, I will encourage people not to buy designer breeds."

Now, was that so hard?


----------



## JDub

B-Line said:


> Ok then Dogman,
> 
> Why make a Doodle when a Portuguese Water Dog already exists?


Easy... most people have heard of a Golden, most have heard of a Poodle, and most have heard of a Doodle. I'm guessing its a significantly smaller population that has ever heard of a Portuguese Water Dog.

This was the exact scenario we went through...and only learned about the PWD from doing a Dog Quiz to match a breed based on our needs/wants. We'd never heard of it, but read a bunch, talked to a brazillion people about them, etc.

We are now 10 days from getting our PWD!!


----------



## Pai

dog-man said:


> i have to conclude that you are either ignorant or intellectually dishonest.
> 
> the AKC, the main registry for purebred dogs, is also JUST A REGISTRY.
> the worst puppy mills can be have their dogs registered if the parent dogs were registered.
> 
> the hybrid registry doesn't represent anyone.
> 
> and i like the registry.
> if all doodle breeders did participate, we could then know the actual numbers of each type of doodle that was bred...and eventually possibly get other relevant statistics.


The AKC, however, DOES have standards for the breeds they recognize, requires them to be represented by organized breed clubs, sponsors shows and other community dog events, and requires breeders affiliated with them to adhere to a written ethical standard. They regularly disbarr bad breeders that are reported to them. That's already _way more_ than those hybrid registries are doing.

I have to conclude that you are blinded by your bias, and incapable of debating people you disagree with without resorting to insults. In any case, I'm bowing out of this discussion, since it's clear the people who are on the other side can't seem to keep from vilifying anyone who disagrees with them.


----------



## B-Line

JDub said:


> We are now 10 days from getting our PWD!!


Woohooo..... 

Jdub, I'm real glad I was able to convince you to go PWD. You and your family are going to be so happy.

(Wet Portie gettin a bath)


----------



## ACampbell

The black spot on the tongue...interesting. I wasn't aware there were other breeds other than Chow-chow's that had black on their tongues (and of course mixes) is this a typical breed thing with a PWD?


----------



## Curbside Prophet

My dog has a black spot on her tongue and so too my sister's Golden.


----------



## dog-man

B-line,

i'm not sure how to respond to your last post.

i never tried to tear apart PWD's.
i only gave you info from books i had read, when making my decision.

if a PWD is as good as a goldendoodle, then there might not be a need for them.

but how am i to determine that?

the books say they are more active and more suspicious.

the goldendoodles i know are incredible.

why would i regret a decision that worked out so well?

if a PWD is as good as you say, i would recommend them over goldendoodles, since they are consistently non-shed.

but again, i don't have experience with PWD to actually make that recommendation.s


----------



## ACampbell

Curbside Prophet said:


> My dog has a black spot on her tongue and so too my sister's Golden.


That's interesting to know, I haven't really seen it in dogs without Chow in them, thats why the question. And no, I'm not questioning that anyones dog is a mix, I'm curious as to where it crops up from.
I had to go and google it, seems this happens with a lot of breeds, including GSD's, Labs, etc...neat!


----------



## Curbside Prophet

ACampbell said:


> That's interesting to know, I haven't really seen it in dogs without Chow in them, thats why the question. And no, I'm not questioning that anyones dog is a mix, I'm curious as to where it crops up from.
> I had to go and google it, seems this happens with a lot of breeds, including GSD's, Labs, etc...neat!


My vet likened it to a beauty mark. But in the order of dog breeds the Chow is close to the top, so maybe it is a Chow gene thing.


----------



## Quincy

B-Line said:


> Ok then Dogman,
> 
> Why make a Doodle when a Portuguese Water Dog already exists?


You specificly asked Dogman. Do you want to ask me any questions or maybe for me to reply to what you just posted. You still are using my dogs photo in the first post in this thread and where you seem to want to do some sort of "compare and contrast" in what some may see in regards to MY DOG QUINCY. I'm going off-line shortly and I hope to catch your reply some time later.
.


----------



## B-Line

dog-man said:


> i never called goldendoodles a NECESSITY...i called it a good idea.
> 
> and IF i decide to get a dog, i do consider it a GOOD IDEA, and close to a necessity, to:
> 1) have a low shed dog
> 2) have a dog that is friendly and gentle
> 3) have a dog that is smart and obedient
> 4) have a dog that is athletic and strong


I wasn't responding hostly Dog Man. I am suggesting, based on your quote above, that the four things you are looking for, already exist.

My point is, not that Doodle's can't be good dogs. Quite the contrary. 

Think of it like this, I have two choices:
a) Get a dog from a known, responsible, proven, breeder who has the best intentions and history with regards to performance, standard, etc, in raising an animal.
b) Promote and support, a large group of unethical, unproven, money driven, type breeders, who may develop a good product, but at what cost?

The question is, do the ends justify the means? Because you got a great Doodle, should all the less than perfect Doodles that ended up in the pound with bad coats, genetic problems, etc. justify the means, of you getting a great dog?

I would say, YES, the ends do justify the means, IF there was a BIG need for Doodle's, because there were no family pets, with hypo-allergenic coats, that are active, good with strangers, intelligent, etc.

But since a dog with the ideal traits of a Doodle, does exist. The ends don't justify the means. 

And although not ALL Doodle breeders are the devil. Or money driven, or irresponsible, A LOT OF THEM ARE. And I've yet to meet a PWD Breeder than is anything less than 100% breed responsible. 

If there were unethical PWD breeders, the word would get out quick and hopefully put to a close, cause other PWD breeders would not trade breeding stock.

So if you have the choice between A and B. There is no reason, or no reasonable reason, to promote the BYB's, the auctioneer's, etc. when a absolutely, fabulous, pet can be brought home, with the same traits and a much better standard and review board.

--
There is one last point I can see someone making for buying a Doodle rather than a PWD. And that would be cost.

The going rate for a PWD seems to be between $1800 and $2000. And that is a lot of money which not everyone wants to spend on a dog. I can understand that.

But if that is the case, the answer, in my opinion, should not be, I'll only spend a $1000 on a Doodle. The answer should be, I'll adopt a mixed breed, Lab-Poodle, or Golden-Poodle.

But "buying" a Doodle, is promoting the wrong things.


btw, there are also very certain criteria that PWD breeders use to determine what is and is not breeding stock. If you breed a PWD without permission, you get no AKC papers and can't sell the liters as such. But since Doodle's don't adhere to any such standard, there is no stopping anyone from breeding regardless of criteria.

And AKC doesn't mean much to me or most people, other than to understand that they are a gate keeper. Yes, there are ways to beat the system, but it's a deterrent, not a panacea..



*Quincy,*

I've avoided your questions because to be honest, they are silly and are making me sound redundant.

I already did some compare , did you not read the first thing I wrote in the the thread:

They are similar in size, they are similar in temperament, they are similar in ideal coat type, they are similar in intelligence, they are similar in trainability, they are similar in their ability to be a great family pet..

There, happy, now you have my COMPARE, AGAIN..

So, now lets do the contrast that you so anxiously desire for me to include.

1) The PWD is a BREED.
2) The Doodle is NOT. Not even the AUSTRALIAN Doodle (aka, the Australian MUTT.)
3) The PWD is bred by responsible, caring, loving, breeders, ALL OF THEM. WHo care not for profit or gains, but to see the betterment of the breed.
4) Doodles, be it of the Australian MUTT variety of not, are bred by greedy, back yard, non-dog caring individuals, who auction off their mutt's to the highest bidder: (I see they took that off their website.. Guess they care more about the advancement of their breeders wallets, than the placement of their puppies.
5) PWD breeders do not allow you to breed their pups without special permission and contracts.
6) You can't bring a dog to Portugal, throw it in the water, and call it a "Portuguese Water Dog." Although, you can call it, a "Wet Dog in Portugal".
6A) ANYONE can host a swing party for a Standard and Lab/Golden and call the results a Doodle. And if they happen to host said swing party in Australia, then they should call it, "A DINGO-DOODLE" Not pretend that adding "Australian" in front of it, legitimizes it. 
And comparing it the English Spaniel and the Spaniel, is not a valid argument. -- Those are BREEDS. Not the offspring of two different breeds.
7) PWD's have a non shedding coat, be it curly or wavy.
8) Doodle's IDEAL coat type, is that of non shedding variety like the Poodle. But since it is bred with a long fur'd shedding dog, usually you get a mix of both.
9) I was screened for days and weeks before a breeder would give me a PWD pup and I had to sign a contract
10) Doodle owners will sell a pet to anyone with a wad of cash.

Should I continue, or would you rather I stop CONTRASTING??

As I have already spent a good deal of time COMPARING, using your picture and my picture, there's not that much else to say.

If you would like me to take down the picture of your Dingo Doodle. Please let me know. He's a cutie !!


----------



## JDub

I'll throw my $0.02 into this train wreck... My wife and I lost our Golden last year, and wanted another dog. That said, we didnt want all the shedding. Our list was quickly narrowed down to a PWD and a Doodle. We met both breeds, and seemed to favor the PWD in terms of size, personality, etc.

In the end, what moved us to the PWD camp was nothing about genetics, health, etc. Odds are, the Doodle would have been a great dog for us. So what sealed it was the notion of rolling the dice with a Doodle regarding size and shedding. We figured we had an 85% chance that all would be well...but 15% chance it would be bigger than we wanted, and/or would shed....the latter being a huge issue for us. We ultimately decided that we didnt want to take anything to chance.

I would never fault anyone for owning a Doodle. On paper its a great idea. Our Golden was an amazing dog and I miss her dearly. If you have one that is great, and that doesnt shed, then I congratulate you. If you're one of the ones I know that has a shedding doodle, well....I hope you still love your dog, and I'm sure you probably do.

For us, we wanted the sure thing...and a change from a Golden is probably a good thing so that this dog will not be raised completely in the shadow of her predecessor.


----------



## B-Line

ACampbell said:


> The black spot on the tongue...interesting. I wasn't aware there were other breeds other than Chow-chow's that had black on their tongues (and of course mixes) is this a typical breed thing with a PWD?


Not that I'm aware of. Nikita has it. Maggie does not. I think it's just a birth mark and is probably not a breed trait. But don't quote me on that.


----------



## JDub

B-Line said:


> Not that I'm aware of. Nikita has it. Maggie does not. I think it's just a birth mark and is probably not a breed trait. But don't quote me on that.


Ha ha...too late sucker!


----------



## B-Line

JDub said:


> Ha ha...too late sucker!


Ok JDub, 

The gloves are off. Now you're not allowed to ask me what you should do when your puppy:
a) Pee's all over
b) Poops all over
c) Bites you all the time
d) Won't walk on leash
e) Cries all night

LOL !


----------



## JDub

B-Line said:


> Ok JDub,
> 
> The gloves are off. Now you're not allowed to ask me what you should do when your puppy:
> a) Pee's all over
> b) Poops all over
> c) Bites you all the time
> d) Won't walk on leash
> e) Cries all night
> 
> LOL !


Duh....only those sub-standard East Coast PWD's do those things. Mine is gonna be perfect.

Besides....isnt the answer to all of those "beat it with a newspaper"??

























I'm kidding, I'm kidding!!!


----------



## B-Line

JDub said:


> Duh....only those sub-standard East Coast PWD's do those things. Mine is gonna be perfect.
> 
> Besides....isnt the answer to all of those "beat it with a newspaper"??
> 
> I'm kidding, I'm kidding!!!


Haha, "perfect puppy"... Boy are you in for a surprise... Jdub, I have an activity to help you prepare for having a puppy in the house.

Go outside, find a nice, hard, wall; run into it at full speed, head first; examine to see if you have moved the wall, REPEAT.


----------



## JDub

B-Line said:


> Haha, "perfect puppy"... Boy are you in for a surprise... Jdub, I have an activity to help you prepare for having a puppy in the house.
> 
> Go outside, find a nice, hard, wall; run into it at full speed, head first; examine to see if you have moved the wall, REPEAT.


I've heard of that activity before.... but it was for Marriage and Parenthood.


----------



## Quincy

Oh dear B-Line, now your referring to my dog by various names. Well I'll put in an effort and reply to your post, and as I feel it maybe a rather lengthy reply and as I'm going offline well the reply will be posted later.

Just to add you asked about editing post which all of us can do on our posts. Well look under your post and there is a bone with the word EDIT in it. Click on that and when the page loads in then edit your post. When finished click the Save Changes button.
.


----------



## MarleysGirl

ACampbell said:


> That's interesting to know, I haven't really seen it in dogs without Chow in them, thats why the question. And no, I'm not questioning that anyones dog is a mix, I'm curious as to where it crops up from.
> I had to go and google it, seems this happens with a lot of breeds, including GSD's, Labs, etc...neat!


Actually Marley has one as well. Sorry, off topic.


----------



## ACampbell

MarleysGirl said:


> Actually Marley has one as well. Sorry, off topic.


Yeah sorry for running off-topic with this. I did some quick reading, it appears to be birthmarks - just a little extra pigmentation. You learn something new every day!


----------



## MarleysGirl

ACampbell said:


> Yeah sorry for running off-topic with this. I did some quick reading, it appears to be birthmarks - just a little extra pigmentation. You learn something new every day!


Oh, I wasnt calling you on being off topic, I just meant I was continuing the off topic, thats what the sorry was for. And Im done now that I have carried it on even further


----------



## B-Line

Quincy said:


> Oh dear B-Line, now your referring to my dog by various names.
> .


Quincy, again, you are only reading what you want to read. I did not call "your dog" who I have stated several times, a name, I think your dog is adorable.

Rather, I have given my own name/designation on Mutt's, that are combined by "pet owners" in Australia.

And, since there is no such breed as an *Australian Labradoodle*, calling the offspring of a Standard Poodle and Labrador a MUTT, regardless of it's country of origin, is the most accurate and technical term.

Calling it an Australian Labradoodle is no more or no less accurate than calling it a "DINGO DOODLE.." Which has a nice ring to it, don't you think?

Since of course, a Dingo (Australian, wild dog), as made famous by the cry of, Lindy Chamerlain, "My God, My God, the dingo's got my baby!" just sort of reminds me of dogs from the Outback 

B

Oh wait, there is more.....

I never asked how to edit a post. I am very capable of navigating my way through a forum and don't quite understand why you thought I needed directions???

It is clear though, that you don't read what I write, and you don't review the posts, because I already took off the picture of your dog. Guess you missed that. Just like you missed my first two statements in the very beginning of this thread, comparing the traits of the PWD and the Mutt called a Doodle.

Less anger Quincy, more reading comprehension...

Peace


----------



## poodleholic

> and IF i decide to get a dog, i do consider it a GOOD IDEA, and close to a necessity, to:
> 1) have a low shed dog
> 2) have a dog that is friendly and gentle
> 3) have a dog that is smart and obedient
> 4) have a dog that is athletic and strong



I hope your next goldendoodle has all of the above, but, don't hold your breath. Even getting another from the same breeder won't guarantee that you'll get what you got with oinest. Even the labradoodle breeders in Australia came to the conclusion that they couldn't consistently get what they were after. 

My co-worker has a goldendoodle who is a very sweet and friendly dog, and is more GR than Poodle. He's also hyper, sheds all over, drools and leaves snot marks on the wall, and has a coat from hell. I've been helping her with grooming, because she can't get a professional groomer to touch him for under $125 for a complete shave down, and that's up from the $100 when he was a puppy. He was just diagnosed with OCD (joint mice) in his right shoulder, and has HD and Addison's disease. Erin bought her dog because she wanted to 
1) have a low shed dog
2) have a dog that is friendly and gentle
3) have a dog that is smart and obedient
4) have a dog that is athletic and strong 

She got a dog who 
1) sheds all over
2) is friendly but hyper & is the proverbial "bull in a china closet" 
3) may be smart, but too hyper to focus & respond to cues/commands
4) has a dog who is strong, but has crippling OCD and HD, both requiring surgery to the tune of about $10,000. The Addisons is being managed well with medication, adding to monthly expenses.


----------



## Quincy

B-Line said:


> Quincy, again, you are only reading what you want to read. I did not call "your dog" who I have stated several times, a name, I think your dog is adorable.
> 
> Rather, I have given my own name/designation on Mutt's, that are combined by "pet owners" in Australia.
> 
> And, since there is no such breed as an *Australian Labradoodle*, calling the offspring of a Standard Poodle and Labrador a MUTT, regardless of it's country of origin, is the most accurate and technical term.
> 
> Calling it an Australian Labradoodle is no more or no less accurate than calling it a "DINGO DOODLE.." Which has a nice ring to it, don't you think?
> 
> Since of course, a Dingo (Australian, wild dog), as made famous by the cry of, Lindy Chamerlain, "My God, My God, the dingo's got my baby!" just sort of reminds me of dogs from the Outback


Yes I just noticed that you finally decided to take the photo on my Quincy from your post that started this topic thread. And I thing your dog looks adorable, thanks for the compliment regarding my dog 

I think that maybe we should firstly focus on your use of those names you called my dog, which I feel is NOT correct.

Quincy is NOT the offspring of a Standard Poodle and Labrador, he is the offspring from an "Australian Labradoodle" crossed with an "Australian Labradoodle", and this going back for 9 generations. He is part of a "Developing Breed", note the word developing, and breeders are developing the "Australian Labradoodle" that one day in the future they will become a "Recognized Breed" by the AKC and other similar "All Breeds Club Registries" around the world.

The are heaps of "Recognized Breeds" that originated by the crossing of 2 or more breeds, and for many generations they were "Developing Breeds" till one day they became "Recognized Breeds".
*B-Line now I ask you this - These heaps of now "Recognized Breeds", during their many generations of breed development do you think that they should be called Mutts, and my Quincy has had 9 generations of similar breed development is he a Mutt ?*

In regards to you mentioning "DINGO DOODLE", well I think it's NOT up to me to decide on the name of a "Developing Breed", maybe that's up to those who started and are developing the breed.

You mentioned something about "Mutt's, that are combined by 'pet owners' in Australia".
*B-Line now I'll ask you this, Do you think that my Quincy has been combined by 'pet owners' in Australia ?*

In regards to the Dingo, yes I already heard what you mentioned about the Dingo. Interestingly due to hundreds of years of dogs being brought into Australia where some of these escaped and crossed with Dingos, plus farmers shooting and baiting Dingos, some today say that "the Dingo as a 'pure breed' ceases to exist", and there are breeders attempting to change this by breeding the "Australian Dingo", via this link is a copy of their "Interim Breed Standard":-
http://www.raritiesinc.ca/breeds/breed%20standards/Australian%20Dingo%20ANKC%20Standard.pdf

Yes I agree on more reading comprehension, and to achieve this so that we understand each other, it maybe best we focus on something then later move on to the other things that you previously mentioned. In other words, I feel that when you answer my questions above, plus there maybe more posts between us just on these where you may ask me questions, then after that I feel we might go on with the other things you mentioned in you previous posts.

Peace 
.


----------



## dog-man

poodleholic said:


> I hope your next goldendoodle has all of the above, but, don't hold your breath. Even getting another from the same breeder won't guarantee that you'll get what you got with oinest. She got a dog who
> 1) sheds all over
> 2) is friendly but hyper & is the proverbial "bull in a china closet"
> 3) may be smart, but too hyper to focus & respond to cues/commands
> 4) has a dog who is strong, but has crippling OCD and HD, both requiring surgery to the tune of about $10,000. The Addisons is being managed well with medication, adding to monthly expenses.


ok...but it is possible i am a better shopper (and a luckier person).

my breeder told me that the curly haired dogs were more likely to be low shed, like a poodle.
and Oinest's dad was the best tempered golden she has ever known, and she had previously been a breeder of goldens.

there are standard poodles out there with all sorts of very bad problems...the main question, as you know, is what breeder does the dog come from.
-------------------------------

B-Line,

i still have my doubts that a PWD is as sweet and smart as a well-bred goldendoodle.
i'm not sure it is possible.

but even if it is true, and people found out about it, the problems of the doodles would just be transferred to the PWD.

the small number of good breeders would not be able to fufill the huge consumer demand (and these better breeders don't want the stupid public coming to them anyway).

so, less qualified breeders would take up the slack, and the resulting PWD's would not be as sweet, etc as perhaps yours is.

for me, if i do ever go to a breeder again (which i very well may not), i would probably go with a goldendoodle again.

however, i would first do some research on PWD's.


----------



## JDub

dog-man said:


> ok...but it is possible i am a better shopper (and a luckier person).
> 
> my breeder told me that the curly haired dogs were more likely to be low shed, like a poodle.
> and Oinest's dad was the best tempered golden she has ever known, and she had previously been a breeder of goldens.
> 
> there are standard poodles out there with all sorts of very bad problems...the main question, as you know, is what breeder does the dog come from.
> -------------------------------
> 
> B-Line,
> 
> i still have my doubts that a PWD is as sweet and smart as a well-bred goldendoodle.
> i'm not sure it is possible.
> 
> but even if it is true, and people found out about it, the problems of the doodles would just be transferred to the PWD.
> 
> the small number of good breeders would not be able to fufill the huge consumer demand (and these better breeders don't want the stupid public coming to them anyway).
> 
> so, less qualified breeders would take up the slack, and the resulting PWD's would not be as sweet, etc as perhaps yours is.
> 
> for me, if i do ever go to a breeder again (which i very well may not), i would probably go with a goldendoodle again.
> 
> however, i would first do some research on PWD's.


Bookmark this thread, and email me in a year....I can tell you if a PWD is as loving as Golden, as I will be able to speak with firsthand knowledge on both breeds.

That said, the few that I've met, were every bit as loving as my Golden was...but we'll see what they're like day in, day out....starting in 9 days!


----------



## Quincy

Talking about things like sweet, smart, loving, etc., below is a photo of my Nelson when he was a pup. I loved him dearly and still miss him very much since he passed away. Yes he was sweet, loving and smart, but then regarding smart there were times when he was not so, such as in this incident:-

Nelson and his mother Charmaine were both in the lounge room savouring their chew hides. Nelson was in his teenage years with testosterone starting to flow. Charmaine finished hers and saw Nelson still savouring his large piece as he eats much slower. Charmaine watched, drooled and then came up with an idea. She went and got Nelson's favourite toy and paraded it in front of him. Well, on seeing this Nelson suddenly forgot his chew hide, sprung up and darted towards Charmaine. Soon as she saw him starting to stand she took off into the dining room, Nelson seeing her running away with his toy took off in hot pursuit. Soon as Charmaine was in the dining room she dropped Nelson's favourite toy. Nelson seeing his favourite toy being dropped grabbed for it, meanwhile Charmaine quick as lightning had doubled back and was well on her way back into the lounge room. Well Nelson then came into the lounge room strutting his stuff with his favourite toy, but the expression on his face and body language suddenly changed for there was Charmaine ignoring him whilst she savoured his chew hide that he had dropped and left behind, out smarted yet again. But Nelson through experience had learnt and became smarter and where tricks like that don't work any more. And I knew that in the years to come there might be times where I might have to be smarter than Charmaine and Nelson and their old tricks.
The one thing that really stood out in Charmaine's manoeuvre to gain the chew hide was that Charmaine never played with any of Nelson's toys. So by getting and parading Nelson's toy was a deliberate ploy to trick Nelson out of his chew hide.









.


----------



## B-Line

dog-man said:


> B-Line,
> i still have my doubts that a PWD is as sweet and smart as a well-bred goldendoodle.
> i'm not sure it is possible.


Ok, so lets make sure we understand each other 100%. Now the argument is a PWD is not as sweet or as smart as a well-bred Doodle.. ?

Btw, I do agree with you and am glad they don't "mass produce" the PWD. I'm not trying to change the world, just trying to educate a few people in it.
- I have found myself posting on this forum, so I thought I would share my views, knowledge, etc. with the people who visit this site and aren't familiar with a fantastic, hypo-allergenic, non-shedding, intelligent, breed/pet.

Since there is so much controversy about "designer breeds", and since there are no other PWD owners "YET" (8 more days), I think it's important to share information about alternatives to supporting "designer breeds"

B


----------



## JDub

B-Line said:


> Ok, so lets make sure we understand each other 100%. Now the argument is a PWD is not as sweet or as smart as a well-bred Doodle.. ?
> 
> Btw, I do agree with you and am glad they don't "mass produce" the PWD. I'm not trying to change the world, just trying to educate a few people in it.
> - I have found myself posting on this forum, so I thought I would share my views, knowledge, etc. with the people who visit this site and aren't familiar with a fantastic, hypo-allergenic, non-shedding, intelligent, breed/pet.
> 
> Since there is so much controversy about "designer breeds", and since there are no other PWD owners "YET" (8 more days), I think it's important to share information about alternatives to supporting "designer breeds"
> 
> B


B-Line, if you're wrong, and my dog isnt like what you talked about in the 4,000 emails we've traded, you owe me $1,800!


----------



## B-Line

Quincy,

You make some very valid points.

But while there is absolutely nothing to prevent any Doodle breeder from calling themselves an Australian Doodle breeder, for the time being, I have to stick by my argument that yes, they are mutt's. (p.s. - I love mutt's.)

I do hope they are one day recognized by the AKC because it is my opinion, that doing so, will vastly prevent some of the unethical breeding that is currently being done, for example, the dog auctions.

I also think that having a breed become AKC recognized will then put those breeders in a situation where they will have to show their dogs, confirm their dogs, and establish a reliable standard for how the dogs will be bred and which dogs should not be bred. There will be some "accountability" for how the word Doodle is thrown around and used to market dogs.

Then, the breeders, will actually have to spend the money they make selling dogs, on improving the breed, cause of the costs involved with showing, testing, etc. - Rather than making a profit because of a designer title.

BTW Quincy, what is your argument regarding a Doodle vs. an Australian Doodle.

Because it seems as if, you probably are more on my side of the argument than you think you are. What are you're feelings about non Australian "Doodle" breeders ?



JDub said:


> B-Line, if you're wrong, and my dog isnt like what you talked about in the 4,000 emails we've traded, you owe me $1,800!


LOL, 

Just remember what I told you about puppies....


----------



## dog-man

B-Line said:


> Ok, so lets make sure we understand each other 100%. Now the argument is a PWD is not as sweet or as smart as a well-bred Doodle.. ?


i'm not sure what your shock is.

i previously explained that in the books i read, a PWD had very good grades, but lower than a golden in friendliness to strangers, intelligence...and had higher energy needs.

it's possible the better breeders of PWDs have made improvements....but they would have to be pretty amazing to reach the levels of the best goldendoodles i have met.


if you haven't met these "top" goldendoodles, how you can be sure a PWD is similar?

however, it does sound to me that you do have a great dog...and a well-bred PWD does sound like a very good choice, based on my tastes in dogs.


----------



## JDub

dog-man said:


> i'm not sure what your shock is.
> 
> i previously explained that in the books i read, a PWD had very good grades, but lower than a golden in friendliness to strangers, intelligence...and had higher energy needs.
> 
> it's possible the better breeders of PWDs have made improvements....but they would have to be pretty amazing to reach the levels of the best goldendoodles i have met.
> 
> 
> if you haven't met these "top" goldendoodles, how you can be sure a PWD is similar?
> 
> however, it does sound to me that you do have a great dog...and a well-bred PWD does sound like a very good choice, based on my tastes in dogs.


So we're comparing/debating/arguing dog breeds based on what is read in books?? Craziness. No two doodles will be alike, just like no two PWD's will be alike...so books are a poor measure for comparison.

Besides...lets be technical about the math.... PWD scored less than a Golden. Ok, lets say the Golden scored a 5, the PWD only a 3. Well a Doodle is only half Golden, so the 5 is now 2.5, which is lower than a PWD.

Further, its safe to say that judges wearing black pants would give more points to the PWD than a Golden.

Lastly....the Doodle...keep in mind, I almost got one. That said...you're breeding 2 completely different dog breeds (obvious statement of the day). If either of them were great specimens of their breed, they'd be used in breeding with other dogs in their breed. If they're just so so in terms of overall "quality" (fitting the norms of the breed, etc), and you combine two of them for puppies...its probalby safe to say that you're rolling the dice a bit. 

I've met a few Doodles...and really liked them. I also used to have a neighbor that has 2 of them, and who says that while she loves them dearly, she wont do a Doodle again.

Lets wrap up this thread this way....some of you love your Goldendoodles, Labradoodles, Dingodoodles, Whattheheckisthatdoodle, etc. Some of you love PWD's.... none of us have either had both breeds (for now). So as long as our dogs are loved, and have happy homes, then all is well in the world.

















p.s.... my PWD will be better than all of your doodles and east coast PWD's combined.


----------



## Laurelin

honestly, if I had to go on the goldens and the PWDs I've met, I'd say the goldens were more trainable for your average person and the PWDs were smarter.

Again just based on personal experience.


----------



## dog-man

JDub said:


> So we're comparing/debating/arguing dog breeds based on what is read in books?? Craziness.]


don't underestimate the benefit of comparing dogs based on books.

especially, if you use more than one or two to compare results.

every one who loves a particular breed cannot be objective to give advice, and it is impossible to have extensive experience with every breed.

i wouldn't have a debate of which breed is better based on books...but for my own personal decisions, i trust books quite a bit.



JDub said:


> Besides...lets be technical about the math.... PWD scored less than a Golden. Ok, lets say the Golden scored a 5, the PWD only a 3. Well a Doodle is only half Golden, so the 5 is now 2.5, which is lower than a PWD.



that's a pretty dopey math method.

anyway, the other half of the goldendoodle is a standard poodle, which has some amazing traits of its own to add into the mixture.


----------



## B-Line

JDub said:


> p.s.... my PWD will be better than all of your doodles and east coast PWD's combined.


JDub,

I think the proper argument, for you and I, to debate now, and in the near future, is not East Coast, West Coast.. We'll let the memory of Tupac and Biggie, remind us, not to travel that road.

I think now, the proper argument, for you and I to discuss is:

*Curly vs. Wavy * - Cause you're dog's gonna have an AFRO..


----------



## JDub

So long as you're admitting that you've never been around a PWD, and thus, have no basis for this comparison.

As for the dopey math...I'll be sure to fire off flares the next time I'm being sarcastic so that you dont miss it next time.


----------



## JDub

B-Line said:


> JDub,
> 
> I think the proper argument, for you and I, to debate now, and in the near future, is not East Coast, West Coast.. We'll let the memory of Tupac and Biggie, remind us, not to travel that road.
> 
> I think now, the proper argument, for you and I to discuss is:
> 
> *Curly vs. Wavy * - Cause you're dog's gonna have an AFRO..


Hmmm....Tupac...I wonder if my wife will go along with that name. 

And we dont yet know if ours will be curly, or "loose curly"....I've dropped numerous subtle hints to the breeder that I'd prefer the latter.

As for the "afro" comment...











Sorry....just love that picture.


----------



## B-Line

Laurelin said:


> honestly, if I had to go on the goldens and the PWDs I've met, I'd say the goldens were more trainable for your average person and the PWDs were smarter.


I would have to say, unequivocally, this is the most accurate statement I have ever heard about the comparison between a Golden and a PWD.

For the average person, the PWD will require, more precise, consistent and thoughtful training. But that is because, they're smarter.


----------



## ACampbell

So if you want to be technical, as far as adding up a score based on say, intelligence...5/5 being the best.
Say a Golden Retriever gets a 5 on the scale...that's half the dog's parentage there, and say a Poodle only got a 1...so the best you could do is to add the two together and divide by 2...coming up with 3...
Granted, by no means is that the end all be all of it, but if you have one stupid parent and one smart one...the kids will either be A. Dumb as a rock, B. somewhere in between or C. Smart like one of the parents.
There's a lot of variables when you are mixing breeds..it could be A, B, C, or D or God only knows what...when instead if you are buying something that has been bred and culled for generations and generations (we aren't talking like 3 or 4) to be just as such, you are more likely to get what you are looking for in something tried and true.



B-Line said:


> JDub,
> 
> I think the proper argument, for you and I, to debate now, and in the near future, is not East Coast, West Coast.. We'll let the memory of Tupac and Biggie, remind us, not to travel that road.
> 
> I think now, the proper argument, for you and I to discuss is:
> 
> *Curly vs. Wavy * - Cause you're dog's gonna have an AFRO..



Wait how's that work anyway? I'm from the West coast, relocated (against my will) to the East Coast...so where's that stick me, or my dogs for that matter (ones from the West coast and one is from the East Coast) hehe!


----------



## JDub

ACampbell said:


> Wait how's that work anyway? I'm from the West coast, relocated (against my will) to the East Coast...so where's that stick me, or my dogs for that matter (ones from the West coast and one is from the East Coast) hehe!


Hmmm....you're a little of this, and a little of that. I think that makes you a Doodle.


----------



## B-Line

Jdub, look at the Curly PWD on the right, if that's not an Afro, than I don't know what is,


----------



## JDub

Oh man, you're killing me with the Show-Fro Seth. Yeah, then can be pretty froofy....but we'll never groom ours like that. This one is also curly, but without the Froof... (and you should recognize the dog, or at least the breeder)










Besides, even if ours is froofy...it just means that she'll have soul, and can dance better than your dog.


----------



## B-Line

dog-man said:


> i wouldn't have a debate of which breed is better based on books...but for my own personal decisions, i trust books quite a bit.


Dog-Man,

I would say, the best way to try to predict, what a pure breed dog traits may be, would be to ask the people who own them, raise them, grade them and decide which ones are worthy of breeding and which ones should just be pets.

If you go the PWDCA.ORG website, you can read, the standard for the breed. What the breed will almost always be, unless it is a "faulted" dog.

So, based on what the Judges and Breed club say about what the dogs should be, I think it's fair to assume, you're books are slightly wrong: (From the Portuguese Water Dog Club of America, website)

*Temperament*
An animal of spirited disposition, self-willed, brave, and very resistant to fatigue. A dog of *exceptional intelligence* and a *loyal companion*, *it obeys its master with facility and apparent pleasure*. I*t is obedient with those who look after it* or with those for whom it works.

So what you're saying is, the dog is not intelligent enough? Or loyal enough? Or obedient enough? If the breed standard says, that is exactly what the dog excels at, then how can a Doodle be even better at those things?? Am I missing something here?


----------



## ACampbell

JDub said:


> Hmmm....you're a little of this, and a little of that. I think that makes you a Doodle.



Nooooooo...I swear, I'm not a cross between a poodle of any sort (I have straight black hair) maybe an Afgan hound though.


----------



## B-Line

JDub said:


> Oh man, you're killing me with the Show-Fro Seth.


I knew I was going to get you with that Show-Fro picture, LOL..... I know you won't let your dog FRO, neither will I let mine, ever be "Lion Clipped"...

I recognize that picture from Theresa... I forgot the name of her dog though.


----------



## dog-man

ACampbell said:


> So if you want to be technical, as far as adding up a score based on say, intelligence...5/5 being the best.
> Say a Golden Retriever gets a 5 on the scale...that's half the dog's parentage there, and say a Poodle only got a 1...so the best you could do is to add the two together and divide by 2...coming up with 3...


yeah, but standard poodles (along with border collies) are off the charts in intelligence, and goldens are at the very top of the list.


----------



## Laurelin

dog-man said:


> yeah, but standard poodles (along with border collies) are off the charts in intelligence, and goldens are at the very top of the list.


And according to those lists, shelties are supposed to be one of the smartest breeds and I can tell you Trey is definitely not a smart dog.

Dogs are individuals.

I've lived with 5 of the breeds listed in the top 10 usually when they talk about intelligence and I'd honestly list them in a totally different order than you hear...


----------



## ACampbell

dog-man said:


> yeah, but standard poodles (along with border collies) are off the charts in intelligence, and goldens are at the very top of the list.


That doesn't mean that the one the "breeder" crossed was exceptionally intelligent though...anyway I was making a general statement. 
I've seen some pretty dumb acting Goldens...even though it's a breed trait to be intelligent, that doesn't mean they all are.
Just because both of your parents are Rocket Scientists doesn't mean you don't have a C average!


----------



## Laurelin

Wow, just realized every breed I've ever owned is listed in the top 10.

I must have a thing for 'smart' dogs.


----------



## JDub

dog-man said:


> yeah, but standard poodles (along with border collies) are off the charts in intelligence, and goldens are at the very top of the list.


Whoa...when I did the same exercise, you called my math dopey or something (too lazy to scroll up). 

And yeah, poodles are intelligent, but....but.....its a..... a _poodle_.


----------



## dog-man

B-Line said:


> *Temperament*
> An animal of spirited disposition, self-willed, brave, and very resistant to fatigue. A dog of *exceptional intelligence* and a *loyal companion*, *it obeys its master with facility and apparent pleasure*. I*t is obedient with those who look after it* or with those for whom it works.
> 
> So what you're saying is, the dog is not intelligent enough? Or loyal enough? Or obedient enough? If the breed standard says, that is exactly what the dog excels at, then how can a Doodle be even better at those things?? Am I missing something here?


actually, i wouldn't trust what a breed club has to say...very often, you have to read in between the lines to get the truth.

"spirited" and "self-willed" and "very resistant to fatigue" sound good, and can be good...but these words also send possible warning signals for my tastes.

if they are ok with strangers who come to the house, but not exceptional, they probably wouldn't mention it.

these dogs might be as great as you say...but i know the sources i trust more than others.


----------



## ACampbell

Lol JDub...you need to make an average when you're adding 2 things together...which you didn't...but I understood where you were going with it 

And that's not to say that besides intelligence there aren't other factors to consider...
Look at some of the breeds predispositions to specific illnesses/diseases/heriditary illnesses...
You took it as "This is THIS" and nothing more...there's so much more to consider.


----------



## dog-man

JDub said:


> And yeah, poodles are intelligent, but....but.....its a..... a _poodle_.


yeah, that's why i mix them with goldens.


----------



## JDub

ACampbell said:


> Nooooooo...I swear, I'm not a cross between a poodle of any sort (I have straight black hair) maybe an Afgan hound though.


I think you just made B-Line's point about Doodles... you wont always get the desired effects.

That said, sorry to hear about your genetically flawed coat. 



dog-man said:


> actually, i wouldn't trust what a breed club has to say...very often, you have to read in between the lines to get the truth.


But you'll trust some random person who writes a book?


Didnt Charlie Manson write a book once??


----------



## ACampbell

dog-man said:


> actually, i wouldn't trust what a breed club has to say...very often, you have to read in between the lines to get the truth.
> 
> "spirited" and "self-willed" and "very resistant to fatigue" sound good, and can be good...but these words also send possible warning signals for my tastes.
> 
> if they are ok with strangers who come to the house, but not exceptional, they probably wouldn't mention it.
> 
> these dogs might be as great as you say...but i know the sources i trust more than others.



Yeah, cuz like a breed club would know anything about the breed they specialize in...



JDub said:


> I think you just made B-Line's point about Doodles... you wont always get the desired effects.
> 
> That said, sorry to hear about your genetically flawed coat.


Hey now, I'm not genetically flawed...most people of my heritage have dark brown or black and straight hair...I fit the breed standard


----------



## dog-man

JDub said:


> But you'll trust some random person who writes a book?
> 
> Didnt Charlie Manson write a book once??


you probably read his book.

but me, i'm more picky.

a well-reviewed book by an expert is more trusted by me than a bunch of dopes on a forum.

especially if i compare a few.


----------



## Laurelin

All breed books generally are not too good. They can't possibly know the breed like the people that write up the things for breed clubs who not only live with the breed but know hundreds of individuals within a breed.


----------



## JDub

dog-man said:


> you probably read his book.
> 
> but me, i'm more picky.
> 
> a well-reviewed book by an expert is more trusted by me than a bunch of dopes on a forum.
> 
> especially if i compare a few.


_pssst....b-line, ACampbell, I think he's talking about you guys. _ 

Seriously though...what makes the guy an expert? Is it that he has spent a lot of time around the breed that he writes about? Is he a breeder? Has he worked shows to see the standards, the norms, etc? I'm guessing these same people are the ones that run the national clubs. Other than spending a LOT of time with a dog, what else would make one an "expert"??


----------



## Curbside Prophet

If it's a comparative psychologist, there's the first problem with these "intelligence" lists. He may call himself an expert, I call him bold. no biologist would attempt what a comparative psychologist attempts with intelligence tests. It's a stupid premise.


----------



## ACampbell

dog-man said:


> you probably read his book.
> 
> but me, i'm more picky.
> 
> a well-reviewed book by an expert is more trusted by me than a bunch of dopes on a forum.
> 
> especially if i compare a few.



Lol, anybody can write a book...some of the worst books I've ever read got "great reviews" yet bored me to tears...
Just because the NY Times says it's a good book, does not make it so. This goes for any books or literature for that matter. 

Next thing you know Oprah will be reviewing dog books...God help us all.



JDub said:


> _pssst....b-line, ACampbell, I think he's talking about you guys. _
> 
> Seriously though...what makes the guy an expert? Is it that he has spent a lot of time around the breed that he writes about? Is he a breeder? Has he worked shows to see the standards, the norms, etc? I'm guessing these same people are the ones that run the national clubs. Other than spending a LOT of time with a dog, what else would make one an "expert"??


Shhhh, JDub, I'd already forgotten to care who he was attempting to make a snide remark about!

Also, on a side note, I agree with you!


----------



## Laurelin

My problem with the 'intelligence tests' is that I think they sometimes confuse trainability with intelligence. 

Some breeds just aren't bred to work with people the way that others are. It doesn't mean they're stupid. 

Trey is probably the most _trainable_ dog we have. However, he has no common sense and cannot problem solve at all.

Papillons are rated lower than the other breeds I've owned, but as individuals they seem to me to be a lot more perceptive and able to problem solve than all the other dogs we've owned, with the possible exception of the german shepherd. 

Then Nikki and Trey are the same breed and Trey is just not all there... but Nikki is savvy and yet not as command oriented.


----------



## dog-man

ACampbell said:


> Lol, anybody can write a book...some of the worst books I've ever read got "great reviews" yet bored me to tears...
> 
> Next thing you know Oprah will be reviewing dog books...God help us all.
> !


Actually, Oprah does review dog books.

anyone can write a book, but it takes people of discretion to choose which to read.
if you feel you are not capable, then i agree it is not the best way for you to go.


----------



## ACampbell

No I believe I'm more than capable of picking my own reading material, and not having other people pick it for me (i.e. reviews)


----------



## JDub

I'll take this one in two pieces....



dog-man said:


> Actually, Oprah does review dog books.


And none of her recommendations or supported books ever turns out wrong.




dog-man said:


> anyone can write a book, but it takes people of discretion to choose which to read.
> if you feel you are not capable, then i agree it is not the best way for you to go.


After reading this, and some of your others, you can imagine how unsurprised I was to see where you live.


----------



## dog-man

JDub said:


> Seriously though...what makes the guy an expert? Is it that he has spent a lot of time around the breed that he writes about? Is he a breeder? Has he worked shows to see the standards, the norms, etc? I'm guessing these same people are the ones that run the national clubs. Other than spending a LOT of time with a dog, what else would make one an "expert"??


two of the main sources i used were:

Daniel F. Ortora, Phd, an animal psychologist, in the book "The right dog for you".

Caroline Coile, Phd
Encyclopedia of Dog Breeds.

both books were well-written, and were clearly the result of a great amount of research and experience.

if you know a source i should trust more, let me know.


----------



## Laurelin

JDub said:


> After reading this, and some of your others, you can imagine how unsurprised I was to see where you live.


What do I know, I'm just a good ol' southerner. 



dog-man said:


> two of the main sources i used were:
> 
> Daniel F. Ortora, Phd, an animal psychologist, in the book "The right dog for you".
> 
> Caroline Coile, Phd
> Encyclopedia of Dog Breeds.
> 
> both books were well-written, and were clearly the result of a great amount of research and experience.
> 
> if you know a source i should trust more, let me know.


I have the Encyclopedia of Dog Breeds.... I like the pictures. 

Honestly, I've not found an all breed book that I've been terribly impressed with. 

Most basically reword the breed standard and throw in a few pictures. It's nothing like the information that's out there by truly educated people on the breed.


----------



## B-Line

dog-man said:


> "spirited" and "self-willed" and "very resistant to fatigue" sound good, and can be good...but these words also send possible warning signals for my tastes.
> 
> if they are ok with strangers who come to the house, but not exceptional, they probably wouldn't mention it.


I would say, both of my dogs are, spirited, are also "resistant to fatigue", and are self willed. 
- in that, they love to play. They can play all day. And they are also self willed - they love to test boundaries. That is why they are considered mischievous. 

They know the rules but they also expect you to enforce the rules. If you don't enforce the rules, they will take advantage. They are testing you.

And that is why a PWD owner, needs to be firm. Needs to train their dog, needs to direct the intelligence. - And that is also why, they are so rewarding, when you do so. 

Dog Man, Wikipedia lists the temperament of a Doodle as such:

*Appearance and Temperament*
The Labradoodle as a dog breed is still developing, and does not yet breed true, i.e. the *puppies do not have consistently predictable characteristics*. While many Labradoodles display desired traits, *their appearance and behavioral characteristics remain, from a breeding standpoint, unpredictable.*
As such, Labradoodles' hair can be anywhere from wiry to soft, and may be straight, wavy, or curly. Some Labradoodles do shed, although the coat usually sheds less and has less dog odor than that of a Labrador Retriever. The color range includes white, cream, gold, apricot, red, brown and black, and most of the other colors seen in Poodles.
[edit]

So, you're telling me, you would rather have a grab bag of traits that are unpredictable, than a dog who wants to be trained? Than a dog that will please you to no end, provided you teach it, what does and doesn't please you.

Your rational still doesn't make much sense. The smarter the dog, the more you need to feed it's mind, or it will become willful and destructive, regardless of breed.


----------



## JDub

dog-man said:


> an animal psychologist



*snickers*




For real? How many dog breeds are there? 400+ according to Wikipedia...plus countless mutt varieties. But these folks are an expert on them ALL?? Really? And they gain this knowledge.....how? By spending time with them? Aside from advanced education, this makes them any more qualified than full time breeders to discuss breed traits.....how???

Animal psychologist...I've heard it all now.



dog-man said:


> Daniel F. Ortora, Phd


Ironically, Google has never heard of this guy. 

As for the woman, ZOMG...she has a book on every breed. She is either a complete expert of ALL dogs, or simply knows how to put together a book based on generalizations of breed characteristics in order to make a buck. Hmmmmm......



B-Line said:


> I would say, both of my dogs are, spirited, are also "resistant to fatigue", and are self willed.
> - in that, they love to play. They can play all day. And they are also self willed - they love to test boundaries. That is why they are considered mischievous.
> 
> They know the rules but they also expect you to enforce the rules. If you don't enforce the rules, they will take advantage. They are testing you.
> 
> And that is why a PWD owner, needs to be firm. Needs to train their dog, needs to direct the intelligence. - And that is also why, they are so rewarding, when you do so.
> 
> Dog Man, Wikipedia lists the temperament of a Doodle as such:
> 
> *Appearance and Temperament*
> The Labradoodle as a dog breed is still developing, and does not yet breed true, i.e. the *puppies do not have consistently predictable characteristics*. While many Labradoodles display desired traits, *their appearance and behavioral characteristics remain, from a breeding standpoint, unpredictable.*
> As such, Labradoodles' hair can be anywhere from wiry to soft, and may be straight, wavy, or curly. Some Labradoodles do shed, although the coat usually sheds less and has less dog odor than that of a Labrador Retriever. The color range includes white, cream, gold, apricot, red, brown and black, and most of the other colors seen in Poodles.
> [edit]
> 
> So, you're telling me, you would rather have a grab bag of traits that are unpredictable, than a dog who wants to be trained? Than a dog that will please you to no end, provided you teach it, what does and doesn't please you.
> 
> Your rational still doesn't make much sense. The smarter the dog, the more you need to feed it's mind, or it will become willful and destructive, regardless of breed.




Bravo B-Line....bravo. I put my 18 month old (at the time) on the floor around 3 PWD's late last year. We did not know them, they did not know us, we were in "their" house. They were extremely gentle, playful, and loving on her. It was one of the reasons we chose the breed.


----------



## ACampbell

JDub said:


> After reading this, and some of your others, you can imagine how unsurprised I was to see where you live.


I'm going to have to agree with this...being a NY transplant I can understand Dog-mans frustrations on life...especially if he drives a car anywhere in this state! 

On another note...Just because someone has a PhD doesn't mean they are qualified to attribute to every aspect of a certain thing. Example, I know someone who is a professor (DVM) at University of Virginia...he has at least 2 books published on horse genetics (coloration) - I helped supply some of the folicles and pictures for the book (my family ranch) - and the man knows his sh!t when it comes to genetics...but when it actually comes down to horses and evaluation...I'd rather have a dog show judge my horse than him. He is a very intelligent person, no doubt, but that doesn't mean he knows anything about training, breed characteristics, etc...

So, explain to me how an animal psychologist is going to know every aspect? Did she lay a dog down on a couch and ask him what was bothering him, to which he replied "Well Doc, it's like this, I want everyone to know that my breed, the _______ is the most intelligent, but somehow I can't convey this message"



Laurelin said:


> What do I know, I'm just a good ol' southerner.
> 
> 
> 
> I have the Encyclopedia of Dog Breeds.... I like the pictures.
> 
> Honestly, I've not found an all breed book that I've been terribly impressed with.
> 
> Most basically reword the breed standard and throw in a few pictures. It's nothing like the information that's out there by truly educated people on the breed.


Agreed, as from living on a horse breeding ranch and owning the Encyclopedia on Horse Breeds - I can definetely say this.

For the breed that we breed, it is the most inaccurate thing I have ever read.

One of the major "aspects" the book mentions is their "calm temprament" - Uhm...NOOOOOOO! Our breed is a very "active" one and is about as calm as dogs during 4th of July (this is not based on any specific horse mind you, but on the 50 that my family owns and the various breeders I know)

So, it makes one wonder, if something is that blatantly incorrect, what else is wrong with it?


----------



## B-Line

Dog Man - 

I thought of another way to explain this to you in your terms. Lets pretend that a dog author, studying breeds, decided to include a description of a DOODLE, in their material.

What do you think that review of the Doodle would say? (Not just Otie, but the entire Doodle family. After all, you did not know how Otie was going to turn out when you adopted him.)

I'm betting a Doodle description would read something like this:

*Size:*
Unpredictable - Small to Large

*Tempermeant*
Care should also be taken to keep your dog leashed and under your control at all times, as Goldendoodles are very keen on following their nose, and will *often turn a deaf ear to your commands*. Because of the Goldendoodle's *high energy and protracted puppy hood* (and the potential for accidental injury to humans therein), this dog should be closely *supervised around small children* and the elderly until full adulthood is reached. Even socialized and trained Goldendoodles should be supervised. Any dog can be aggressive without warning, and due to their size and buoyant nature, Goldendoodles can easily hurt someone even in play. Goldendoodles need *lots of care during puppyhood*, as they are *extremely high-energy*, *enthusiastic dogs*. This breed is a great family dog and it is also good for someone that lives alone.

or

The Labradoodle as a dog breed is still developing, and does not yet breed true, i.e. the puppies *do not have consistently predictable characteristics*. While many Labradoodles display desired traits, their appearance and b*ehavioral characteristics remain, from a breeding standpoint, unpredictable.*

*Coat*
Labradoodles' hair can be anywhere from wiry to soft, and may be straight, wavy, or curly. Some Labradoodles do shed, although the coat usually sheds less and has less dog odor than that of a Labrador Retriever.


My point is, you are only reading what you want to read and seeing what you want to see.

In case you're not sure who's winning this argument, here is some video to help you figure it out. 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOyEQcvmuxU


----------



## ACampbell

B-line...that video is priceless...LMFAO!


----------



## dog-man

i have learned much from internet dog forums such as this.

however, i count my blessings that i was not aware of these forums before i made my choice of dog.

Heaven forfend that i should trust my own research, judgement and intuition.

by following the above, i obtained and trained a pooch that is beyond what i imagined a canine could be.


----------



## B-Line

WOOHOO. I WON !!!!!!

LOL....

Otie is a great looking dog and glad you're happy with your doodle.
Now back to the normal fights, Pit bulls vs. Caesar Milan


Btw Dog-Man, this was never a:
Maggie vs. Otie argument. Or 
Nikita vs. Quincy, etc.

It was always about paying money for a breed or paying money for a mutt, labeled as a breed, to line the pockets of mostly unscrupulous breeders.


----------



## ACampbell

B-Line said:


> WOOHOO. I WON !!!!!!
> 
> LOL....
> 
> Otie is a great looking dog and glad you're happy with your doodle.
> Now back to the normal fights, Pit bulls vs. Caesar Milan



Ohhh them is fighting words! Depends on what side of the fence you're on with Pits and we may not get along anymore! Lol j/k and I could give a rat's butt about Caesar Milan so it's all good there


----------



## B-Line

I was just kidding about the Pit argument, but since it's been addressed, I'll give my .02 cent opinion.

Pit's are great dogs, for certain owners. Unfortunately 95% of the Pits/owners I have met, have not been those certain owners.
5% have.

As Pit's have become increasingly popular, it would seem the caliber of qualified people that have them as pets, has severely diminished. And they continue to become more popular, and the people who adopt them, breed them, etc, continue to be less capable..

But I still think they are awesome dogs.

B


----------



## ACampbell

Yep we still agree...you'r enot on my "bad dog" list  hehe


----------



## dog-man

B-Line said:


> Btw Dog-Man, this was never a:
> Maggie vs. Otie argument. Or
> Nikita vs. Quincy, etc.
> 
> It was always about paying money for a breed or paying money for a mutt, labeled as a breed, to line the pockets of mostly unscrupulous breeders.


i would pay 5 times the amount i paid for my WELL-BRED mutt (labeled by no one i know as a breed), from a loving breeder, who has a right to make a living from her work.

purebreeds are overrated, as i've discussed many times.

i can't speak for PWDs...maybe they were spared so far, since they only joined AKC fairly recently.

but i gotta tell you, B-Line, your humble and respectful tone at the beginning of the thread has changed quite a bit by now.


----------



## Pai

dog-man said:


> but i gotta tell you, B-Line, your humble and respectful tone at the beginning of the thread has changed quite a bit by now.


You just have that effect on people, it seems!

*runs away again*


----------



## B-Line

Yeah, I know.. 

I didn't mean it to. I think Quincy kept prodding it. I really had no interest in slamming Doodle's. I think they can be great dogs. 

But the more I tried to ignore the requests to get into the fray, the more she tried to pull me in. And once I was in, I was in.

Sorry if it seemed as though this did turn into a Doodle bashing thread.

I was really just trying to answer questions that many people have asked me previously about the differences between a PWD and a Doodle. 

My bad.


----------



## JDub

*jumps out of the shadows*


Wavy Coat's Suck!!!


*runs away giggling*


----------



## Quincy

B-Line said:


> Dog Man, Wikipedia lists the temperament of a Doodle as such:
> 
> *Appearance and Temperament*
> The Labradoodle as a dog breed is still developing, and does not yet breed true, i.e. the *puppies do not have consistently predictable characteristics*. While many Labradoodles display desired traits, *their appearance and behavioral characteristics remain, from a breeding standpoint, unpredictable.*
> As such, Labradoodles' hair can be anywhere from wiry to soft, and may be straight, wavy, or curly. Some Labradoodles do shed, although the coat usually sheds less and has less dog odor than that of a Labrador Retriever. The color range includes white, cream, gold, apricot, red, brown and black, and most of the other colors seen in Poodles.
> [edit]


That *[edit]* at the bottom of what you posted is rather interesting. Maybe you or anyone else might like to edit some information about Labradoodles on Wikipedia. If so then use this link and then click on where you see *[edit]* 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labradoodle
.


B-Line said:


> Quincy,
> You make some very valid points.


Do I 
.


B-Line said:


> But while there is absolutely nothing to prevent any Doodle breeder from calling themselves an Australian Doodle breeder, for the time being, I have to stick by my argument that yes, they are mutt's. (p.s. - I love mutt's.)


Yes there is nothing anyone can do about someone who crosses a Poodle with a Labrador and calling it an Australian Labradoodle, this may similarly apply if someone crosses a Rottweiler, Giant Schnauzer, Airedale and Newfoundland where they may call it a Black Russian Terrier and pass it off as something as on this link:-
http://www.akc.org/breeds/black_russian_terrier/

By the way, you still did not answer one of my questions, but no worries. In the link above to the Black Russian Terrier, where it took many generations of breed development to develop that breed, during that time they were called the Black Russian Terrier, and yes before breed recognised by the AKC and even before breed recognised by other Registries. The same is occuring with the Australian Labradoodle where they are a developing breed, but they are experiencing the effects of heaps of puppy millers and backyarders cashing in and where heaps of assorted doodles came onto the scene, but with the Black Russian Terrier this did not happen as they were not a popular public demand so puppy millers and backyarders were not interested in them. You keep referring to my dog as a mutt and I wonder what you would call the Black Russian Terrier during all those many generations where they were being breed developed.

I have some friends who have cross bred dogs and I don't call their dogs mutts. I feel the word has derogatory meaning, say like if you called somone a mutt then that's calling that someone a stupid or foolish person; a simpleton a dolt, a mongrel, and an inferior dog or one of mixed breed, but where the one of mixed breed has the same meaning as applied to persons such as stupid or foolish. Some may say the mutt and add words of praise fondness and affection, some dog owners may say they are very proud of their mutt and love them dearly. I prefer not to call someones dog a mutt, and I don't like it if others call my dog a mutt not even if they pad it with nice lovely meaning words. Well I'll leave it up to people to read their dictionaries and decide if they choose to use mutt or not, and those that don't have dictionaries well here is a link to one:-
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=mutt
.


B-Line said:


> I do hope they are one day recognized by the AKC because it is my opinion, that doing so, will vastly prevent some of the unethical breeding that is currently being done, for example, the dog auctions.


I've been in the breeding showing scene for quite some years, and I know of breeding that I would call unethical breeding by pure breed breeders. I've heard of things like auctions, say like where a breeder unexpectedly died and there was no will, some breeders wanted the champion breeding dogs still kept in the gene pool, there was dissagrements between breeders as to who would actually get the champion breeding dogs and how they would go about it, some even suggested spay neutering them all and finding good pet owners but others dissagreed. I've also heard of where a breeder suddenly retired due to personal reasons and who knows just maybe sudden medical reasons, where a silent auction happened and the only bidders allowed were those who were given numbers by the breeder where I feel a vetting process may have occurred, and I feel bidders for breeding dogs may have been breeders who previously bought breeding dogs or used stud services from that breeder, that breeder did mention "I will always be available to support and advice breeders as they carry my dreams on into the future for me", and where that to me does not sound like they wanted their breeding dogs to go to puppy millers or backyard breeders. Now what's these dog auctions that you are referring to and maybe you can tell us all the details.
.


B-Line said:


> I also think that having a breed become AKC recognized will then put those breeders in a situation where they will have to show their dogs, confirm their dogs, and establish a reliable standard for how the dogs will be bred and which dogs should not be bred. There will be some "accountability" for how the word Doodle is thrown around and used to market dogs.
> Then, the breeders, will actually have to spend the money they make selling dogs, on improving the breed, cause of the costs involved with showing, testing, etc. - Rather than making a profit because of a designer title.


Here is something interesting via this link, and a judge in that photo had for 30 years bred, showed plus conformation show judged pure bred registered dogs where they had Rottweilers, German Shepherd Dogs, Collies, Shih Tzus and Maltese, and now what do you think that these people in the photo maybe interested in, and yes I understand costs and gees if you want I'll show you my dogs specialist health certificates if you show me yours:-
http://www.alpsdoodles.org/pages/malibushow06.htm
.


B-Line said:


> BTW Quincy, what is your argument regarding a Doodle vs. an Australian Doodle.
> Because it seems as if, you probably are more on my side of the argument than you think you are. What are you're feelings about non Australian "Doodle" breeders ?


My wife and I for some years bred and showed Cavalier King Charles Spaniels where they obtained quite a few showing titles. Now we have an "Australian Labradoodle" which I see as a "developing breed". I do not like seeing what's happening where puppy millers and backyard breeders are churning out heaps of Cavaliers or some sort of Doodles or whatever dogs.
.


B-Line said:


>


Hope it doesn't start some sort of fashion where heaps of puppy millers and backyarders jump in to make $$$.
.



B-Line said:


> Yeah, I know..
> 
> I didn't mean it to. I think Quincy kept prodding it. I really had no interest in slamming Doodle's. I think they can be great dogs.
> 
> But the more I tried to ignore the requests to get into the fray, the more she tried to pull me in. And once I was in, I was in.
> 
> Sorry if it seemed as though this did turn into a Doodle bashing thread.
> 
> I was really just trying to answer questions that many people have asked me previously about the differences between a PWD and a Doodle.
> 
> My bad.


By the way, I am a he, but then maybe you missed some of my posts where I mentioned *My wife and I*.

B-Line, when you started this thread you put my Quincy's photo in that post and where you wanted to do a "Compare and Contrast". You called my Quincy by various names and where I feel that was not correct but you kept on persisting, well I thought before you do some sort of "Compare and Contrast" with my dog then you should at least know what my dog really is and he is not some of the names you mentioned. I think that you turned it into a Doodle bashing thread and I seem to remember you mentioning somewhere about providing education this I think to stear people away from doodles and to the breed you have or maybe other registered pure bred dogs.
.


----------



## B-Line

Quincy, your responses, on so many levels, are just so asinine, from your first response where you specifically mention, that, you have not the time to read the whole the thread. To the next one, where you bashed me for not answering your post in a timely enough fashion. To the several that came after that, asking me to please compare and contrast, which I had already done, several times: Size, Coat, Temperament, etc. 

Trying to have a conversation with you is like watching a monkey trying to have sex with a football: while entertaining, it's not really advancing any consciousness. 

Every-time I read one of your responses, I am quietly reminded how good a thing it is, that no every Doodle owner, wants a PWD. 

P.S. - You have obviously not heard a thing I have said about Doodle's, cause I have repeatedly said, I like them very much. It's the ethics behind the majority of the so called breeders that I don't like and the seemingly endless misinformation Doodle owners are constantly yapping about PWD's and their inability to be trained, too high energy, etc.

Having said all that, I really, no longer wish, to continue giving you examples of how Doodle's are similar or different from PWD's. I also have no idea what this PHANTOM question, you keep referring to is.

So have a nice weekend... As far as I'm concerned, this conversation is over.

p.s.s. - Just because you put a negative connotation on the word mutt, does not mean that everyone else in the world shares your view on the term. I certainly don't like it when breeders use the term "BITCH", but I'm not about to start a rally for doggie, political correctness... ANd that's all I have to say about that.


----------



## dog-man

B-Line said:


> Trying to have a conversation with you is like watching a monkey trying to have sex with a football: while entertaining, it's not really advancing any consciousness.


i've never seen that...


----------



## JDub

B-Line said:


> Trying to have a conversation with you is like watching a monkey trying to have sex with a football


I'd pay $5 to watch that. Got a link?? 


I dont understand the aversion to the word "mutt" either. A mutt is simply two unmatched breeds making a dog. That's what a Doodle is. If/when the AKC recognizes them as an official "breed", then the mutt tag would be dropped. If I had a doodle, and someone called it a mutt, well, I'd be hard pressed to disagree....but I certainly wouldnt take offense to it.



dog-man said:


> i've never seen that...


Maybe if you didnt spend so much time reading dog psychology books....



(its a joke)


----------



## B-Line

dog-man said:


> i've never seen that...


Best I could come up with, short notice:


----------



## Pai

JDub said:


> I'd pay $5 to watch that. Got a link??


Bet you YouTube has it, they have every crazy thing you can imagine there!


----------



## dog-man

JDub said:


> I dont understand the aversion to the word "mutt" either. A mutt is simply two unmatched breeds making a dog. That's what a Doodle is. If/when the AKC recognizes them as an official "breed", then the mutt tag would be dropped. If I had a doodle, and someone called it a mutt, well, I'd be hard pressed to disagree....but I certainly wouldnt take offense to it.


actually, i disagree that this is the definition of mutt.
this is the definition as has been promulgated by the AKC, and it's affiliated morons.

i consider a mutt to be a dog that is not the result of intentional, knowledgeable breeding.

however, if someone chooses two quality dogs (whether purebred or not), and believes that high quality dogs will result from the mating (perhaps even better than the two parents), then I would not call the resulting dogs "mutts".

however, to distinguish a goldendoodle from incestuous purebreed dogs, i would simply refer to it as a cross-breed.


----------



## B-Line

One last point, even though I should just lay it to rest...

-- Why try to invent a breed, where a breed already exists that fits the almost *exact* same specifications? It's like trying to re-invent the German Shepard, or the Boxer, or the Beagle, or the Pug....

This is the 2006, Australian Doodle, winner, from the site that Quincy posted:
http://www.alpsdoodles.org/pages/malibushow06.htm









Here is a picture of a BROWN, Portuguese Water Dog:









Here is another picture of a Doodle: (hair is long)









And here is a Portuguese Water Dog: (hair is cut short)


----------



## dog-man

B-Line said:


> Best I could come up with, short notice:


i guess we all see what we want to see.

i see a quarterback monkey who just took the snap.


----------



## B-Line

dog-man said:


> i guess we all see what we want to see.
> 
> i see a quarterback monkey who just took the snap.


Has anybody seen this video ??
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOyEQcvmuxU

Cause: 

http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn...y****ingafootball.com/images/MonkeySplash.jpg

LOL dogman, you just can't catch a break


----------



## ACampbell

B-Line said:


> One last point, even though I should just lay it to rest...
> 
> -- Why try to invent a breed, where a breed already exists that fits the almost *exact* same specifications? It's like trying to re-invent the German Shepard, or the Boxer, or the Beagle, or the Pug....
> 
> This is the 2006, Australian Doodle, winner, from the site that Quincy posted:
> http://www.alpsdoodles.org/pages/malibushow06.htm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a picture of a BROWN, Portuguese Water Dog:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is another picture of a Doodle: (hair is long)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And here is a Portuguese Water Dog: (hair is cut short)



Sad thing is, in my view just from seeing the photos...I can't tell the difference between the two breeds whatsoever.

All I see is a ton of fur that I'd have to trim or brush constantly...no thanks!


----------



## reverend_maynard

dog-man said:


> actually, i disagree that this is the definition of mutt.
> this is the definition as has been promulgated by the AKC, and it's affiliated morons.


No. This is the definition that has been promulgated by Websters, American Heritage, etc. Write them a letter and tell them they've got it wrong.



dog-man said:


> i consider a mutt to be a dog that is not the result of intentional, knowledgeable breeding.


Do you always make up your own definitions for words and then expect other people to follow along?



dog-man said:


> however, if someone chooses two quality dogs (whether purebred or not), and believes that high quality dogs will result from the mating (perhaps even better than the two parents), then I would not call the resulting dogs "mutts".


Sorry. Webster would. All doodles are mutts.



dog-man said:


> however, to distinguish a goldendoodle from incestuous purebreed dogs, i would simply refer to it as a cross-breed.


Feel free to refer to them anyway you want. Don't object when those of us who aren't using made up definitions of the word mutt call them mutts though.


----------



## JDub

From Wikipedia....
Mutt may refer to: Mixed-breed dog, a dog that has characteristics of two or more breeds. 

Dictionary.com...
mutt, noun...an inferior dog or one of mixed breed

From Wordnet.princeton.edu...
S:  cur, mongrel, mutt (an inferior dog or one of mixed breed) 

From Wisegeek...
Mutt is one of the many terms for a mixed-breed dog. Such crosses include the labradoodle, a poodle-labrador cross, and a peek-a-poo, a poodle-pekinese cross.



Sorry dog-man.....you have a "mutt".


----------



## dog-man

reverend_maynard said:


> No. This is the definition that has been promulgated by Websters, American Heritage, etc. Write them a letter and tell them they've got it wrong.
> 
> Do you always make up your own definitions for words and then expect other people to follow along?


what i wonder, is if you have no skills at research, or you are just intellectually dishonest.

i looked up various online dictionaries, and the definition i gave was a valid one, along with yours.

the word, by the way, is somewhat of a slang for "mongrel"...it seems it was only first used in 1901:

mutt from muttonhead, a pejorative term meaning “a stupid person” based on the notion that sheep are stupid. Mutt in its first recorded use in 1901 is used in the same senses as muttonhead, but it is soon recorded (1904) as a term of contempt for a horse and then (1906) for a dog. 
(American Heritage Dictionary)
------------------------

there is this from Oxford Pocket Dictionary:
. inf. 1. humorous or derog. a dog, esp. a mongrel: a long-haired mutt of doubtful pedigree. 

as you can see, one of the definitions is "doubtful pedigree".
a goldendoodle is not of doubtful pedigree...it was purposefully done.

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

there is dictionary.com:
1.	a dog of mixed or indeterminate breed. 

so you, see, it can refer to mixed OR indeterminite breed.

the first one is your definition...the second is mine.
---------------

i can only conclude that either you are intellectually dishonest or a mutt yourself, according to the dictionary definition:

2. A stupid person; a dolt

2. a person regarded as stupid or incompetent: “Do not give me orders, mutt.”



JDub said:


> Sorry dog-man.....you have a "mutt".


i have a well-bred dog.

i do not mind the word mutt...i often tell Oinest he is a stupid mutt.

however, when people use the word mutt to mean that he or other goldendoodles are of inferior breeding, that is not only misleading, but false.

i have already referenced this website many times, which has many articles discussing the serious inherent genetic problems of todays purebred dogs:

www.canine-genetics.com


----------



## reverend_maynard

dog-man said:


> what i wonder, is if you have no skills at research, or you are just intellectually dishonest.
> 
> i looked up various online dictionaries, and the definition i gave was a valid one, along with yours.
> 
> the word, by the way, is somewhat of a slang for "mongrel"...it seems it was only first used in 1901:
> 
> mutt from muttonhead, a pejorative term meaning “a stupid person” based on the notion that sheep are stupid. Mutt in its first recorded use in 1901 is used in the same senses as muttonhead, but it is soon recorded (1904) as a term of contempt for a horse and then (1906) for a dog.
> (American Heritage Dictionary)
> ------------------------
> 
> there is this from Oxford Pocket Dictionary:
> . inf. 1. humorous or derog. a dog, esp. a mongrel: a long-haired mutt of doubtful pedigree.
> 
> as you can see, one of the definitions is "doubtful pedigree".
> a goldendoodle is not of doubtful pedigree...it was purposefully done.
> 
> -------------------------------------
> 
> there is dictionary.com:
> 1.	a dog of mixed or indeterminate breed.
> 
> so you, see, it can refer to mixed OR indeterminite breed.
> 
> the first one is your definition...the second is mine.
> ---------------
> 
> i can only conclude that either you are intellectually dishonest or a mutt yourself, according to the dictionary definition:
> 
> 2. A stupid person; a dolt
> 
> 2. a person regarded as stupid or incompetent: “Do not give me orders, mutt.”
> 
> 
> 
> i have a well-bred dog.
> 
> i do not mind the word mutt...i often tell Oinest he is a stupid mutt.
> 
> however, when people use the word mutt to mean that he or other goldendoodles are of inferior breeding, that is not only misleading, but false.
> 
> i have already referenced this website many times, which has many articles discussing the serious inherent genetic problems of todays purebred dogs:
> 
> www.canine-genetics.com


Who's being intellectually dishonest again? Cross-breeds are mutts. Oinest is a mutt.


----------



## JDub

Edited out the response.... this thread has gone beyond stupidity. Nice work dog-man.


----------



## ACampbell

I love how when someone doesn't agree on something with dog-man, he uses "intellectually dishonest" as his scapegoat...I've read it so many times I'm sick of hearing it - thats my last stance on this whole thread...it's gone to the dogs!


----------



## dog-man

reverend_maynard said:


> Who's being intellectually dishonest again? Cross-breeds are mutts. Oinest is a mutt.


hey pal, you said i made up the definition...and it turns out there are different definitions, just as i said...

the one promulgated by the morons who believe in AKC closed-book breeding methods...and one for people with a more open mind of what is best for dog health...

for my sources, i already posted a website with many knowledgeable folk on the issue.

where's your sources on the genetic issues?



ACampbell said:


> I love how when someone doesn't agree on something with dog-man, he uses "intellectually dishonest" as his scapegoat...I've read it so many times I'm sick of hearing it - thats my last stance on this whole thread...it's gone to the dogs!


no, i said he is either intellectually dishonest OR stupid.

the definition as i stated it was to be found on all different dictionaries...and all he sees is the definition he wants to see.

i am polite to those who debate polite...but if you want to throw mud...like saying i made up a definition and get all sarcastic about it...then get ready to have some mud thrown back.



JDub said:


> Edited out the response.... this thread has gone beyond stupidity. Nice work dog-man.


your definition of beyond stupidity is when the point you were making is found to be erroneous.


----------



## JDub

dog-man said:


> your definition of beyond stupidity is when the point you were making is found to be erroneous.


No, actually its the point where we determine we're all saying the same thing, but you continue to argue. A mutt is a mixed breed. Your doodle is a mixed breed. But in your head, the quacking of a duck, and the looks of a duck, obviously mean its not a duck. That right there is a special kind of stupid.


----------



## dog-man

JDub said:


> No, actually its the point where we determine we're all saying the same thing, but you continue to argue. A mutt is a mixed breed. Your doodle is a mixed breed. But in your head, the quacking of a duck, and the looks of a duck, obviously mean its not a duck. That right there is a special kind of stupid.



no, that is not so.

if all anyone means when they say the word "mutt" is that it is a mixed breed, then you would be correct.

however, very often, what people mean here, directly or covertly, is to imply an inferior stock.
-----------------

btw, if you go to the beginning of the thread, B-line clearly was asking for a polite but strong debate, based on facts...and that is what i gave him.

if i give someone a rude response, check the post i am responding to, and you will usually see that i am responding in kind.

i don't want to prolong this issue, but i am tired of certain double standards of politeness and rudeness...

i am not referring to you, JDUB...i kinda like you and your approach.


----------



## Curbside Prophet

Let's see if I can get this thread back to comparisons between PWD's and "doodles".

From what I can ascertain just from this thread, there are two different views of what a "doodle" is, and those opposing views are from the "doodle" owners. Seems a bit ironic, no? 

There doesn't seem to be a questions as to what a PWD is.

So if we're comparing and we want the clearest definition of what kind of dog we're buying, sounds like the PWD would be a better choice to start with.


----------



## JDub

No worries dog-man....but for the record, at least on this thread, I dont recall seeing any discussions or assertions of doodles being of inferior stock. What was called into question was breeding habits...which could be bad for any breed, but for purebreeds there would at least be discernable standards by which the dogs would be measured.

But yes, I've seen a few doodle threads on here that seem to all go downhill pretty quickly.

And lastly, as I've mentioned a few times....I got thiiiiiiiiis close to buying a Doodle, but ended up changing my mind at the last minute simply because of ther lack of absolute certainty on what we'd get. No doubt the personality would be great....but there was no assurance on the size of the dog, nor on the shedding issue. In the end, we knew we wanted, or needed for our sanity, a 50 pound or less dog that absolutely did not shed. Our Golden shed like crazy, and as such didnt have access to certain rooms, such as the nursery when our kids arrived. So we needed the no-shed certainty...and the PWD had fully intrigued me.

I am now 8 days away from picking up my PWD puppy....so I'll post frequent updates over the next year or so to highlight differences between the Golden that I had for 12 years.

Ok....big group hug....koom-by-ah.... have a good weekend all. I'm off to continue looking for that monkey/football video.


----------



## dog-man

Curbside Prophet said:


> Let's see if I can get this thread back to comparisons between PWD's and "doodles".
> 
> From what I can ascertain just from this thread, there are two different views of what a "doodle" is, and those opposing views are from the "doodle" owners. Seems a bit ironic, no?
> 
> There doesn't seem to be a questions as to what a PWD is.
> 
> So if we're comparing and we want the clearest definition of what kind of dog we're buying, sounds like the PWD would be a better choice to start with.


brilliant.

did it ever occur to you that the two dogs may be similar, but not identical?

and therefore, the better choice depends on the subjective needs of the person choosing.



JDub said:


> And lastly, as I've mentioned a few times....I got thiiiiiiiiis close to buying a Doodle, but ended up changing my mind at the last minute simply because of ther lack of absolute certainty on what we'd get. No doubt the personality would be great....but there was no assurance on the size of the dog, nor on the shedding issue. In the end, we knew we wanted, or needed for our sanity, a 50 pound or less dog that absolutely did not shed. Our Golden shed like crazy, and as such didnt have access to certain rooms, such as the nursery when our kids arrived. So we needed the no-shed certainty...and the PWD had fully intrigued me.
> 
> .


for what it's worth, i think you made the right decision.

now, you need some good luck.

so...i wish you good luck.


----------



## reverend_maynard

dog-man said:


> hey pal, you said i made up the definition...and it turns out there are different definitions, just as i said...
> 
> the one promulgated by the morons who believe in AKC closed-book breeding methods...and one for people with a more open mind of what is best for dog health...


Just because their are other definitions does not exclude the fact that doodles fit most of the valid definitions of mutt. You said doodles were not mutts because they don't fit a few of the definitions of mutt. That's like saying a Granny Smith is not an apple because the definition of apple is "a green *or red* fruit." It's not red, but it's still an apple.

Deliberately discarding certain definitions because they don't fit what you want the word to mean is the height of intellectual dishonesty. Or is it stupidity?



dog-man said:


> for my sources, i already posted a website with many knowledgeable folk on the issue.
> 
> where's your sources on the genetic issues?


Sources on genetics have what to do with doodles being mutts?


----------



## Curbside Prophet

dog-man said:


> did it ever occur to you that the two dogs may be similar, but not identical?
> 
> and therefore, the better choice depends on the subjective needs of the person choosing.


A clear definition of what the dog is should not be subjective. Remember form follows function, not the other way around. The health benefits you argue are subjective of the breeder, not what the dog is. And we're comparing dogs, right? Not breeders.



reverend_maynard said:


> Sources on genetics have what to do with doodles being mutts?


He wants to make the argument that "doodle" breeders are some how defying the laws of common genetics more so than purebred breeders. I think Hitler tried to make the same argument...thank goodness the allied forces proved Hitler wrong.


----------



## Quincy

B-Line said:


> One last point, even though I should just lay it to rest...
> 
> -- Why try to invent a breed, where a breed already exists that fits the almost *exact* same specifications? It's like trying to re-invent the German Shepard, or the Boxer, or the Beagle, or the Pug....


Do you know of any breeders of those breeds who are using people who are allergic to dogs to assist them in determining which dogs to breed with, plus also to the function of Guide/Service dogs such as what many Guide/Service Dog Organisations do around the world.
.


----------



## B-Line

Quincy said:


> Do you know of any breeders of those breeds who are using people who are allergic to dogs to assist them in determining which dogs to breed with, plus also to the function of Guide/Service dogs such as what many Guide/Service Dog Organisations do around the world.
> .


No, nope, sorry, can't say that I do..

The only thing PWD's are good for is jumping in the pool.


----------



## Curbside Prophet

Quincy said:


> Do you know of any breeders of those breeds who are using people who are allergic to dogs to assist them in determining which dogs to breed with, plus also to the function of Guide/Service dogs such as what many Guide/Service Dog Organisations do around the world.
> .


What would prevent a PWD breeder from doing the same?


----------



## Quincy

B-Line said:


> No, nope, sorry, can't say that I do..
> 
> The only thing PWD's are good for is jumping in the pool.


On this webpage there are breeders who do, and some of the people you see in the photo are allergic to dogs, and my wife is in one of the photos:-
http://www.alpsdoodles.org/pages/malibushow06.htm

Yes my wife became allergic to dogs and her allergy is gradually increasing in severity. Because of this we no longer can have a Cavalier at our home, nor any other dog she is allergic too, yet we can have our Quincy as she is not allergic to him and including his relatives. Well it's great to see her able to go to a dog show as seen via that link.

My Quincy also loves to dive into pools. Great to have a Guide/Service Dog who loves water as they can function well in situations like being caught out in pouring rain.
.



Curbside Prophet said:


> What would prevent a PWD breeder from doing the same?


I think PWD breeders could do the same, but I don't know of any does anyone.
.


----------



## dog-man

Curbside Prophet said:


> A clear definition of what the dog is should not be subjective. Remember form follows function, not the other way around. The health benefits you argue are subjective of the breeder, not what the dog is. And we're comparing dogs, right? Not breeders.
> .


does anyone know what in the world you are saying?

by the way, my response to you, was to your statement regarding the BETTER CHOICE of what dog to get...that has to do with the OWNER.
here are your words:
So if we're comparing and we want the clearest definition of what kind of dog we're buying, sounds like the PWD would be a better choice to start with.

therefore, the better CHOICE has to do with the subjective needs of the buyer.

if someone has a main priority that the dog should be non-shed, then a PWD would probably make more sense, since the non-shed is already consistent.

however, i wanted certain temperament traits as my most important priority, and my judgement was that a goldendoodle was the best way to get those traits.

that was a judgement call...not a declaration of fact.

since i got the temperament i was looking for (and non-shed also), then i can feel confident that my CHOICE, based on my subjective needs was done well.

even if it was maybe possible to accomplish my needs with another choice.

get out of your "intellectual" thinking, and realize that people have to make choices of what is BEST for them...not some ethereal objective truth.



Curbside Prophet said:


> He wants to make the argument that "doodle" breeders are some how defying the laws of common genetics more so than purebred breeders. I think Hitler tried to make the same argument...thank goodness the allied forces proved Hitler wrong.


again, what in the world are you saying?

does anyone get it?


----------



## Curbside Prophet

dog-man said:


> by the way, my response to you, was to your statement regarding the BETTER CHOICE of what dog to get...that has to do with the OWNER.
> here are your words:
> So if we're comparing and we want the clearest definition of what kind of dog we're buying, sounds like the PWD would be a better choice to start with.
> 
> therefore, the better CHOICE has to do with the subjective needs of the buyer.


And I'm comparing PWD's to "doodles" in what the dog *IS*. As usual, you have your own agenda. We're not comparing one owners "needs" to yours. My point, the one you're trying to deflect, is that the PWD is a PWD and the choice is we want a dog that *IS* what it's suppose to be. Not, we want a PWD and a "doodle" worked for dog-man so that's an option too. Again (maybe it's like pennies in a piggy bank and one day the bank will be full), we shouldn't enter into a contract with a breeder unless we know what the dog *IS*...you're hoping that your decisions lead you to a good dog, but it's not surprising that Oinest exceeded your limitations. I agree however that good decisions will lead you to a good dog, but if I know what the dog *IS* I'm increasing my chances in what the dog *IS*. I honestly don't care how you seek to validate your judgment. It doesn't help anyone in how to consider buying a dog. 



> however, i wanted certain temperament traits as my most important priority, and my judgement was that a goldendoodle was the best way to get those traits.
> 
> that was a judgement call...not a declaration of fact.


One day you'll understand that I'm not interested in your judgment, nor write from a vantage considering your ability to judge in spite of my sarcasm that you don't get. 



> since i got the temperament i was looking for (and non-shed also), then i can feel confident that my CHOICE, based on my subjective needs was done well.


This is Dogforums.com, not dog-man'sforums.com. Your subjective needs do not even begin to scrape the surface for what a prospective buyer needs to consider about the dog they are buying. So no one cares about your subjectivity. 



> get out of your "intellectual" thinking, and realize that people have to make choices of what is BEST for them...not some ethereal objective truth.


So using one's intellect is not within reason? Or is this an attempt to satisfy your egocentric "needs"?



> again, what in the world are you saying?
> 
> does anyone get it?


It's a math problem. You may even need your counting toes for this one.


----------



## dog-man

i'm finished responding to you.

half the time you are unintelligible...the other half evasive.

occassionally, you have something interesting to say, which fools me into thinking a conversation would be worth it.

good luck.


----------



## Curbside Prophet

Quincy said:


> I think PWD breeders could do the same, but I don't know of any does anyone.
> .


Seems like if that's something they wanted to do they could easily. It would certainly make it easier for the consumer since the breed is already recognized. But it makes sense that if your specific needs were satisfied by the emerging Australian Labradoodle, and not the PWD, you would make that choice.



dog-man said:


> i'm finished responding to you.


Do you promise?


----------



## Xeph

> half the time you are unintelligible...the other half evasive.


POT CALLING THE KETTLE BLACK!! POT CALLING THE KETTLE BLACK!!! 

*squeals, giggles, and runs off to frolic with her Shepherds*


----------



## wvasko

Xeph said:


> POT CALLING THE KETTLE BLACK!! POT CALLING THE KETTLE BLACK!!!
> 
> *squeals, giggles, and runs off to frolic with her Shepherds*


I got to side with the Kettle on this, the Pot is a one horse & pony show. 

dogman
A mutt is a mutt, it is a mixed breed dog no more, no less. You are not going to be in control of what individuals think when they hear the word mutt. Sorry, I got carried away as I try to stay out of this stuff.


----------



## ACampbell

OMG, I thought this thread was done and over with...like a page and a half ago...how silly of me, I guess the horse wasn't dead enough so some folks figured beating it some more might help.

Anyway, I agree with Curbside...and as for Dog-mans comment about him being evasive and or unintelligible...I don't think that's true. Some of CP's responses are written at more than a 5th grade reading level, but, they have a point...even if it's buried in big words  lol
Now, go outside, play with your Doodle or PWD - or whatever...(just leave my pitbulls alone hehe)  it's nice weather here in NY, no excuse Dog-man!


----------



## Curbside Prophet

ACampbell said:


> Some of CP's responses are written at more than a 5th grade reading level, but, they have a point...even if it's buried in big words  lol


Two of my favorite people Richard Dawkins and Neil deGrasse Tyson speak to your point and I think Dawkins' response is eloquent, LOL.


----------



## ACampbell

LMFAO...priceless.
I don't see a problem with what you write, I understand it perfectly (then again being an English major doesn't hurt either) maybe you need a crash course in writing Army Training manuals...to help with some people that don't quite get all of it. They are written to a 5th grade reading level, but still don't explain a darn thing when you read them...similar to electronics manuals


----------



## dog-man

wvasko said:


> dogman
> A mutt is a mutt, it is a mixed breed dog no more, no less. You are not going to be in control of what individuals think when they hear the word mutt. .


the point is not to control people's minds...it is to OPEN people's minds to alternative priorities in dog-breeding.

the concept of PUREbreed is fairly new...before the AKC, the priority in quality breeding was to develop a consistency in work abilities...cross-breeding was rampant among the better breeders.

i was offering a different definition of mutt/mongrel (which is in the dictionary) and is consistent with the history of dog breeding.

i was not saying that the AKC definition of mutt does not exist.

the word "mutt" itself is a perjorative term...it started as a slang "muttonhead".

the central issue is whether a cross-breed is by definition inferior to a pure breed.
the use of the word "mutt" to an intentional crossbreed is merely the prejudice of those who advocate an AKC philosophy on quality dog-breeding.

i have often referenced the website which has many articles, that are critical of the AKC approach. www.canine-genetics.com
even if some people read the articles, no one tries to debate the content.

all i hear, is that there must be another side...well, what is it?


----------



## Laurelin

I love that the AKC is now promoting one version of the term 'mutt'. I was really unaware they had such influence on the English language. 

And this idea that mutts are inferior... this is coming from where? Many of us have had mutts and purebreds alike. My dog was a crossbred half and half... he was a mutt. I called him that. But he was a great dog as well...

Heck, I even call my purebred CHAMPION dog a mutt. I don't see the problem with the word at all.

You blame way too much on the AKC to try to explain away some dubious breeders imo. There are many more kennel clubs than the AKC and dog showing was around long before. 

I won't deny that some labradoodle breeders are reputable, but crossing everything is not magically okay because some purebred breeders have problems.


----------



## dog-man

ACampbell said:


> LMFAO...priceless.
> I don't see a problem with what you write, I understand it perfectly (then again being an English major doesn't hurt either) maybe you need a crash course in writing Army Training manuals...to help with some people that don't quite get all of it. They are written to a 5th grade reading level, but still don't explain a darn thing when you read them...similar to electronics manuals


ok, genius.

here is his quote:
He wants to make the argument that "doodle" breeders are some how defying the laws of common genetics more so than purebred breeders. I think Hitler tried to make the same argument...thank goodness the allied forces proved Hitler wrong.

first, translate it so it makes sense.

even if you accomplish that, the point will probably be false.

the purebreed philosophy of dogs was inspired by the 19th century philosophy of eugenics...breeding the best to the best, among people and animals.

eugenics was Hitler's philosophy.

eugenics was proven to be a faulty philosophy, once genetic scientists showed the health flaws of small breed pools....too many of the same recessive genes among the small population.

livestock breeders got the point pretty quick, once the purebred livestock were not doing so well.

the AKC still continued the eugenics tradition, because the dogs didn't have to perform...just look good.
the utilization of health tests only manages to put off the more serious problems temporarily.

so, how anyone can try to equate the advocating of crossbreeding to the philosophy of the nazis has facts completely screwed up.

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

btw, if you want to read a good article on the history of eugenics and purebred dog breeding, here is a very good one:

http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2006/05/inbred-thinking.html


----------



## ACampbell

dog-man said:


> ok, genius.
> 
> here is his quote:
> He wants to make the argument that "doodle" breeders are some how defying the laws of common genetics more so than purebred breeders. I think Hitler tried to make the same argument...thank goodness the allied forces proved Hitler wrong.
> 
> first, translate it so it makes sense.
> 
> even if you accomplish that, the point will probably be false.
> 
> the purebreed philosophy of dogs was inspired by the 19th century philosophy of eugenics...breeding the best to the best, among people and animals.
> 
> eugenics was Hitler's philosophy.
> 
> eugenics was proven to be a faulty philosophy, once genetic scientists showed the health flaws of small breed pools....too many of the same recessive genes among the small population.
> 
> livestock breeders got the point pretty quick, once the purebred livestock were not doing so well.
> 
> the AKC still continued the eugenics tradition, because the dogs didn't have to perform...just look good.
> the utilization of health tests only manages to put off the more serious problems temporarily.
> 
> so, how anyone can try to equate the advocating of crossbreeding to the philosophy of the nazis has facts completely screwed up.
> 
> ---------------------
> 
> btw, if you want to read a good article on the history of eugenics and purebred dog breeding, here is a very good one:
> 
> http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2006/05/inbred-thinking.html


I think that was rude and out of line to be honest...I never made any direct nasty comments toward you, so why don't you just go find something to do other than complain. 

I got CP's point exactly...it was in reference to what you were stating that basically breeding Dog X and Dog Y will help to cut out bad genetic factors - Hitlers "idea" was that if you cross Human X (blond hair blue eyes theorectically) and Human Y (same blond hair and blue eye combo) you would get a "super race" of "genetically pure" humans... it would appear that your theories are the same with your crossbred dogs...thinking that if I cross X and Y it will be a superior dog...I'm pretty sure that was CP's point...I'm sorry you were unable to read that much into it.


----------



## dog-man

ACampbell said:


> I think that was rude and out of line to be honest...I never made any direct nasty comments toward you, so why don't you just go find something to do other than complain.


i apologize for being ride.

i thought in your previous post that you were implying i didn't understand CP, because of some intelligence flaw.
i reread your post, and i see that this was not so.

btw, it is raining this afternoon where i am, and i took Oinest to the dog park in the morning.


----------



## ACampbell

Yeah it started raining here around 3 PM...but this morning was bright and sunny!

Also, if I wanted to be rude and make a crack on your intelligence, it wouldn't have been nice LOL, CP's posts can take some reading to them, and re-reading...but generally I find once I've read it over and think about it that it makes sense 
Trust me, CP and I haven't always gotten along, so it's not a "clique" thing against you for me to say that, hehe.


----------



## dog-man

ACampbell said:


> I got CP's point exactly...it was in reference to what you were stating that basically breeding Dog X and Dog Y will help to cut out bad genetic factors - Hitlers "idea" was that if you cross Human X (blond hair blue eyes theorectically) and Human Y (same blond hair and blue eye combo) you would get a "super race" of "genetically pure" humans... it would appear that your theories are the same with your crossbred dogs...thinking that if I cross X and Y it will be a superior dog...I'm pretty sure that was CP's point...I'm sorry you were unable to read that much into it.



as to the point, i already stated where it is completely flawed.

the history of dog breeding is SELECTIVE breeding.
it was not only a matter of choosing the best, but trying to obtain a cross of differing traits...to get the best of each "breed".
however, the definition of superior was not limited by definition to a limited group, and groups did not have to be kept separated from each other.

on the other hand:
eugenics, which was the inspiration of Hitler and the show dog, was one of only breeding from a very small, "superior" pool, and keeping each group pure from the other.

please read the terrierman article on the previous post for more detail.

this is as close to historical fact as you can get.
to turn the argument around is ludicrous.


----------



## ACampbell

That's what I read CP's post to be about...maybe not read the same as intended but that's determined by the comprehension from person to person.

Some of your statements lean that way...personally, and to be honest, I really don't give a rats butt about Doodles or the big complaint against them. I agree that BYB's shouldn't be making money on ANY breed just to pump them out for the public...which, seeing the variation of coats in the doodle thus so far, seems to be whats happening. If a standard was created for them, I'd like to see it. I don't care if it's AKC standard (which of course it won't be because since they are not recognized - nor do I hold a lot of stock in AKC) but I believe if they intend on creating a "new breed" such as a Golden Doodle a common goal amongst breeders should be prevalent...this isn't something I"ve seen yet. I've seen a massive variation of coats and looks - but nothing being done about it. 
They even had one on "Groomer Has It" yesterday or the day before. One of the main points of it was the variation on how to groom said dog because of the variation...the one mentioned did not look anything like a PWD, but had long, straight hair that was matted...to me, that might as well be a Golden Retriever...

What is the overall "goal" of a Golden Doodle breeder? As of yet I've seen anyone to sit down and define it without getting irritable (it is a simple question) or complaining or acting the fool...it's just like the pitbull people that go totally ape sh!t when someone makes a nasty comment...instead of informing, they push more people away because the owners are more "vicious" than their dogs.


----------



## Curbside Prophet

dog-man said:


> eugenics was proven to be a faulty philosophy, once genetic scientists showed the health flaws of small breed pools....too many of the same recessive genes among the small population.


This is what happens when you have an agenda - you tell only one side of the story. Eugenics is a much broader term which also includes eliminating hereditary defects by exterminating undesired gene pools. You've defined purebreds as being the undesirable gene pool. So let's not appear foolish and tell only half the story. 



> livestock breeders got the point pretty quick, once the purebred livestock were not doing so well.


Let's not also fool ourselves into thinking livestock breeders are breeding companion animals or that their intentional crosses are for the long term health benefit of the animal. These were your goals, correct? Your average cow never sees the full term of his life, he's too delicious for that. The only thing livestock breeders care about is the yield (that is a cow's purpose)...as it translates into $$$. The same can be said of "doodle" breeders...the fad translates into $$$. They'll say whatever they need to say to make you buy their animals, and they've got you on a hook.



> the AKC still continued the eugenics tradition, because the dogs didn't have to perform...just look good.
> the utilization of health tests only manages to put off the more serious problems temporarily.


And the AKC is only a registry. You don't buy dogs from the AKC. Conformation trails are merely one form of peer review. 

As far as the health tests are concerned, there aren't even tests available for many breeds and diseases. We're just at the infancy of genetic testing. But all the genetics you say are excluded from purebred breeders is a false claim. Nature is never as simplistic as you describe it, not even with "doodle" breeders, nor has your science been demonstrated on any significant scale in doodledom. Theory is one thing, application in the real world is another. 

The skill and luck of the breeder is demonstrated in her results. In the 80's the GSD was on the verge of complete collapse due to unthoughtful breedings and hip dysplasia (in fact it could be traced back to one German sire). However, one of the most inbred lines of dogs in the world has the lowest breed incidence of hip dysplasia and the highest success rate as a superior companion dog - the seeing eye German Shepherd. How can this be when you've said all along small gene pools are deleterious? 

It's simple, one does not make breeding or buying choices based on single or subjective criteria - outcrossing can be as deadly as linebreeding, but smart breeders make careful selections EVERY generation. 



> so, how anyone can try to equate the advocating of crossbreeding to the philosophy of the nazis has facts completely screwed up.


When your view is one sided of course it is. But your bias is obvious to us.


----------



## dog-man

ACampbell said:


> What is the overall "goal" of a Golden Doodle breeder? .


the goal, as I see it, is merely to provide a good family dog, for the RIGHT families.

for example, me and my family.

my favorite dog is a golden.
however, i need to have a dog that sheds much less than a golden does.
but i DO NOT need a guarantee of low or non-shedding.

a goldendoodle from a good breeder, from what i have seen, is a highly friendly/gentle, highly intelligent dog.

i was told that they are good with cats, and i needed that, because i had an old cat that hated dogs.

a goldendoodle (just like a golden retreiver) needs exercise and company.
my doctor said i needed to get more exercise, and i work at home now, so it was a perfect match.

personally, i believe in the concept of hybrid vigor.
that doesn't mean mixing any breeds is a good idea...but from what i can see, a well-bred golden and well-bred poodle is a great match.
in that case, the crossing of genes between breeds is positive from a scientific perspective.
anyone care to argue that?
you won't have a leg to stand on...all you can do is confuse the issue with nonsense. 

what more purpose does a goldendoodle breeder or buyer need?

all the answers i have seen, with an AKC philosophy of dog breeding are pretty vacuous.


----------



## ACampbell

Ok, so for your purpose you like golden retrievers, but not the HUGE shed factor? Even though with the fact you are crossing a massively shedding breed with a no shed breed will yield some of each...so in all train of thought, you COULD have gotten a dog that sheds like crazy still.
As for the cat part, that's part of prey drive...lots of dogs can be good with cats and lower on the shedding factor without having to make a new breed. 



> personally, i believe in the concept of hybrid vigor.
> that doesn't mean mixing any breeds is a good idea...but from what i can see, a well-bred golden and well-bred poodle is a great match.
> in that case, the crossing of genes between breeds is positive from a scientific perspective.
> anyone care to argue that?
> you won't have a leg to stand on...all you can do is confuse the issue with nonsense


Nonesense aside...do you honestly believe the people that are breeding these dogs are using top quality Goldens and Poodles? If that were so, why aren't they breeding to better the Golden or Poodle breed instead of making...mutts. Either they are money motivated or they don't have a top quality dog of either breed.
That's not a positive at all...for anyones sake. Either they are denying excellent genetics for a purebred breed - which you yourself would say is necessary since you seem to think purebred dogs have lost their edge...or they are breeding animals that couldn't hack it as a excellent quality dog for breeding purposes within their own breed.
Anyone can buy a dog of each breed and make a doodle. There will be variations that are either good or bad - genetically or conformation wise - at least with a purebred animal you can have a general idea of what the dog will look like when it's an adult...this will be a downfall for doodle owners or new owners that think the following:

"Because my dog is a doodle, it WILL not shed" - FALSE, how can you be sure of what genetic trait that particular animal got?

"I bought a doodle because they are hypoallergenic" FALSE - again, like the coat issue...thats playing roulette.

I'm not disputing the fact that they may be very friendly and intelligent - both the parent breeds are...so that's a given, unless like I mentioned earlier...someone was using a crappy bred dog to pump out puppies to fill the demand.

But now onto genetically inherited diseases. What about Addison's Disease? Common in poodles...so how can any breeder of a mixed dog guarantee that dog won't get it? They can't - here's proof 


> No Standard Poodle Breeder is correct in stating that they know for certain that any Standard Poodle alive will not be affected by this disease


http://www.tiarapoodles.com/addisons.html


> There are no worthwhile health screenings to help avoid the disease. The only way to know if a dog is a carrier, is if the dog has produced the disease.


It also can show up at any time in life. A poodle owner with a poodle bred from a responsible breeder, would know this. Since there is no way to test it, I'd rather not take bets on such a horrifying disease. At least they get a warning!


> A DNA test is not available for Addison's disease in Standard Poodles (or any other breed at this time) and until that blessed day arrives, all Standard Poodles are to be considered carriers


This is half your dogs lineage...along with many other diseases that might not crop up right away. 

IMHO, "Hybrid Vigor" is a cover up statement. The dog may or may not get the inherited diseases. Working with 2 completely different genetic lines can be disasterous at worst...sucessful at best...again, back to playing Roulette.

There is no guarantee...while your dog maybe the best dog out there - I can guarantee you that there are others that shed a lot, have genetic disorders, hip dysplasia, elbow dysplasia, Von Willebrands Disease...etc. 
Without a common goal to eradicate or to sterilize animals with said disorders - it will always be prevalent. This goes for purebred or mixed bred dogs. Sounds cruel, but to remove a genetic defect you must remove the genetics. 

A person that is interested in buying a mixed breed dog needs to be twice as aware of the genetic predispositions of the animals parents. Most are not, it's a fad for now, it's a shame that not as many people are disease saavy as they should be. It would be the same for a person going out to buy a GSD pup...however, the occurance of HD in GSD's is pretty well known...how many people know about Addison's Disease or Von Willebrands? I can assure you, it's not as many as there needs to be. I'd never heard of Addison's Disease before coming onto DF...I've never owned a poodle or any other breed associated with the disease...I also think doodles are cute...
So, when I go and buy a doodle and it, after several years, starts vomiting, has diarrhea, and some of the common symptoms of A.D...I am definetely going to feel jipped that I was not aware of their genetic predisposition to it. But who knows, I could get lucky and get one that wouldn't have it...you just don't know though.


----------



## dog-man

ACampbell said:


> Ok, so for your purpose you like golden retrievers, but not the HUGE shed factor? Even though with the fact you are crossing a massively shedding breed with a no shed breed will yield some of each...so in all train of thought, you COULD have gotten a dog that sheds like crazy still.
> .


there was an informal survey of goldendoodle owners.

the vast majority reported a low shed rate.
the percentage that shed a lot was not large.

as well, by choosing a doodle with curly hair, you up your chances of low or no shed very considerably.

i do not see ANY shed on Oinest, and the goldendoodles i know either do not shed or are low shed.
the few that do were from puppy stores, and so there was no consultation with a knowledgable breeder.



ACampbell said:


> As for the cat part, that's part of prey drive...lots of dogs can be good with cats and lower on the shedding factor without having to make a new breed.


a golden is supposed to be among the best dogs to live with cats.

having part golden in the mix is a good idea to me.



ACampbell said:


> Nonesense aside...do you honestly believe the people that are breeding these dogs are using top quality Goldens and Poodles? .


i think the better breeders do use top dogs.

but, it is also important how one defines "top dog".

my breeder used to breed goldens exclusively.

she said that Oinest's dad was the best dog she ever had...but he would not have been able to be top in the show or field competitions.

he was a well-tempered, intelligent, stable, athletic, healthy etc dog.



ACampbell said:


> ...do you honestly believe the people that are breeding these dogs are using top quality Goldens and Poodles? If that were so, why aren't they breeding to better the Golden or Poodle breed instead of making...mutts. Either they are money motivated or they don't have a top quality dog of either breed.
> .


you see, you are assuming that a mutt (a cross-breed) is somehow inferior.

yes, i think they are money-motivated....i don;t have a problem with that, if they also love dogs, and want to make money by having the best dogs.

the vast money that many show dog breeders spend on breeding and showing their dogs is not all money well-spent.
the expenses in traveling and showing is not necessarily returning that value back in to the quality of the dog.

these people want ribbons...that can lead to bad decisions too...if they also love dogs, then it is not as bad.



ACampbell said:


> "Because my dog is a doodle, it WILL not shed" - FALSE, how can you be sure of what genetic trait that particular animal got?
> 
> "I bought a doodle because they are hypoallergenic" FALSE - again, like the coat issue...thats playing roulette.
> .


the Australian doodles aside (i am not knowledgable about them), any breeder who claims this is a liar, and any buyer is a fool.

however, the breeders and buyers i know are up front and knowledgeable of the risks.

as i mentioned before, they seem to be lower shed and lower allergenic than goldens, and so there is usually a positive step up, if this is preferable for you.



ACampbell said:


> A person that is interested in buying a mixed breed dog needs to be twice as aware of the genetic predispositions of the animals parents.
> how many people know about Addison's Disease or Von Willebrands?


actually, a person who buys a purebred dog has to be more diligent about these recessive genetic problems than one who buys a cross (although both should be diligent).

IF Von Willebrands is a recessive genetic problem (i believe it is)...and IF golden are less prone to it than poodles (i believe they are)...then the mere crossing of the two breeds lessens the chance of the offspring getting Von Willebrands by quite a bit.

i have to clarify...it lessens it for poodles...and does not significantly raise the odds for goldens, if that recessive gene is not common to them.

in general, crossing is considered very positive, from a genetic helath perspective...there are individual cases where it can be detrimental...what we are after is to raise the odds for a healthy outcome, for all dogs.


----------



## Xeph

> IF Von Willebrands is a recessive genetic problem (i believe it is)...and IF golden are less prone to it than poodles (i believe they are)...then the mere crossing of the two breeds lessens the chance of the offspring getting Von Willebrands by quite a bit.


Having perhaps, but what about being a carrier?

And "less prone" does not equal immune. There are breeds less prone to hip dysplasia than the GSD...doesn't mean they're free of it.


----------



## ACampbell

I'm glad to see that you can point out the good factors of said breed...now to be an advocate you need to be able to point out the negatives as well.
No offense, but an informal survey doesn't mean a whole lot. I could put up a survey on this website and people will vote...but it's not necessarily the end all, be all of the breed.

I noticed with Addison's Disease it also affects the PWD, Poodle...etc. Could this be hereditary to dogs with a curly coat? If that is the case, which I'm not sure of but would like some input, would that not make a dog from either breed or a mixture thereof, more likely to have said disease? IF that is the case, and say I have allergies (I do, just not to dogs thank God) to dogs, I would want one with a curly coat - more hypoallergenic (so I've read) - but doesn't that up my chances to have a dog with a genetic problem? 

I'm not disputing that you have a wonderful dog, from a wonderful father...even though he wasn't "show quality" - which makes about absolutely no matter to me at all - but you didn't mention the mother?

Top quality doesn't always necessitate a purple ribbon in all events...in fact, some of the animals I've seen considered "Grand Champion" would not interest me whatsoever...(especially with the APBT these days...WTF is going on there?! I don't want a hippo, I want an athletic, sleek dog...not one that looks like it could pull a wagon across the prarie!) 
I'd rather see dogs being bred for temperment and health than looks anymore...again, the "blue hippo" syndrome that has hit the APBT . . .but they are placing in shows and I don't know why...

Top quality, as per MY definition - would be a dog that is conformationally sound, healthy and free of genetic disorders, and looks like a representative of that breed should look like. Show ring results aren't always indicative that the dog is healthy or free of genetic disorders - unless they are forcing people to provide more than OFA certs. for showing...

I've lived on a horse ranch and shown horses my entire life (well up until the last 2 years or so) this is where I get my definitions from...seeing horses that can barely walk but are absolutely gorgeous is a total turn off...seeing a horse that might not be as beautiful (i.e. overly large head, heavier boned, etc) that is useful is more important to me...but not to all.

I guess it all comes down to person preference. I don't think making a hybrid breed is any better than a GOOD purebred breeder. I do think that a lot of people are doing it for the money with little regard to health issues. 
IF, and I stress, IF, the Golden doodle becomes a breed that is bred with a standard and comes out consistently (I'm not sure how that would be achieved because they are a direct mix...), and people are made aware of the potential health issues...then it will have my respect as more than a cross-breed...not until.

As for dogs that like cats...that will never be a problem for me...I'm highly allergic to cats and I don't care for them at all (sorry I'm on the top of the food chain in my house, not a slave! lol or so I'd like to think anyway) 

Another question for you. In the event (I hope not, but hypothetically) that your doodle were to come down with any of the problems associated with the two breeds...what is your recourse? I know if you buy a purebred from a reputable breeder with a contract and say the dog comes up with HD (it could happen even with 2 OFA cert. dogs being the parents) you would be in better shape than buying from a BYB that only guarantees they will be healthy for a year...I don't find that very fair. You have more genetic possibilities this way, would a breeder not be more liable since it could be a combination of these? I'm curious to know, when my hubby bought Lily (APBT) that I had picked out...we made sure her parents were HD free (I saw both parents also which was a good thing) because that's a problem with a larger dog . . .did your breeder show you information to "prove" that the father didn't have HD (like OFA cert) or anything like that?



Xeph said:


> Having perhaps, but what about being a carrier?



Not even that, just because Goldens are less prone to it, doesn't mean they aren't a carrier...who knows, you could have an epidemic of something like that...
Also the question is, WHY is the Golden less prone to having Von Willebrands? Has it been bred out or are good breeders not using dogs that are positive for it? Ok, so lets go with the second idea, that good breeders are avoiding matings with dogs that have or carry the disease...

With the dogs being a fad, everyone and his cousin jumping on the bandwagon and such...what is more likely? That they'll check to see if it's a genetic trait? Or if they bought the first Golden old enough to be bred and the first poodle and called it good? Even I could do something like that and call it a Doodle, but there's no guarantee the offspring of my impulse bought dogs will be healthy at all...THAT is my big problem with all of it...the puppies suffer because of bad breeding practices. While there may be some good breeders out there trying to make a new breed, I doubt this is the overall goal of the Goldendoodle market.


----------



## dog-man

Xeph said:


> Having perhaps, but what about being a carrier?
> 
> And "less prone" does not equal immune. There are breeds less prone to hip dysplasia than the GSD...doesn't mean they're free of it.


i don't understand your point.

less prone is important, and that is accomplished by not having a small group that has a high percentage of the same negative recessive gene.

one top solution, according to scientists, is to cross populations, to a healthy extent.



ACampbell said:


> I'm glad to see that you can point out the good factors of said breed...now to be an advocate you need to be able to point out the negatives as well.
> No offense, but an informal survey doesn't mean a whole lot. I could put up a survey on this website and people will vote...but it's not necessarily the end all, be all of the breed.
> .


this was not a vote...this was a survey of people who OWNED goldendoodles...not a scientific study, but better than some people here just pulling facts from certain orifices.



ACampbell said:


> I noticed with Addison's Disease it also affects the PWD, Poodle...etc. Could this be hereditary to dogs with a curly coat? If that is the case, which I'm not sure of but would like some input, would that not make a dog from either breed or a mixture thereof, more likely to have said disease? IF that is the case, and say I have allergies (I do, just not to dogs thank God) to dogs, I would want one with a curly coat - more hypoallergenic (so I've read) - but doesn't that up my chances to have a dog with a genetic problem?
> .


if curly coat was related to Addisons, then you would be increasing the chances...i'm not sure of the point you are making.

but if the poodles and PWDs were occassionally outcrossed to a breed that didn't have it, the chances to receive it would go down.

experienced breeders can do outcrosses and still maintain the crucial traits of the breed.



ACampbell said:


> I'm not disputing that you have a wonderful dog, from a wonderful father...even though he wasn't "show quality" - which makes about absolutely no matter to me at all - but you didn't mention the mother?


she said the mother was intelligent, well-behaved and healthy.
she did not rave about her like she did about the father, but she did praise her.

i believe my breeder chooses the best dogs from her litters to continue breeding.



ACampbell said:


> Another question for you. In the event (I hope not, but hypothetically) that your doodle were to come down with any of the problems associated with the two breeds...what is your recourse? .


my breeder had the same guarantees as the better breeders...but what is the point of it anyway.

after a year, you love your dog, and you are not sending it back.

as i discussed on a different thread, if a dog is returned to the best of the purebred breeders, and the dog has a very serious problem, the breeder merely puts the animal down herself.



ACampbell said:


> .did your breeder show you information to "prove" that the father didn't have HD (like OFA cert) or anything like that?
> 
> .


my breeder did not do those testings...however, she chose dogs to mate that showed no signs of these problems.

there are many goldendoodle breeders that do all the accepted tests of the better breeders..
if i got another doodle, if i did not go to the same breeder, i would go to a breeder that did the testing.


----------



## ACampbell

The dog being put down is not necessarily true. If it's better for the dog in terms of quality of life...then they should it, or the owner should have been caring enough to do it themselves...

That being said, if I bought a dog I wanted for specific reasons and did not come with a health guarantee - I wouldn't buy it.
Also, perhaps the idea of some people buying from a good breeder is to breed themselves - they buy the top quality so they can produce top quality. If the dog comes down with someone serious - the dogs purpose cannot be fulfilled (I know that sounds cold but can't think of a better way to put it and cook dinner at the same time) and therefore their money should be returned? 
If a dog is bought for its hypoallergenic qualities, yet ends up shedding like crazy or being a problem to the allergies - should the person get their money back? Sure they love the dog, however, that doesn't mean that they are able to live with it...just my thought on it.

On that note, say your dog (hypothetically) that you paid X amount of $$ for...eats your cat? Or you can no longer keep him because he becomes aggressive toward your cat...it could happen. So what happens then? Granted, if he's already killed the cat you know not to get another one, but if the cat survives does the dog go outside or what? You said that was a specific reason you wanted the breed you chose is because of their lack of prey drive to cats and shedding...so if he had turned out to be a shedding cat eating monster...would you still be as happy?


----------



## dog-man

ACampbell said:


> Also the question is, WHY is the Golden less prone to having Von Willebrands? Has it been bred out or are good breeders not using dogs that are positive for it? Ok, so lets go with the second idea, that good breeders are avoiding matings with dogs that have or carry the disease...
> 
> .


it was probably not necessary to breed it out of goldens.

the foundation stock that started goldens might not have had that recessive gene present.

even though poodles are of ancient origin, the foundation stock that was used when the kennel clubs were formed was of limited number.

there must have been some Von Willebrand's gene among them...and then when all future poodles are bred from that smal loriginal group, a higher percentage of poodles have the recessive gene, than if they were allowed to mate without human intervention.

for the malady to present itself, both parents have to have the recessive gene...
if you mix breeds, the chances of both parents having the same recessive gene is lessened.

the breed clubs have relied on another solution...to try to weed out the dogs that have the recessive gene at all...the testing is not advance enough to do that well enough...
so for now, it is just a temporary bandaid.


----------



## Xeph

> i don't understand your point.
> 
> less prone is important, and that is accomplished by not having a small group that has a high percentage of the same negative recessive gene.


What's not to understand? Just because the Golden Retriever is LESS prone to Addison's doesn't mean some dogs don't have it, or aren't carriers. And since you don't know about it until the dog produces it, the Golden father and the Poodle mother very well could have produced a puppy with Addison's.

Mighty dangerous crapshoot.


> if you mix breeds, the chances of both parents having the same recessive gene is lessened.


Not if both breeds are prone to that health issue. Doesn't matter if the occurrence in the Golden is less, the point is they can still produce Addison's.


----------



## ACampbell

Yes I'm familiar that it takes two recessives (rr) to make a recessive gene show up...doesn't mean it won't happen. My father has brown eyes (Bb) and my mother blue (bb) - mine are blue also...this happens a lot...just because genetics say I should have brown eyes...mother nature definetely said otherwise. 


Besides, that's a single disease, we are looking at a multitude of various diseases between the two breeds...it's a lot of chance that it might get overlooked due to people not being aware that there is a predisposition to these diseases within both breeds...


----------



## Curbside Prophet

I'd love to see how many grants "doodle" breeders have written to identify and eliminate hereditary diseases compared to what the Golden Retriever Club of America and the Poodle Club of America have written. Or the DNA data bank that's supplied by GRCA and PCA to researchers - but absent from "doodle" breeders. I think that says all that needs to be said about who actually is doing something about hereditary diseases.


----------



## dog-man

Xeph said:


> What's not to understand? Just because the Golden Retriever is LESS prone to Addison's doesn't mean some dogs don't have it, or aren't carriers. And since you don't know about it until the dog produces it, the Golden father and the Poodle mother very well could have produced a puppy with Addison's.
> 
> Mighty dangerous crapshoot.
> 
> .


it actually lessens the chances of a crapshoot, if you would have gotten a poodle instead.

it increases the chances if you would have gotten a golden instead...but not too significantly if they are not common carriers.

some level of crossing is advised for general good health in breeding.

that is the main problem which show breeders hide their head in the sand about.


----------



## Quincy

ACampbell said:


> But now onto genetically inherited diseases. What about Addison's Disease? Common in poodles...so how can any breeder of a mixed dog guarantee that dog won't get it? They can't - here's proof
> http://www.tiarapoodles.com/addisons.html
> 
> It also can show up at any time in life. A poodle owner with a poodle bred from a responsible breeder, would know this. Since there is no way to test it, I'd rather not take bets on such a horrifying disease. At least they get a warning!


There are a lot of genetically inherited diseases that breeders cannot guarantee their dogs won't get them, and the best they can do is use what testing is currently available to screen parents and even those back in the lines before deciding to breed or not.

With Addisons till a DNA screening test becomes available, it is important for breeders to know in great detail about the health of the dogs in the pedigrees of those they intend to breed to ensure low risk breedings and also to avoid perpetuating this genetic disease.

I've heard that some breeders do an inexpensive test that's available in many veterinary clinics. There is no guarantee that the dog will not develop Addison's later in life, but by testing at least the breeder is more actively looking and trying to do low risk breedings till DNA screening tests become available, and think about this:-
Addisons can be picked up by changes in the ratio between sodium or potassium by accident at times. When this happens it is still extremely important to treat for it. It is confirmed by an ACTH response test -- administration of this hormone should stimulate production of adrenal hormones. If this does not occur then hypoadrenocorticism is present. In cases in which the electrolyte levels are normal this is the only test for the problem and it will be missed unless it is looked for specifically. At times this disease can be hard to differentiate from renal failure because the symptoms and even the blood work can be similar ---- so the ACTH response test may be necessary to differentiate them.
.


----------



## ACampbell

Quincy, not to be rude but I'm pretty sure I mentioned most of your points...concerning Addison's - almost verbatim...what was the point of repeating it to me like I didn't know that?
my question is, how are breeders of "doodles" trying to prevent genetic diseases - I KNOW I mentioned that it cannot be tested for, etc...
So, if you come back with your doodle to the breeder and tell them it has Addison's Disease...do you think the breeder is going to start telling people that yes they have a line that evidently has it? I really doubt that one. 


> With Addisons till a DNA screening test becomes available, it is important for breeders to know in great detail about the health of the dogs in the pedigrees of those they intend to breed to ensure low risk breedings and also to avoid perpetuating this genetic disease.


And are "doodle" breeders doing this, or are they trying to ignore it and say "well it's only half the genetics so it's not AS likely" to try to reassure people that ask about it and probably not bring up the possibility at all to those who are ignorant.


----------



## Xeph

> And are "doodle" breeders doing this, or are they trying to ignore it and say "well it's only half the genetics so it's not AS likely" to try to reassure people that ask about it and probably not bring up the possibility at all to those who are ignorant.


If they aren't, then they're no better than the "horrible show breeders" that dog-man constantly tries to malign.


----------



## Quincy

ACampbell said:


> say I have allergies (I do, just not to dogs thank God) to dogs, I would want one with a curly coat - more hypoallergenic (so I've read)


Many websites in relation to allergies do mention things like coats, non-shedding and hypoallergenic, then I have a think about people who are allergic to dogs who have NO COAT, say like this Xoloitzcuintli:-









Within DOGS saliva plus their dander, urine and even poo are the dog's proteins that people who are allergic to dogs react too. The 2 main proteins that affect people the most are called "Canine f 1 and f 2" (Can f 1 and Can f 2), but keep in mind there are other such proteins but the most focus tends to be on these two. If anyone is interested in what actually causes people to allergy react to dogs, well I suggest they do a search on the proteins I mentioned.
.



ACampbell said:


> And are "doodle" breeders doing this, or are they trying to ignore it and say "well it's only half the genetics so it's not AS likely" to try to reassure people that ask about it and probably not bring up the possibility at all to those who are ignorant.


As there are heaps of different "doodles" out there being bred with assorted dogs crossed with a poodles, this mostly by heaps of puppy millers and backyarders, where I feel that what you mentioned might be the general case, BUT really I'm just guessing as I do not have any facts.

Now in relation to my Quincy who has been bred for 9 generations "Australian Labradoodle" to "Australian Labradoodle", and where I have seen health test certifications for quite a few generations then I feel I could talk about health issues in regards to my Quincy and his relatives. And I could show you specialist health certificates on my Quincy if your willing to show me your dog's specialist health certificates, and my Quincy has been DNA Profiled.

My wife and I have been to a number of "Australian Labradoodle" events where even many pet owners attended. Amongst those who attended were some people who were thinking about obtaining an "Australian Labradoodle", and where health issues were discussed, and some did want to test themselves allergy wise to the "Australian Labradoodles" that were there. During the discussions regarding health not one breeder or any pet owner mentioned their dog had Addisons, and there were dogs of assorted ages attending even some oldies. Here is a photo of an event and there were more dogs and people outside of the camera's view:-









.



Xeph said:


> If they aren't, then they're no better than the "horrible show breeders" that dog-man constantly tries to malign.


My wife and I for years have bred and show Cavalier King Charles Spaniels. I will say that most breeders of these dogs do NOT specialist health test nor follow specialist recommended breeding protocols.

Just to add Xeph, I do like the GSD Breed Survey, this on a number of points including where specialist health certificates MUST be presented BEFORE the GSDs can be looked at by the GSD specialists, and it's interesting to see and hear of how many GSD breeders participate. And Xeph, the breeder of my Quincy not only bred and showed GSDs for 30 years they were also a show judge.
.



ACampbell said:


> I've seen a massive variation of coats and looks - but nothing being done about it.


Some breeds certainly do have variations in coats or looks or both. Take for example the Collie where some differentiate different types as Collie (Rough) and Collie (Smooth), and where some registries around the world classify them a different breeds. Even in relation to a dog's size and function, pups born within the same litter could be seperated, say like into Springing or Cocking functions in relation to hunting, and in time these became seperated into different breeds known today as Springer Spaniels and Cocker Spaniels, and then breeders altered the "looks" somewhat, and this to the point where American Cocker Spaniels became a different breed to the English Cocker Spaniels, and into the scene around the world is appearing dogs specificly bred for conformations shows and those specificly bred for actual working which is creating some rather interesting discussions, sort of like some are specificly breeding Border Collies for conformation showing where some others are specificly breeding Border Collies for actually working.

Talking about variations within a breed, read this about the recognized registered pure breed in the Chinese Crested where their coats are a real Chinese Puzzle, and some breeders could even provide these with absolutely no coat or hair at all and where some people *assume* these particular ones are hypoallergenic, but remember that what people are allergic to in dogs is the proteins that are within the dog's saliva, dander, urine and even poo. Please do a search and at learn something about the proteins "*Can f 1 and Can f 2*". Anyway see some of the variety within this recognized pure breed which is a real Chinese Puzzle, and due to such variety in coat some just might wonder what is the requirements for dogs to become a recognized pure breed when this breed and some others are already recognized breeds, see via this link:-
http://www.shikadin.ourdogs.net/pages/ccpuzzle.pdf
.


----------



## ACampbell

I had a neighbor with a hairless dog...very interesting and strange to pet...but a nice dog. She had very little hair (thin wispy strings on her tail and head) - no idea on allergies associated since I don't have said allergies. 



> Now in relation to my Quincy who has been bred for 9 generations "Australian Labradoodle" to "Australian Labradoodle", and where I have seen health test certifications for quite a few generations then I feel I could talk about health issues in regards to my Quincy and his relatives. And I could show you specialist health certificates on my Quincy if your willing to show me your dog's specialist health certificates, and my Quincy has been DNA Profiled.


Also, one of my dogs is a rescue...so no health papers there - then again, I'm not claiming to make a new breed - I saved a dogs life instead. The only papers required for APBT are OFA cert. and heart testing (to check for murmurs) Both her parents were OFA tested, she will be when she's old enough and she's already had her heart checked - it's clear...I'm not claiming to have this wonderful designer breed either...my breed of choice is not prone to having things like Addison's Disease - they are "prone" to having heart defects such as murmurs, and PRA (as are poodles) - 

The nice thing about that is though, I KNOW I'm looking at a genetic predisposition with it and will have it checked (my APBT is only 14 weeks old and I've had her for a week) will all "doodle" owners KNOW what they are getting into with the genetic crapshoot? I doubt it. Luckily, I got my dog from a good breeder...who sat down and discussed it with me (even though I'd done my own research) - 
With that being said, dogs with PRA are not supposed to be bred...but this can be proven with genetic testing that the dogs are clear...Addison's cannot be and is a catch 22...there's a BIG difference there. I'm not saying anyone is doing it intentionally, but the point that a genetic disorder that "hides" is being used in foundation stock, well that's a set up for failure.

That sounds great...it's a shame that most the "breeders" aren't doing THAT, but pumping out the first generation mix, where you will have more inconsistency due to the larger genetic pool. If you breed dog X (curly coated hypoallergenic per se) to another similiar, you can still get an outcrop, but it's less likely. I was, and should have been more clear, to mention that I'm concerned with the first generation outcrossings.
Having multiple allergies (not to include dogs so much, some dog slobber gives me rashes but not all - it's not severe and I don't care) I'm pretty familiar with the types of allergies. Horse dander is one of mine...I grew up on a horse ranch and showed horses up until recently. 

As for the coat variance. I was referring to the fact that it seems the curly ones are more popular as being potentially hypoallergenic...the likelyhood of getting straight coats is a 50/50 chance - hypothetically. With collies it's not the same issue, with Collies, they aren't being bred to be "the hypoallergenic" dog or the "No/low shed" dog - whichever you chose. These are some of the marketing ploys of the doodle...not the same as the collies - not exactly a relevant arguement considering that the "idea" as most see it, of the doodle, is a dog that doesn't shed or is very low shed. They are also more of an exception to the rule...you don't see long haired Beagles being shown, or a longhaired APBT (both of mine have the shortest fur I've ever seen on a dog...I feel bad for them since I live in Upstate NY and not in AZ anymore where it was a great thing for them). 
Take for example, my friends girlfriends dog got pregnant (she's a mutt of the most loose definitions and so was the father) she was a shepherd looking micro haired dog (almost like an APBT fur) the father was this hairy Chow-chow looking dog. The litter results out of 7...2 long hair (not chow like hair, but long and fine, very long like a golden retriever) and 5 short hair. Even though the father would technically pass on half his genetics, less than half the litter was long haired, approximately 1/3 was long haired...
My point: With the initial cross of Golden x Poodle...any kind of litter results could occur. Of course when you are breeding 2 dogs of the same mix and they are the "standard" - which I've yet to see anyone mark something as what a Doodle SHOULD be - then you are much more likely to have what you are looking for, but still not guaranteed...same goes with genetic defects. Things like Addison's Disease don't have to show up right away, so technically the bitch used for foundation stock could have had it and not shown symptoms until later years...but the offspring could still produce it, now if the father were the same, the instance of the disease cropping out would be doubled, not lowered as Dog-man states consistently. 
Generation I outcross - LESS likely to be affected - but still can occur
Generation II (doodle x doodle) - more likely than the initial outcross - because you are now working with 4 lines of genetics and not just the initial 2 - not necessarily something you can avoid because of the possibility of late onset of the disease - if the bitch doesn't show it until she is 8 years old...she could have technically had 6 litters by then (figure bred at age 2, litter every 6 months at the most) so which ones of those pups will be affected?

Unless the original Poodle used for the original crosses can be said, in no uncertain terms, that it does NOT have this disease...there's no way to tell. Since there is no genetic test for it, and there's no way to tell if they have it until they have the onset of symptoms...it's really back to playing Roulette. So who knows, they could have bred it into the line unknowingly...


----------



## reverend_maynard

I wonder if dog-man even realizes that, as a proponent of first generation crosses, he is also a proponent of closed registries, and all their supposed evils, of the parent dogs? Without pure-bred goldens and pure-bred poodles, the goldendoodle would be even more of a crap shoot than it already is.


----------



## Laurelin

Quincy said:


> My wife and I for years have bred and show Cavalier King Charles Spaniels. I will say that most breeders of these dogs do NOT specialist health test nor follow specialist recommended breeding protocols.
> .


That's a real problem in the toys, isn't it? Seems like much fewer toy breeders health test to the extent of some of the larger breeds. With cav's that'd be pretty detrimental as they are susceptible to a lot of diseases.


----------



## Quincy

Laurelin said:


> That's a real problem in the toys, isn't it? Seems like much fewer toy breeders health test to the extent of some of the larger breeds. With cav's that'd be pretty detrimental as they are susceptible to a lot of diseases.


With the smaller breeds I think too many breeders have their heads stuck in the ground, then those breeders wonder what might be the reasons so many out there are getting doodles.

But there are some very dedicated breeders even Cavalier breeders who do health test and are quite willing to show their dogs health certificates, even on health registers, and the Cavalier Club even has a health register on their website, see via this link:-
http://www.ckcsc.org/ckcsc/healthreg.nsf/obn!openform

When looking at hereditary health issues one must have correct pedigree information, and to assist breeders the Cavalier Club started a compulsory DNA Policy where litters will NOT be registered unless the breeder provides DNA Profiles on both the Sire and Dam, see via this link:- 
http://www.ckcsc.org/ckcsc/ckcsc_inc.nsf/Founded-1954/breederdna.html
.



reverend_maynard said:


> I wonder if dog-man even realizes that, as a proponent of first generation crosses, he is also a proponent of closed registries, and all their supposed evils, of the parent dogs? Without pure-bred goldens and pure-bred poodles, the goldendoodle would be even more of a crap shoot than it already is.


Keep in mind that maybe some Goldendoodle breeders out there might be using this health test that's on the list via this link:-
http://www.optigen.com/opt9_test.html
*Goldendoodle - OptiGen® prcd-PRA test*
.

This is for everyone - In regards to people being allergic to dogs here is something that may inspire some thought and discussion.
Imagine a person who is quite allergic to "Can f 1", now read the abstract that's via this link, and just on the dogs mentioned what dogs would you recommend to that person to allergy test themselves too with a view to finding a suitable dog for them:-
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15969688?dopt=Citation
.


----------



## Canadian Dog

I've been absent from the forum for a few days and have not read all the posts. Would just like to add regarding the comparing of these dogs. Have met 2 new PWD in the last couple of days - beautiful dogs, but the owners must have them clipped every 6 weeks. Molly (my goldendoodle) will be 1 yr next month and I've never had her clipped. Her coat seems to have stopped growing and she is at the end of blowing her puppy coat. Her coat grows in loose spirals and I've only ever found 2 mats on her but that is because I groom her every day.

I am well aware the coat is a crap shoot with these mixes and that is why I advised my son and his wife not to get one. Many owners are forced to shave the dogs. Just wanted to add this info. As I stated earlier - had I been aware of the PWD I probably would have gotten one instead of a doodle, but I have no regrets as I am amazed at what a wonderful dog Molly is - she is perfect!


----------



## dog-man

reverend_maynard said:


> I wonder if dog-man even realizes that, as a proponent of first generation crosses, he is also a proponent of closed registries, and all their supposed evils, of the parent dogs? Without pure-bred goldens and pure-bred poodles, the goldendoodle would be even more of a crap shoot than it already is.


no, that is not true at all.

i think it is good idea to have breeds, with all their own individualistic abilities and temperaments.

however, i would like to see the registries opened up, to increase genetic diversity.

i think crossing is a step in the right direction, but not much more.

the extensive testing of the better breeders is a very good idea...but not to exclude opening up the books.

the idea of a breed does not have to be as obsessed in terms of "purity" and closed books as it is now.

but, yes, i do owe gratitude to breeders past and present...even the ones who have faults, in my judgement.


----------



## reverend_maynard

dog-man said:


> no, that is not true at all.
> 
> i think it is good idea to have breeds, with all their own individualistic abilities and temperaments.
> 
> however, i would like to see the registries opened up, to increase genetic diversity.
> 
> i think crossing is a step in the right direction, but not much more.
> 
> the extensive testing of the better breeders is a very good idea...but not to exclude opening up the books.
> 
> the idea of a breed does not have to be as obsessed in terms of "purity" and closed books as it is now.
> 
> but, yes, i do owe gratitude to breeders past and present...even the ones who have faults, in my judgement.


But, by increasing genetic diversity, you also increase variation to type. More variation to type in the breeds would result in more variation to type in cross-breeds, no?


----------



## Curbside Prophet

reverend_maynard said:


> But, by increasing genetic diversity, you also increase variation to type. More variation to type in the breeds would result in more variation to type in cross-breeds, no?


The only acceptable answer to your question is no one knows. You would think that if "doodle" breeders wanted to justify their breeding practice, they would take the time to study the effects of cross breeding on the domesticated dog. I'm not aware of any long term studies on this or that "hybrid-vigor" breeders care to justify their breeding practice outside of their propaganda.


----------



## JDub

Canadian Dog said:


> I've been absent from the forum for a few days and have not read all the posts. Would just like to add regarding the comparing of these dogs. Have met 2 new PWD in the last couple of days - beautiful dogs, but the owners must have them clipped every 6 weeks. Molly (my goldendoodle) will be 1 yr next month and I've never had her clipped. Her coat seems to have stopped growing and she is at the end of blowing her puppy coat. Her coat grows in loose spirals and I've only ever found 2 mats on her but that is because I groom her every day.
> 
> I am well aware the coat is a crap shoot with these mixes and that is why I advised my son and his wife not to get one. Many owners are forced to shave the dogs. Just wanted to add this info. As I stated earlier - had I been aware of the PWD I probably would have gotten one instead of a doodle, but I have no regrets as I am amazed at what a wonderful dog Molly is - she is perfect!


Yes, the grooming will be a pain with the PWD....but in time, I'll probably just try to learn how to do it myself.

Your post is exactly what we went through. Meet both breeds, see a lot of similarities, see that one is more of a gamble, and thus went the other way. As far as personalities and companionship, no doubt in my mind that a Doodle would likely be a great dog.

I still miss my Golden. 

But 5 days till I get my PWD!!


----------



## dog-man

reverend_maynard said:


> But, by increasing genetic diversity, you also increase variation to type. More variation to type in the breeds would result in more variation to type in cross-breeds, no?


i might not be understanding you.

what exactly is the detriment of variation, as long as the basic traits and features of the dog is maintained?

like a border collie, that does not have as fixed a phenotype as most breeds.


----------



## poodleholic

> Originally Posted by ACampbell
> Nonesense aside...do you honestly believe the people that are breeding these dogs are using top quality Goldens and Poodles? .





> dogman's reply:
> 
> i think the better breeders do use top dogs.
> 
> but, it is also important how one defines "top dog".
> 
> my breeder used to breed goldens exclusively.
> 
> she said that Oinest's dad was the best dog she ever had...but he would not have been able to be top in the show or field competitions.
> 
> he was a well-tempered, intelligent, stable, athletic, healthy etc dog.



Ah, but the dam, what about the dam. A breeder's foundation bitch is of utmost importance, and there's no way in hell that a reputable, ethical, responsible Standard Poodle breeder would have allowed a top quality bitch to go to oinest's breeder. She may have gotten her hands on an quality, intact Standard Poodle bitch through devious means, or somehow through someone else, but if oinest's breeder even knows the pedigree of the SPoodle dam, and displays this on her website (if she has one), you can bet that the breeder of this SPoodle bitch is kicking her/himself and rueing the day s/he allowed that bitch to leave without first spaying her. A practice many breeders are now doing, to prevent this from happening.


----------



## Curbside Prophet

dog-man said:


> what exactly is the detriment of variation, as long as the basic traits and features of the dog is maintained?


Oh I don't know how about the degradation of traits you seem to ignore like predatory drift? It goes back to the question _*IS* the dog what it *IS* suppose to be? _And variation can bring about the onset of behaviors like predatory drift.



> like a border collie, that does not have as fixed a phenotype as most breeds.


And that's why not only are the parent BC's peer reviewed, so to their offspring. Because as you remember phenotype is not a very good indicator for genotype. So the only way to qualify a breeding program is through peer review. So that detrimental variations (like neck biting BC's) may be culled and not exploited.


----------



## Laurelin

Curbside Prophet said:


> The only acceptable answer to your question is no one knows. You would think that if "doodle" breeders wanted to justify their breeding practice, they would take the time to study the effects of cross breeding on the domesticated dog. I'm not aware of any long term studies on this or that "hybrid-vigor" breeders care to justify their breeding practice outside of their propaganda.


Coming from a gene background, I can tell you that hybrid vigor as used in this context is most often misused. And I love how outbreeding depression is NEVER mentioned.


----------



## dog-man

Laurelin said:


> Coming from a gene background, I can tell you that hybrid vigor as used in this context is most often misused. And I love how outbreeding depression is NEVER mentioned.


please explain outbreeding depression.


----------



## Laurelin

Well, it's complicated, but I can try. I have been out of genetics for a year, though! 

In genetics the term hybrid vigor is usually used to talk about a specific gene. For example sickle cell anemia. It's a recessive homozygous condition. The homozygous dominant is not affected, the heterozygous (hybrid) is not affected, and the homozygous recessive is affected with sickle cell. The hybrid form also experiences an added benefit of being unable to contract malaria. So since the homozygous normal form can contract malaria and the homozygous recessive has sickle cell, the heterozygous form is the most viable. Thus this is a case of hybrid _vigor_.

Now the main problem as the term is used by breeders of these dogs is that these terms apply to real wild populations. When you are selectively breeding, outside forces change and what is desirable can change. A certain trait that could be detrimental in the wild could be beneficial as far as selective breeding goes. The use of the term 'hybrid vigor' at all in regards to domestic animals, especially companion animals like a dog is highly debatable.

Basically when an outcross is more viable than either parent, you are experiencing hybrid vigor. However, what these dog breeders never mention is that not all crosses work out. If a cross is less viable than the parents, it is outbreeding depression. Now, it is not that cut and dried, but that's the gist of it. In many cases there may be some benefit to the outcross relieving _inbreeding_ depression (which you like to refer to as the lack of a wide gene pool) and then some problems arising from _outbreeding_ depression. In some cases, the benefits of the first generation cross will outweigh the problems. This is really case by case, not every cross brings in good traits. Not all crosses are compatible and not all genes work well with each other. Combining traits especially from breeds that are very different could end up in a dog that just isn't as capable as either of it's parents.

Another issue with outbreeding depression is that usually it worsens as the generations go. The further away from the first generation cross is made, the more likely you are to see it. So if you cross two animals and are trying to say solve some sort of a problem, breeding down the line could actually hurt what you are trying to do. You could start with a good outcross that is actually quite beneficial to the population, then down the line the virtues are outweighed by the negatives arising. F1 might be more viable, but F2 and so forth might likely not be.

Another problem is that you cannot breed for a heterozygote or a hybrid. You cannot standardize. If you cross only two breeds, once you move to the F2 most of the puppies will revert back to basically the grandparent breeds. Crossing two F1 puggles, for example, will end up with basically a litter of pugs and beagles, not puggles. That is part of why it is so hard to standardize and predict a type of dog that is being produced by only two breeds. Recognized dog breeds usually involved many crosses. 

A lot of these terms really apply more to crops and food animals, though, so keep in mind.

What is commonly worded by said breeders as 'crosses are generally healthier' is just way too broadly worded.


----------



## JDub

Laurelin said:


> Well, it's complicated, but I can try. I have been out of genetics for a year, though!
> 
> In genetics the term hybrid vigor is usually used to talk about a specific gene. For example sickle cell anemia. It's a recessive homozygous condition. The homozygous dominant is not affected, the heterozygous (hybrid) is not affected, and the homozygous recessive is affected with sickle cell. The hybrid form also experiences an added benefit of being unable to contract malaria. So since the homozygous normal form can contract malaria and the homozygous recessive has sickle cell, the heterozygous form is the most viable. Thus this is a case of hybrid _vigor_.
> 
> Now the main problem as the term is used by breeders of these dogs is that these terms apply to real wild populations. When you are selectively breeding, outside forces change and what is desirable can change. A certain trait that could be detrimental in the wild could be beneficial as far as selective breeding goes. The use of the term 'hybrid vigor' at all in regards to domestic animals, especially companion animals like a dog is highly debatable.
> 
> Basically when an outcross is more viable than either parent, you are experiencing hybrid vigor. However, what these dog breeders never mention is that not all crosses work out. If a cross is less viable than the parents, it is outbreeding depression. Now, it is not that cut and dried, but that's the gist of it. In many cases there may be some benefit to the outcross relieving _inbreeding_ depression (which you like to refer to as the lack of a wide gene pool) and then some problems arising from _outbreeding_ depression. In some cases, the benefits of the first generation cross will outweigh the problems. This is really case by case, not every cross brings in good traits. Not all crosses are compatible and not all genes work well with each other. Combining traits especially from breeds that are very different could end up in a dog that just isn't as capable as either of it's parents.
> 
> Another issue with outbreeding depression is that usually it worsens as the generations go. The further away from the first generation cross is made, the more likely you are to see it. So if you cross two animals and are trying to say solve some sort of a problem, breeding down the line could actually hurt what you are trying to do. You could start with a good outcross that is actually quite beneficial to the population, then down the line the virtues are outweighed by the negatives arising. F1 might be more viable, but F2 and so forth might likely not be.
> 
> Another problem is that you cannot breed for a heterozygote or a hybrid. You cannot standardize. If you cross only two breeds, once you move to the F2 most of the puppies will revert back to basically the grandparent breeds. Crossing two F1 puggles, for example, will end up with basically a litter of pugs and beagles, not puggles. That is part of why it is so hard to standardize and predict a type of dog that is being produced by only two breeds. Recognized dog breeds usually involved many crosses.
> 
> A lot of these terms really apply more to crops and food animals, though, so keep in mind.
> 
> What is commonly worded by said breeders as 'crosses are generally healthier' is just way too broadly worded.


Wow...thanks for the educational moment. Fascinating stuff. And I am now even more glad that I chose the PWD over the Doodle.


----------



## Quincy

Laurelin said:


> Well, it's complicated, but I can try. I have been out of genetics for a year, though!


Good post 

Anyway, with the "Australian Labradoole" the co-developers started with the Labrador and Poodle where there have quite a few of each. They started with quite a few results from crossing, some were stopped because of health issues appearing from the parent breeds or the cross result was not to what they wanted, the ones that were stopped they were replaced with other. This was just in the beginning stage but eventually they had a number of lines with good results to go with into the future to gradually develop a breed.

Into some line they tried infusions of yet more breeds to try an improve certain traits, some were stopped because they did not produce the desired results yet a few did which went on. In later generations some lines were merged but others were not.

It's all rather complicated for most, but anyway this gives a bit of a view on how things started and for some time, but keep in mind it's been 20 years of development so far and breed development is still occuring:-
http://www.australianlabradoodleclub.us/AustralianLabradoodleGradingScheme.html
.



Canadian Dog said:


> I've been absent from the forum for a few days and have not read all the posts. Would just like to add regarding the comparing of these dogs. Have met 2 new PWD in the last couple of days - beautiful dogs, but the owners must have them clipped every 6 weeks. Molly (my goldendoodle) will be 1 yr next month and I've never had her clipped. Her coat seems to have stopped growing and she is at the end of blowing her puppy coat. Her coat grows in loose spirals and I've only ever found 2 mats on her but that is because I groom her every day.
> 
> I am well aware the coat is a crap shoot with these mixes and that is why I advised my son and his wife not to get one. Many owners are forced to shave the dogs. Just wanted to add this info. As I stated earlier - had I been aware of the PWD I probably would have gotten one instead of a doodle, but I have no regrets as I am amazed at what a wonderful dog Molly is - she is perfect!


My wife said years ago she checked out some PWDs and she found these ones "guarding and hyper", and not suited to what she wanted in a Service Dog, and because of this she didn't bother checking herself out allergy wise to these particular dogs. She didn't check out any more PWDs as they were too far away from our locality, besides there were other dogs of various breeds in our locality that she wanted to personally check. 

For 2 years my wife was casually looking around for another dog, then for the next 2 years seriously looking. Then we found our Quincy who was an "Australian Labradoodle" a developing breed.

Quincy has a wool coat like a Poodle and which is non-shedding, but his coat is not as course as Poodles. He didn't need any clipping until the coat change when he was about a year old. During this coat change he needed clipping to a low clip then a good brush, and he certainly did not need a "shave".

Since then he only needs a 15 minute brush one a week, and 2 times a year we give him an extended high clip which leave his coat about 1½ inches high. My wife learnt how to do this by watching Quincy's breeder giving several grooming demonstrations whilst at a social get together we call a "romp" where many pet owners attended, this at a park with barbeques and where the off-leash doggies all had a great time where some even went for a swim.

The brush we used is called the Les Pooch Brush Wide. For clipping, my wife bought the "Wahl KM-2 Two Speed" clippers, and for this she additionally bought a set of "plastic extension combs" which come in different sizes, where they attach to the clipper and raise the height of the clip to what you want.

By the way, Quincy rarely needs a bath, and when he does we just use barely minimal ammount of shampoo, keep in mind there are times we just hose him with plain water and this he really loves, we like to keep his "natural oils" that are in his coat. If he goes out and plays in the mud, well we just let him naturally dry and where the dry mud just falls off his coat, and interestingly he then does not have that "muddy odour". Quite a different situation to when we had Cavaliers, where overall each of them required more bathing and grooming time.
Well, we like this sort of "hairstyle" on him:-








.


----------



## B-Line

JDub said:


> Wow...thanks for the educational moment. Fascinating stuff. And I am now even more glad that I chose the PWD over the Doodle.


Don't worry Dub, I'm sure any depression that your pup may have will not be caused by genetics... I would almost certainly guarantee the depression will be the result of a show-fro and a haircut poorly executed by his parents with a flowbee.


----------



## dog-man

Laurelin said:


> In genetics the term hybrid vigor is usually used to talk about a specific gene. .


i believe the expression hybrid vigor also can refer to the general benefit of having less opportunities for the offspring to share the same negative recessive gene.
with purebred dogs, the chances of sharing recessive genes is remarkably high.

similar to the high level of genetic sicknesses facing the Amish, because most everyone in that area stems from an original small group of people.



Laurelin said:


> The use of the term 'hybrid vigor' at all in regards to domestic animals, especially companion animals like a dog is highly debatable.
> 
> .


whatr exactly is the debate?
all geneticists believe that starting a population from relatively few members, and not allowing new members in, eventually leads to dire health problems.

it may take a while before the problems are serious enough for those affected to take drastic action...and the type of testing that is done by better breeders slows the problem down...but the basic downward movement in genetic health seems to be guaranteed.

is there any scientist who debates that?



Laurelin said:


> However, what these dog breeders never mention is that not all crosses work out. If a cross is less viable than the parents, it is outbreeding depression.
> 
> Not all crosses are compatible and not all genes work well with each other. Combining traits especially from breeds that are very different could end up in a dog that just isn't as capable as either of it's parents.
> 
> .


ok, but the history of dog breeding is one of crossing dogs that breeders believe will be compatible and beneficial.

the fact that some crosses would not be good is not an argument for not attempting crosses that would make sense to an experienced breeder.


----------



## B-Line

Quincy said:


> By the way, Quincy rarely needs a bath, and when he does we just use barely minimal ammount of shampoo, keep in mind there are times we just hose him with plain water and this he really loves, we like to keep his "natural oils" that are in his coat. If he goes out and plays in the mud, well we just let him naturally dry and where the dry mud just falls off his coat, and interestingly he then does not have that "muddy odour". Quite a different situation to when we had Cavaliers, where overall each of them required more bathing and grooming time.


Wow Quincy, 

I wish I had parents like you when I was growing up.. They were mean, nasty people that made me believe, that spending all day in a pool did not mean I was clean. Those jerks actually made me shower and if you wouldn't believe it, also made me use soap AND I had to wash behind my ears.

To think, this whole time, I could have just gone outside and hosed myself off. I'm calling my Mom this afternoon and asking her to send back that Mother's Day present.. To hell with them and soap !

p.s. - I always thought the point of giving a dog a bath was also to remove the oils from human hands petting them, that gets in their coat.. But what do I know? I'm not as lucky as you Doodle owners, my dogs actually does need bath's and haircuts.

Hey, maybe we can invent a breed that can also eat it's own poop. That way, we won't have to worry about feeding it or walking it.

p.s.s. - I've yet to meet a Standard Poodle, a Lab or a Golden that didn't need a bath. So Quincy must be some sort of genetic superhero.


----------



## Pai

B-Line said:


> Hey, maybe we can invent a breed that can also eat it's own poop. That way, we won't have to worry about feeding it or walking it.
> .


Some dogs do this already, don't they? We should start a selective breeding program with them! =D


----------



## dog-man

Laurelin said:


> That is part of why it is so hard to standardize and predict a type of dog that is being produced by only two breeds. Recognized dog breeds usually involved many crosses.
> 
> .


the most effective way to standardize is to extensive inbreeding.
that is how most modern breeds were created.
breeders know better now, and so standardizing has become more difficult.

Laurelin, i appreciate your post.

however, i find it hard to believe that there is any scientist who says that the benefits to keeping a population closed would outweigh the benefits of allowing in new blood.

allowing populations to mix is considered a positive, even without outside supervision.
obviously, problems can develop, but the benefits of lessening recessive sicknesses is considered to significantly outweigh any potential problems. 

if you have any literature that claims that, i would like to see it.

everything i have read clearly says the opposite.



Quincy said:


> By the way, Quincy rarely needs a bath, and when he does we just use barely minimal ammount of shampoo, keep in mind there are times we just hose him with plain water and this he really loves, we like to keep his "natural oils" that are in his coat.
> .


yes, i found the same thing with Oinest.

i have an old car that the family dubs the Oinest-mobile.
no one goes in willingly except me and Oinest.

after he gets nice and filthy with sand from the beach or mud from the park, i let him nap in the car for 2 hours.
when he wakes up, almost all the dirt and sand has fallen off, and he looks clean and smells decent.

my vet told me not to bathe him too much, and to only use very gentle type shampoos.
nevertheless, we probably bathe him once every 3 weeks.


----------



## Curbside Prophet

> is there any scientist who debates that?


Yes, those who are not so maligned to take an extreme "nature" position.


----------



## B-Line

dog-man said:


> yes, i found the same thing with Oinest.
> 
> i have an old car that the family dubs the Oinest-mobile.
> no one goes in willingly except me and Oinest.
> 
> my vet told me not to bathe him too much, and to only use very gentle type shampoos.
> nevertheless, we probably bathe him once every 3 weeks.


So let me see if I got this straight. You have a car that no one else will get into because it's filthy. But your dog, who filth's up the car is clean, as the mud and sand magically fall off your dog.

Dude, I think you missed your flight to the planet mars. Your dog is dirty and stinky and just because he doesn't smell bad to you, doesn't mean that the rest of your family agrees with you. Do yourself a favor, give your dog a bath. Use soap. And gently asking someone who's opinion you really take stock in, "Do I have good hygiene?" Cause I'm betting by the condition of your Oinest car, it probably ain't all that good. 

p.s. - I take both my dogs to work everyday. They ride in the back of my car. Sometimes they are very dirty, sometimes they are very clean. Regardless, I have no family members that refuse to ride in my vehicle, want to know why? It's called cleanliness. And a .50 cent pine tree air freshener from the car wash you never visit, ain't the answer.

p.s.s. - It's a good thing your miraculously clean Doodles don't need to attend any dog shows. Cause all the breeders there with their shampoo'd and groomed dogs, would surely have to hang their heads in shame, when the dirty doodle's come in and win Best in Show.


----------



## wabanafcr

Pai said:


> Some dogs do this already, don't they? We should start a selective breeding program with them! =D


Oh, this is a well-known Flatcoat trait (and they love goose poop and cow poop and well, you get the idea--and if it ain't worth eatin', it is great to roll in). I don't know of anyone that would breed for that particular trait, though...


----------



## B-Line

wabanafcr said:


> Oh, this is a well-known Flatcoat trait (and they love goose poop and cow poop and well, you get the idea--and if it ain't worth eatin', it is great to roll in). I don't know of anyone that would breed for that particular trait, though...


Actually Wab,

Doodle owners have found the genetic gene that prevents dogs from eating or rolling in goose, cow and dog poop. As such, the dogs do not need baths because they never roll around in the fecal matter of other animals. Not even in dog parks. Not even by ponds. They have genetically engineered that trait out.

Nor do they ever get poop or urine in those long haired coats of theirs. Did I forget to mention the urine free feet? Cause all dog owners know how dogs never get dribble on their paws.


----------



## dog-man

B-Line said:


> So let me see if I got this straight. You have a car that no one else will get into because it's filthy. But your dog, who filth's up the car is clean, as the mud and sand magically fall off your dog.
> 
> Dude, I think you missed your flight to the planet mars. Your dog is dirty and stinky and just because he doesn't smell bad to you, doesn't mean that the rest of your family agrees with you. .


i missed your logic.
the car gets dirty because the dirt falls off, and he is now clean.

when he gets dirty and stinky, he gets a bath.

but he is a dog...trust me, HIS hygiene standards are not the same as ours.

he is a white dog, and looks clean, and only smells when he decides to roll in something dead, or take a swim in a disgusting pond.

regular dirt and ocean water and sand is no problem...comes right off.



B-Line said:


> Actually Wab,
> 
> Doodle owners have found the genetic gene that prevents dogs from eating or rolling in goose, cow and dog poop. As such, the dogs do not need baths because they never roll around in the fecal matter of other animals. Not even in dog parks. Not even by ponds. They have genetically engineered that trait out.
> 
> Nor do they ever get poop or urine in those long haired coats of theirs. Did I forget to mention the urine free feet? Cause all dog owners know how dogs never get dribble on their paws.


my-my, aren't we getting sarcastic!?

btw, i sometimes dribble, but Oinest seems to be fine with that issue.


----------



## JDub

B-Line said:


> Don't worry Dub, I'm sure any depression that your pup may have will not be caused by genetics... I would almost certainly guarantee the depression will be the result of a show-fro and a haircut poorly executed by his parents with a flowbee.


Oh yeah?!? Well....I uh..... I mean....

Damn.






B-Line said:


> Hey, maybe we can invent a breed that can also eat it's own poop. That way, we won't have to worry about feeding it or walking it.


Would that be a PooPoodle?


----------



## dog-man

B-Line said:


> p.s. - I take both my dogs to work everyday. They ride in the back of my car. Sometimes they are very dirty, sometimes they are very clean. Regardless, I have no family members that refuse to ride in my vehicle, want to know why? It's called cleanliness.
> .


don't get so nervous...we have two other cars that are clean.

but in the Oinest-mobile, i let Oinest take in assorted treasures from the beach.
it does smell.
but he doesn't mind.
the car is a 1991 corolla, and my kids say i should get rid of it, just because i keep it alive with spit and scotch-tape.


----------



## JDub

dog-man said:


> btw, i sometimes dribble, but Oinest seems to be fine with that issue.


No mention of how the wife/girlfriend feels about this though. Interesting....


----------



## dog-man

JDub said:


> No mention of how the wife/girlfriend feels about this though. Interesting....


the wife is fine with it, but the girlfriend finds it gross.

anyway, that's why i wear briefs instead of boxers.

i don't know how people wear boxers.

sorry if that's more than you cared to know.


----------



## B-Line

Ding, Ding, Ding, Ding, Ding,

We finally found the answer. The greatest contrast between a PWD and a Doodle is:

A Doodle magically cleans itself.

A PWD actually needs bath's.

and Dogman, by no means have I recently become sarcastic. I take that as an insult. I have been sarcastic for years. It's not a new found trait


----------



## wabanafcr

B-Line said:


> Doodle owners have found the genetic gene that prevents dogs from eating or rolling in goose, cow and dog poop.


Well, crap. I'm gonna take my stinkin' dogs and go play!


----------



## ACampbell

LOL this thread is funny...on the bathing note...I hardly ever NEED to bathe my dogs (they do get stinky sometimes) but then again, they don't have those GOBS of fur to get nasties buried in...

How about a slick-coated doodle? There ya go, hypoallergenic and cleans itself!


----------



## Quincy

B-Line said:


> Actually Wab,
> 
> Doodle owners have found the genetic gene that prevents dogs from eating or rolling in goose, cow and dog poop. As such, the dogs do not need baths because they never roll around in the fecal matter of other animals. Not even in dog parks. Not even by ponds. They have genetically engineered that trait out.
> 
> Nor do they ever get poop or urine in those long haired coats of theirs. Did I forget to mention the urine free feet? Cause all dog owners know how dogs never get dribble on their paws.


Not all dogs like to eat or roll on faecal matter of other animals, and I feel you may not have met a dog yet that aims well when urinating. Keep in mind that my dog's coat maybe quite different to the dogs coats that you may have encountered in other breeds, even in the doodles you encountered. And by the way, have you ever actually met, pated, groomed and lived with at least one "Australian Labradoodle" such as the dogs referred to on this website:-
http://www.australianlabradoodleclub.us/

As to Quincy's coat whose coat is softer and of finer micron than Poodles, well this is how we like his "hairstyle":-









.



B-Line said:


> So let me see if I got this straight. You have a car that no one else will get into because it's filthy. But your dog, who filth's up the car is clean, as the mud and sand magically fall off your dog.


One of the parks we go to has barbeque facilities and water taps. It's great there on nice sunny warm days, and where my dog likes to romp around and even have a swim. When we think it's nearing time to go home we use one of the water taps to rinse him, and by the time we finish chatting with heaps of others at the romp, well he is already somewhat dry from the nice sunny warm day before we even start heading off for home.
.



B-Line said:


> Ding, Ding, Ding, Ding, Ding,
> 
> We finally found the answer. The greatest contrast between a PWD and a Doodle is:
> 
> A Doodle magically cleans itself.
> 
> A PWD actually needs bath's.


I think this maybe what I originally mentioned, and do you want me to clarify some more.
Quincy rarely needs a bath, and when he does we just use barely minimal ammount of shampoo, keep in mind there are times we just hose him with plain water and this he really loves, we like to keep his "natural oils" that are in his coat. If he goes out and plays in the mud, well we just let him naturally dry and where the dry mud just falls off his coat, and interestingly he then does not have that "muddy odour".
.


----------



## MarleysGirl

I love my doodle, but he is just like any other dog. When he has gone a while playing outside and through daily life, he needs a bath. And yes when he plays in dirty water, and then dries, the dirt does fall right off him...and right on to my floors, so I always at least hose him off outside if he is that dirty. There are definitley things I love about his coat, and some things I dont love about his coat. When you get a good quality with something, there is usually a downside as well. With Marley I wanted the curlier coat that wouldnt shed as much, but with that comes more grooming. I understood that and made the decision that was right for me. I dont really think a doodle is BETTER than any dog out there, and I certainly dont think they are WORSE than any dog out there as far as cleanliness and grooming. Its all just personal preference on how much dirt and dog smell you can tolerate, just like any other dog. I certainly dont have to clean my dog any less than other people because of the fact he is a doodle. Just my two cents


----------



## Laurelin

dog-man said:


> i believe the expression hybrid vigor also can refer to the general benefit of having less opportunities for the offspring to share the same negative recessive gene.
> with purebred dogs, the chances of sharing recessive genes is remarkably high.
> 
> similar to the high level of genetic sicknesses facing the Amish, because most everyone in that area stems from an original small group of people.


Not generally if you're studying genetics, actually. A hybrid state is one of two things and two thing only- a cross between species, which mixed breed dogs are not. Or it's a term used to refer to the state of a gene containing two different alleles. More technically, that should just be called the heterozygote. 

What you are referring to is gene pool size and variance, not anything to do with the thing being a hybrid. 



> whatr exactly is the debate?
> all geneticists believe that starting a population from relatively few members, and not allowing new members in, eventually leads to dire health problems.
> 
> it may take a while before the problems are serious enough for those affected to take drastic action...and the type of testing that is done by better breeders slows the problem down...but the basic downward movement in genetic health seems to be guaranteed.
> 
> is there any scientist who debates that?


You're missing what I said... using evolution to study selectively bred organisms is debatable. 

These terms were coined for studying evolution. When humans start selectively breeding animals, these don't always apply. In short when humans begin playing God, evolutionary pressures do not affect a population in the same way. 



> ok, but the history of dog breeding is one of crossing dogs that breeders believe will be compatible and beneficial.


Yes? That's kind of obvious. 



> the fact that some crosses would not be good is not an argument for not attempting crosses that would make sense to an experienced breeder.


What makes sense is debatable, is it not? 

I have no problem with several crossbreds that are bred that remain F! crossbreds. There are some viable crossbreeding programs out there. But that wasn't what I was addressing. 

I also don't have problems with seriously developing breeds. 

Curbside simply mentioned the term 'hybrid vigor' so I thought I'd give my take on it. 

The problem I was outlining is that if you get down to the average designer dog breeder they LOVE to start going on about 'hybrid vigor' and the problems with purebreds when I don't think they understand it. 

There is also a problem with consistency especially after the first generation. A real developed breed needs more than one breed in the cross to standardize.



dog-man said:


> Laurelin, i appreciate your post.
> 
> however, i find it hard to believe that there is any scientist who says that the benefits to keeping a population closed would outweigh the benefits of allowing in new blood.
> 
> allowing populations to mix is considered a positive, even without outside supervision.
> obviously, problems can develop, but the benefits of lessening recessive sicknesses is considered to significantly outweigh any potential problems.


You're forgetting something again.... wild populations. 

It is common sense that if you have new blood coming it it will not always help. 

For example... There is a species on some islands somewhere. (Yes I am pulling this out of my hat) There are two subspecies that have adapted to very specific situations. Say one island is more mountainous than the other, the other more forest. Population size is relatively small for each. Both are superbly adapted to their terrain. An individual of the mountain subspecies ends up in the forest and mates with the population there. The resulting offspring will be a genetic mix of the two. Sometimes there will be a trait in a cross like this that makes them MORE viable. But many times something in between the two types is not suited to live either place. Therefore the cross is not a success. 

Or like wolves.... Grey wolves have many subspecies. Ones in the plains will be smaller, less coated and darker colored than one from the arctic. That wolf will be very large, thick coated, with small ears, and light in color. A cross of those will not be as suited to either environment. But of course boundaries in this case make this happening in the wild pretty impossible.

Or border collies, a selectively bred animal. There are many types of border collies. The working lines are bred specifically for herding, the conformation lines for showing. A cross of these two is sometimes tried but you end up with a dog that is not suited for showing or herding. It'll be less typey than a show dog, and less efficient working than a pure herding line dog. So either way it's a step BELOW the parents. 

Or there were actually a couple of attempts to backcross breeds to wolves. One was a german shepherd. The idea was to try to rid the GSD of some problems by adding back in a wolf. Well, what they ended up with was the Saarloos Wolfhound, which people will agree is not suited to work like the GSD. The temperament is just not conductive to do the job.

Some GOOD outcrosses? Things like lurchers, used for hunting. Herding dog x sight hound many times. Or hound x huskies used to sled pull. Or border jacks which are extremely fast and used as height dogs on flyball teams. For every cross that is an improvement, there's a lot that aren't.


----------



## dog-man

Laurelin said:


> Not generally if you're studying genetics, actually. A hybrid state is one of two things and two thing only- a cross between species, which mixed breed dogs are not. Or it's a term used to refer to the state of a gene containing two different alleles. More technically, that should just be called the heterozygote.
> 
> What you are referring to is gene pool size and variance, not anything to do with the thing being a hybrid.
> .


that's not so.

it can refer to crossing species OR breeds.

in particular, the manner in which modern dog breeds have developed, being kept separate from other breeds, has caused a unique genetic situation, where the concept of hybrid vigor can play a strong role.



Laurelin said:


> You're missing what I said... using evolution to study selectively bred organisms is debatable.
> 
> These terms were coined for studying evolution. When humans start selectively breeding animals, these don't always apply. In short when humans begin playing God, evolutionary pressures do not affect a population in the same way.


that is where the problems came in, in a major way.
people from 100 years ago, selectively breeding for the dog show, and not having a clue about genetics.

prior to that, when breeders were breeding for a real working function, and not caring a rat's tush about PURITY of breed, these major genetic problems did not develop.

-------------------------------------
Quote:
ok, but the history of dog breeding is one of crossing dogs that breeders believe will be compatible and beneficial. 

Laurelin:
Yes? That's kind of obvious

Dog-man:
i was too lazy to see what you said that i responded.
but no, it certainly is not obvious to many on this site.

they act as if they are carrying on the tradition of early breeders, when in truth, their insistence on breed purity is merely the creation of the kennel clubs.

the early breeders who created these breeds had no problem experimenting on crosses that seemed wise to them.
the argument that there are many "bad" cross ideas is irrelevant.



Laurelin said:


> You're forgetting something again.... wild populations.
> 
> It is common sense that if you have new blood coming it it will not always help.
> 
> For example... There is a species on some islands somewhere. (Yes I am pulling this out of my hat) There are two subspecies that have adapted to very specific situations. Say one island is more mountainous than the other, the other more forest. Population size is relatively small for each. Both are superbly adapted to their terrain. An individual of the mountain subspecies ends up in the forest and mates with the population there. The resulting offspring will be a genetic mix of the two. Sometimes there will be a trait in a cross like this that makes them MORE viable. But many times something in between the two types is not suited to live either place. Therefore the cross is not a success.
> 
> Or like wolves.... Grey wolves have many subspecies. Ones in the plains will be smaller, less coated and darker colored than one from the arctic. That wolf will be very large, thick coated, with small ears, and light in color. A cross of those will not be as suited to either environment. But of course boundaries in this case make this happening in the wild pretty impossible.
> 
> Or border collies, a selectively bred animal. There are many types of border collies. The working lines are bred specifically for herding, the conformation lines for showing. A cross of these two is sometimes tried but you end up with a dog that is not suited for showing or herding. It'll be less typey than a show dog, and less efficient working than a pure herding line dog. So either way it's a step BELOW the parents.
> 
> Or there were actually a couple of attempts to backcross breeds to wolves. One was a german shepherd. The idea was to try to rid the GSD of some problems by adding back in a wolf. Well, what they ended up with was the Saarloos Wolfhound, which people will agree is not suited to work like the GSD. The temperament is just not conductive to do the job.
> 
> Some GOOD outcrosses? Things like lurchers, used for hunting. Herding dog x sight hound many times. Or hound x huskies used to sled pull. Or border jacks which are extremely fast and used as height dogs on flyball teams. For every cross that is an improvement, there's a lot that aren't.


i was reading up a bit on outbreeding depression after you mentioned it.

it is regarded as a phenomena...an exception to the general rule that outbreeding is a general solution to the severe problems of inbreeding depression.
it must be taken into consideration, but not used to ignore or justify inbreeding depression, which is a severe problem by most modern breeds.



Laurelin said:


> I have no problem with several crossbreds that are bred that remain F! crossbreds. There are some viable crossbreeding programs out there. But that wasn't what I was addressing.
> 
> I also don't have problems with seriously developing breeds.
> 
> The problem I was outlining is that if you get down to the average designer dog breeder they LOVE to start going on about 'hybrid vigor' and the problems with purebreds when I don't think they understand it.
> 
> .


i don't understand what you are saying.

up until a couple of years ago, almost all the goldendoodle breeders were just doing F1 crosses...that is where the benefit of hybrid vigor is strongest.

and yet everyone on these forums was screaming that there was no concept of hybrid vigor even for the F1s.

now there are more backcrosses to a poodle, to get a better coat consistency...the hybrid vigor concept might be less strong than the F1...but i don't think there is anyone who would say that those dogs are now weaker than the original grandparents.
the hybrid vigor concept has just possibly been lessened.


----------



## Laurelin

dog-man said:


> that's not so.
> 
> it can refer to crossing species OR breeds.


Hybrid refers to two things that are different. In cattle and produce they use it to talk about breed crosses often.

BUT technically a hybrid is really two different species and two breeds crossing are crossbreds. 

When talking a bout a hybrid dog, that's really more appropriate for a wolf x dog.



> in particular, the manner in which modern dog breeds have developed, being kept separate from other breeds, has caused a unique genetic situation, where the concept of hybrid vigor can play a strong role.


? 



> that is where the problems came in, in a major way.
> people from 100 years ago, selectively breeding for the dog show, and not having a clue about genetics.
> 
> prior to that, when breeders were breeding for a real working function, and not caring a rat's tush about PURITY of breed, these major genetic problems did not develop.


Dog shows are really modern. Most breeds weren't bred for showing. 

No, 'purity' was a concern. It just defined differently. Instead of defining a border collie by looks, they defined it by ability to work. The eye, the low stance, slinking movement, etc. If anything the breeder originally making breeds were MORE selective about things. They culled endlessly for good dogs. Culling is not generally deemed acceptable these days. 



> :
> ok, but the history of dog breeding is one of crossing dogs that breeders believe will be compatible and beneficial.
> 
> Laurelin:
> Yes? That's kind of obvious
> 
> Dog-man:
> i was too lazy to see what you said that i responded.
> but no, it certainly is not obvious to many on this site.
> 
> they act as if they are carrying on the tradition of early breeders, when in truth, their insistence on breed purity is merely the creation of the kennel clubs.
> 
> the early breeders who created these breeds had no problem experimenting on crosses that seemed wise to them.
> the argument that there are many "bad" cross ideas is irrelevant.


You're talking about something totally different than I am. Designer dogs are TOTALLY in a different scenario than crossing for a purpose. There is no rhyme or reason for 99% of those crosses. 

The Australian Labradoodle is imo not a designer dog, but a breed in progress. 

Apparently according to you simply because these people are not breeding 'evil purebreds' then they are doing right. 



> i was reading up a bit on outbreeding depression after you mentioned it.
> 
> it is regarded as a phenomena...an exception to the general rule that outbreeding is a general solution to the severe problems of inbreeding depression.
> it must be taken into consideration, but not used to ignore or justify inbreeding depression, which is a severe problem by most modern breeds.


It does happen though, so the statement that these crosses are going to be healthier than a purebred is just... well bogus. 

Inbreeding depression is a problem of course. The extent to which it is a problem is variable depending on breed. We cannot fix every problem. Is it worth sacrificing x trait to try to fix y? That's what breeders of individual breeds must figure out. How best to handle it. If it can be done by brining in new blood from other countries, which you seem to think is impossible but is really quite frequently done, then there is no reason to bring in a new breed with a bunch of new variables. 

For example with the Saarloos was it acceptable to sacrifice working ability and temperament to try to improve health? It's debatable. There is no magic black and white one size fits all solution for all breed problems. 




> up until a couple of years ago, almost all the goldendoodle breeders were just doing F1 crosses...that is where the benefit of hybrid vigor is strongest.


Also assume the quality of the parents is good, which in many cases it is not with these breeders. Assuming quality of both parents is good, then this is true.



> and yet everyone on these forums was screaming that there was no concept of hybrid vigor even for the F1s.


Not in the way it's usually presented, no. 



> now there are more backcrosses to a poodle, to get a better coat consistency...the hybrid vigor concept might be less strong than the F1...but *i don't think there is anyone who would say that those dogs are now weaker than the original grandparents.*
> the hybrid vigor concept has just possibly been lessened.


Debatable. You have to of course have something you're specifically looking for. A definite way they are an improvement. Not just... 'they're sweeter'.

Btw, Quincy, this is a really interesting website-

http://www.australianlabradoodleclub.us/AustralianLabradoodleGradingScheme.html


----------



## borzoimom

The only logic I can see in your vet telling you to let your dog stay dirty is the hope of having to give a bunch of expensive medications for skin problems. When a dog is dirty- you bath them. If low in oil on the coat, use a mild shampoo, but skin and coat do best if kept clean.. And actually a dirty coat will break off- ie shedding.. I think its time for a new vet dogman..


----------



## JDub

Quincy said:


>


I will say this, though the genetic debate that is currently underway is just silly.... Quincy, that really is a great looking dog!


----------



## Laurelin

JDub said:


> I will say this, though the genetic debate that is currently underway is just silly.... Quincy, that really is a great looking dog!


Sorry!


----------



## Quincy

dog-man said:


> that's not so.
> 
> it can refer to crossing species OR breeds.
> 
> in particular, the manner in which modern dog breeds have developed, being kept separate from other breeds, has caused a unique genetic situation, where the concept of hybrid vigor can play a strong role.


Coefficient of Inbreeding (COI) is a complex formula for accessing the degree of commonality within an animals pedigree, it is largely believed by most geneticists that a high COI is detrimental for any breed as it can and does have an effect on the immune system and also the ability to reproduce, also increases chances for other heredity based diseases.

Some breeders certainly do keep an eye on the COI, and take this into consideration when selecting who to breed theirs dogs with, and some do import dogs or semen for also COI reasons. I know that with some pure breeds that have very small gene pools and where there are serious concerns, and it's up to them on what to do about it where they maybe forced to cross but in a controlled manor approved by the Club.

As to the COI of my Quincy an "Australian Labradoodle" a breed that is being developed, well over 10 generations his COI is below 0.5% and in the recent 5 generations is 0%, yes zero.

The "Australian Labradoole Club" has already made moves to start closeing the stub book, this by some breeders relatively new to the developing breed. The 2 co-founders and developers disagree that the stud book should be closed so soon with only 20 years of breed development, and into this the 2 co-founds were focused on more development towards Service Dogs and Allergies where some of the others to me seemed only interested in aiming for breed recognition and going to dog shows. Well there is some friction and internal club politics on what maybe best for the developing breed, but then over the years I've seen and heard of friction and internal politics within a number of Breed Clubs, including those with very small gene pools.
.


----------



## JDub

Laurelin said:


> Sorry!


No no...its fascinating stuff. The silliness comes from a debate between a person with a background in the stuff versus someone who read a book.


----------



## Curbside Prophet

JDub said:


> I will say this, though the genetic debate that is currently underway is just silly.... Quincy, that really is a great looking dog!


I actually don't think it's silly at all. Some may not be interested in the science but I prefer Richard Dawkins anecdote, in the video I left earlier in this thread, as a response to that. But I think you just find the differing opinions silly?, which I often agree with when the opinion differs from mine . 

Beyond that I also think it demonstrates where for some, reality is perception, and in others, reality is a matter of fact. I don't believe it's a stretch to say "doodledom" is plagued with misinformation and propaganda to satisfy their true means. And of course their websites prove their propaganda! But then those who open a textbook or read scientific journals come to learn differently, as is often the case when you hold no bias. 

There's an idiom that goes _seeing is believing. _This proves true if seeing is dependent on visible light, and of course, our position in seeing that light. Try standing inches away from a magnificent art painting and how magnificent is it really? But stand back where the art can be in full view and a different story can be told. But in science, seeing is not believing, especially if what we're trying to see is infrared, UV, X-ray, microwaves, radio waves, gamma rays or terahertz radiation. And this to me is where "doodledom" fails to make believers, they haven't proven anything that they claim to see.


----------



## Quincy

JDub said:


> I will say this, though the genetic debate that is currently underway is just silly.... Quincy, that really is a great looking dog!


Thanks for the compliment. Quite a few have said that, even my veterinarian when our Quincy went in for his vaccinations. By the way, I like discussions on genetics, even on Coefficient of Inbreeding. I even like discussions on showing and breeding, and it may not be too evident on this forum but I am quite interested in other things like field retrieving, herding, tracking, obedience, agility, etc., etc..
.


----------



## B-Line

Guys, I hate to burst the bubble, but I was being sarcastic, AGAIN..

I can all but promise you, the similar coat types, require the same work, regardless of breed.

Curly dogs need less bathing,
Wavy a little more.

And girl dogs who pee on cement need more baths than boy dogs that pee on tree's. (Cement is not porous and puddles tend to collect.) Dogs that only pee on grass, we'll you're lucky and have never lived in Manhattan or the Hollywood Hills.

But regardless of breed, I do suggest, if your dog has hair and not fur, on occasion, you check your dog's "backside" because regardless of breed, sometimes you need to "de-dingle-berry"


----------



## ACampbell

LOL B-Line...you'd think that'd be common knowledge...where there is hair in a backside area, there will be "dingle-berries"...

Another reason I have dogs with "microfur"  it's more cost efficient for me to not have a dog that needs to be clipped, washed, etc...I can wash mine in the bathtub once a month and they don't reek (unless they get into something really nasty then it's an immediate bath)


----------



## dog-man

borzoimom said:


> The only logic I can see in your vet telling you to let your dog stay dirty is the hope of having to give a bunch of expensive medications for skin problems. When a dog is dirty- you bath them. If low in oil on the coat, use a mild shampoo, but skin and coat do best if kept clean.. And actually a dirty coat will break off- ie shedding.. I think its time for a new vet dogman..


Oinest gets a bath about once every three weeks.

his skin has been healthy, he is healthy...and he looks and smells fine.

often, he doesn't look as white as he really is...but that's what happens when you allow a dog to wrestle in dirt.

almost all of it comes out...don't worry about it.



JDub said:


> No no...its fascinating stuff. The silliness comes from a debate between a person with a background in the stuff versus someone who read a book.



no, the silliness is when there is a consensus in the scientific community on the issue, and people with minor experience argue against it.

here is one website with people who know more than Laurelin:
www.canine-genetics.com

how much do you think she knows anyway?
an expert?

there are scientists who still claim it is possible to say the sun goes around the earth.
as a non-expert, i can argue with someone who took physics in college who advocates the sun-around-the-earth-theory.
i can point to a scientific consensus, even if i am not versed in the field.

i'd like to see articles from non AKC sponsored scientists that don't say the inherent inbreeding in modern dog breeds is not a serious problem.


----------



## Xeph

Oh my God...LET THAT WEBSITE GO! If that's the ONLY thing you have to offer after 17 pages, clearly you're at a bottleneck!

And, knowing Laurelin quite well, I know she knows what she's talking about ;-)


----------



## Laurelin

Xeph said:


> And, knowing Laurelin quite well, I know she knows what she's talking about ;-)


Awww, Xeph! 

Warm and fuzzy moment! 

Dear lord, I've known you for... something like 8 years.


----------



## Xeph

> Dear lord, I've known you for... something like 8 years.


I know, right!? The person I've known the longest in the PC (oh God, the geekiness!) is Salem...I think we've known each other for like, 10 years x.x


----------



## Laurelin

Wow.... that's crazy! 

It's okay, we're nerds together!


----------



## ACampbell

Uhmmmm...
OK...I know I mentioned a few pages ago about someone I know that is a geneticist (an EXPERT) that is not "up to par" on things other than genetics with the same type of animal...or even, outside of his specialty area. I think it's presumptious to refer to someone who is obviously knowledgible not to be considered a good source. 
I could call my friend who is the leading expert in horse genetics and ask about something outside of horse COLOR genetics, and he may or may not have the answer...
You can't rely on a website as a single source, i.e. the Dog Genetics Bible, it's just silly and redundant. You only read what you want to hear and the rest goes out the other ear. 
Just because my friend is top of the line on horse color genetics, doesn't mean that I limit myself to JUST his material and debunk all others...nooooo...that's being really single track minded. If I want to educate myself, I would read his books, knowing that they are of good quality...then read others, and from there ask questions about the parts that don't match each other...that's really the only way to become truly educated about a subject. You only learn as much as you want to, and citing a single source is not doing anything to further your education in such things.


----------



## dog-man

Xeph said:


> Oh my God...LET THAT WEBSITE GO! If that's the ONLY thing you have to offer after 17 pages, clearly you're at a bottleneck!
> 
> And, knowing Laurelin quite well, I know she knows what she's talking about ;-)


no, i won't let it go.

maybe read it, and challenge some ideas.

there are tons of articles, with different agendas.

provide with a website that says something different.

it is an accepted fact among scientists that the type of selective breeding techniques of modern purebreed dogs is a serious problem.
Laurelin has not presented anything to the contrary.

but some people read only that which agrees with their philosophy.


----------



## Curbside Prophet

dog-man said:


> it is an accepted fact among scientists that the type of selective breeding techniques of modern purebreed dogs is a serious problem.


Or better stated the absence of technique. The genetics behind selective breeding is modeled in mathematics. The question, really, is who's doing their math? Very few breeders if any. That's the problem. "Doodle" breeders can point to the science all they like, purebred breeders do the same, but none of it will be realized though. At least not how breeders are currently structured. Your breeder simply isn't a good enough mathematician...they are a "hobbyist". 

So all your bark has no bite. Same to any other philosophy regarding the genetics of our dogs. What breeders NEED to do is enlist an independent service teamed with geneticists to help them with their math problems. Because despite your insistence, the problem is not the result of gene pools being too small or gene pools that can be made larger, but rather, gene pools that are inefficient. And resolving that is in the geneticists math. It's one thing to have a theory that's generally accepted in the scientific community, it's another to have it actually realized in the real world.


----------



## B-Line

Oh man, all these genetic threads are killing me. I fell like I'm falling asleep in science class again. Mom has blue eyes, dad has brown eyes, why am I bald?

Firgured I should spice this thread up again. How about some more PWD pictures!


----------



## Quincy

Talking about mathematics, some breeders do have this program, where they can input pedigrees, and where the program will show them the inbreeding calculation, and this can be of assistance with their breeding program:-
http://www.breedmate.com/

However I must add, there is some serious concerns with things like Coefficient of Inbreeding within some breeds that have only a very small number of registered dogs within their breed worldwide and that do have closed stud books.
.


----------



## B-Line

No worries, YES, I have more !!


----------



## Curbside Prophet

Oh I have pictures of your PWD too.








Or is that a "doodle"?



Quincy said:


> However I must add, there is some serious concerns with things like Coefficient of Inbreeding within some breeds that have only a very small number of registered dogs within their breed worldwide and that do have closed stud books.


This goes back to how breeders are structured. The onus is on the breeders to prove to their breed clubs and registries that a benefit can be had by opening stud books. Unless they employ an independent team of geneticists to work on their problems their arguments are no better than those in this thread, and these are fleeting at best.


----------



## Quincy

Curbside, best I not show Quincy all those little balls, as he might want to add them to his ball collection 
.


----------



## Curbside Prophet

No dog can have too many good balls.


----------



## Quincy

Curbside Prophet said:


> This goes back to how breeders are structured. The onus is on the breeders to prove to their breed clubs and registries that a benefit can be had by opening stud books. Unless they employ an independent team of geneticists to work on their problems their arguments are no better than those in this thread, and these are fleeting at best.


But there is a lot of politics within clubs and it's member where some do not want to open up the stud book for any reasons. If one went back a few decades ago it would have been a different scene. I noted what the person said who cross bred a Boxer with a Pembroke Welsh Corgi this so as to have a "Bobtail Boxer", this was given permission and approved by Clubs and Registries, anyway here is his comments which he mentioned later, and from this link:-
http://www.steynmere.com/ARTICLES1.html

I have often thought with envy about dog breeding at the turn of the Century. This must have been a truly exciting period. It was a time of construction when older breeds and varieties were melded together to make new and exciting ones, each developed for specific purposes. Today, crossbreeding is no longer a recognised option but for the first 50 or so years of this century, crossbreeding to allow the introduction of new or otherwise desirable characters into established breeds was permitted by the Kennel Club, and this too must have been fascinating. I believe that only three backcrosses were needed before registration was again permissable. Nowadays, however, with K.C. registered dogs, pure breeding is the only option. Crossbreeding for any purpose is not considered, and I'm sure that even the idea may be thought of as heresy by most present-day breeders.
.

By the way, in regards to the "Australian Labradoodle" have a read of what's on this page via this link about "infusions", where they must go before an "Infusion Committee" and be approved, and I feel today one may have to have rather strong justification:-
http://www.australianlabradoodleclub.us/InfusionofParentBreed.html
.

Going back to the breeder/geneticists comments, I noted his comments not only in relation to tail docking but also ear cropping, where by using carefull selective breeding one could produce lines of dogs that do NOT need to be tail docked, or do NOT need to be ear cropped. Why continue all this cut something off be it tails or cut crop ears, anyway note what he mentioned:-

During my 50 or so years in Boxers I have, like everyone else, pretty well accepted the status quo. The challenge has been to produce the top class specimen excelling in type, construction and temperament etc.. But, in Boxers, the need to dock tails has, for me, always been an irritant. Why does one have to cut something off to achieve the required overall appearance. 
Why, therefore, not develop a Boxer with a naturally short tail - and maybe with erect ears too, if one prefers this image, instead of the cropped ear still largely accepted on the Continent or in American? How easy would it be in any case to introduce a gene from one breed into another?
.


----------



## wabanafcr

Quincy said:


> crossbreeding is no longer a recognised option but for the first 50 or so years of this century, crossbreeding to allow the introduction of new or otherwise desirable characters into established breeds was permitted by the Kennel Club.


With my breed, the two World Wars caused a huge genetic bottleneck. Most of the Flatcoats were being raised by gamekeepers, and they were some of the first to have to go off to war. A result was that many bloodlines died out, and there were few Flatcoats left to re-establish the breed. Outcrosses were made in the 50s and 60s to revitalize the breed. 

Shortly after that, in the early 1970s, a lovely Flatcoat won Best in Show at Crufts. He subsequently sired 36 litters, and they produced litters and their children produced litters, etc. By the year 2000, it was estimated that 95% of the Flatcoats in the UK have this particular dog in their pedigrees, and I can see it creating another genetic bottleneck. Now throw in the fact that this dog's sire had hereditary glaucoma, and you see where ONLY ONE of the problems in my breed is coming from (there were others with glaucoma, but not with the same amount of genetic influence).

I am working with several breeders in several countries to maintain lines free of that particular dog, and that is becoming increasingly difficult to do. He was a lovely dog, a good solid worker, yet we have to maintain some genetic diversity or my breed is doomed. There is also a very high cancer rate in my breed, and that can also be attributed to the genetic bottleneck. 

I will fully admit that there are advocates of bringing in labrador blood through some well-planned outcrossed, but for now that is all talk. I understand that argument, and I honestly have not decided which side I am on, as I can see the point of both. I think my biggest hesitation comes from the fact that most people I know are not well-educated enough in the foundations of our own breed to be able to wisely manage outcrossing to another breed in the name of genetic diversity. There is a big difference between well-planned and well-researched outcrosses with a specific goal in mind (and with the probability of that goal being researched and planned in-depth) and simply cross-breeding to provide lip service to the idea of genetic diversity. Most of the retriever breeds are similar enough that ill-informed outcrossing could bring a world of hurt instead of helping. 

Gotta go to work.


----------



## dog-man

getting back to the title of the thread.

there is me, Quincy, Canadian Dog, and i believe Marley's Girl as well...i think there was also some guy also who popped his head in.

we are all thrilled to pieces with our goldendoodle.

this does not mean that they are for everyone.
no dog breed or crossbreed is.
we all have our individual needs and priorities.

but i think some of you doodle bashers have to step back with a little humility...and consider the possibility that this cross might be a good idea (and not just a silly fad), and that there are good breeders for them....and there are lots and lots of thrilled owners out there.

honestly, i don't see how there can be so many people who oppose the ban on pitbulls...simply because they are a recognized breed...and don't condemn the good breeders along with the bad...
but then you lose your sphincter control when the topic of doodles comes up, and make all sorts of blanket statements.

i also don't get why being a good family dog is not considered a function, and why breeding specifically for that function is an inherently bad idea.
THAT IS THE PRIME FUNCTION OF DOGS NOWADAYS!

all breeds need responsible breeders and educated owners.

just because some people have a different philosophy on dogs than you do, doesn't mean your philosophy is wrong.
as Oinest always reminds me: There is more than one way to skin a cat.

and consider the possibility that your philosophy has some downsides along with the good.
and others have a different take on those upsides and downsides.

the doodle owners are not trying to convert anyone.
it is the doodle bashers who are intolerant of the possibility that many doodle owners and breeders might know something.


----------



## ACampbell

B-Line said:


> Oh man, all these genetic threads are killing me. I fell like I'm falling asleep in science class again. Mom has blue eyes, dad has brown eyes, why am I bald?



Cute pictures...oh and you're bald because your mothers father was bald...or supposedly that's the theory that male pattern baldness runs on


----------



## Curbside Prophet

Quincy said:


> Nowadays, however, with K.C. registered dogs, pure breeding is the only option. Crossbreeding for any purpose is not considered, and I'm sure that even the idea may be thought of as heresy by most present-day breeders.


That's not entirely true. How the brindle Besenji came to be is an example of how it did work. Registries like the AKC do have a history, although limited by frequency, of approving crosses when breeders organized their political force. But I think your last point is a fair statement. Breeders have no political force or communal will if they are all holding onto their "reputation" over what's best for their breed. There in lies the problem and until breeders like that are weeded out of the system, these problems will continue to plague dogdom. That's why I feel breeders need to be organized more like a professional organization (with independent consults) than as political entities.


----------



## Rainbow.Paws

dog-man said:


> getting back to the title of the thread.
> 
> there is me, Quincy, Canadian Dog, and i believe Marley's Girl as well...i think there was also some guy also who popped his head in.
> 
> we are all thrilled to pieces with our goldendoodle.
> 
> this does not mean that they are for everyone.
> no dog breed or crossbreed is.
> we all have our individual needs and priorities.
> 
> but i think some of you doodle bashers have to step back with a little humility...and consider the possibility that this cross might be a good idea (and not just a silly fad), and that there are good breeders for them....and there are lots and lots of thrilled owners out there.
> 
> honestly, i don't see how there can be so many people who oppose the ban on pitbulls...simply because they are a recognized breed...and don't condemn the good breeders along with the bad...
> but then you lose your sphincter control when the topic of doodles comes up, and make all sorts of blanket statements.


I wouldn't support a ban on any dog- there are too many loop wholes. Yes mixed breeding (in my eyes) is wrong, but I still wouldn't support a ban. Imagine what would happen to all the mutts out there? they'd be pulling people over left and right confiscating their dogs. The reason there is so much fire to free pits from bans is because all BSL is wrong. Its not just the APBT, its all breeds that BSL has/will affect. 
I have had friends have to fight to get their boxers and labradors back because the cops deemed them "pit like"- I would never support that with ANY breed or mixed breed. the laws don't stop bad breeders, fighters, hoarders..etc as they are already breaking the law.

I think the doodle mixes I've met were sweet and the ones who were adopted made good pets. I have nothing against the dog, I just don't understand why people compare the designer breedss to established breeds and seem to toss all the other mixes into another catagory..like their cross is better. 

Interesting thread.


----------



## ACampbell

dog-man said:


> honestly, i don't see how there can be so many people who oppose the ban on pitbulls...simply because they are a recognized breed...and don't condemn the good breeders along with the bad...
> but then you lose your sphincter control when the topic of doodles comes up, and make all sorts of blanket statements.
> 
> i also don't get why being a good family dog is not considered a function, and why breeding specifically for that function is an inherently bad idea.
> THAT IS THE PRIME FUNCTION OF DOGS NOWADAYS!
> 
> all breeds need responsible breeders and educated owners.


OK, now you've gone and dragged pitbulls back into it...it's on now!  just kidding. 
Most of your pitbull advocates do not support the breeding of them, unless it's in proven dogs, etc, etc...we have enough bad stigma on our breed already without BYB's and other trash breeders making it worse by breeding animals that are temperamentally unsound. 
I don't oppose the ban on APBT's because "they are a recognized breed" in fact that's a total blanket statement, as to which you show your disdain for. 
First off, the breed bans are not JUST banning APBT's...it's any breed that "looks similar" - I'm opposing breed ban of any sort...whether it be a doodle or a pitbull...because it infringes upon good owners because of a smaller group of morons who think they are cool or improperly train theirs to be vicious. Just like a doodle, their breed intent was not to be human aggressive...thats poor breeding in the works for you. So if BYB's and people looking to make a buck are the only people breeding pitbulls, don't you think the quality is going to go to hell in a hand basket? I think that's pretty much some thoughts on Doodle breeders...Bad breeders = a vast array of bad things. Do you want to see your "breed" or mix (yes they are banning pit mixes too) banned next because of the crappy breeding practices? I think not. You'll probably argue that it's a different scenario and that neither of the base breeds are human aggressive...but, neither were the APBT's as is stated over and over and over again that they were supposed to be DOG aggressive, not human and that ones that were aggressive toward humans were culled.
If you are being an advocate of your breed you have to take the good with the bad, not just cover up the bad and promote the good...that doesn't solve anything.
All breeds have BYB's and puppy mills...if you want your breed to survive/thrive you need to educate people about these horrors and such, instead of bashing all breeders for their breed of choice.


That's just my theory on it - I think using the "pitbull problem" with BSL to try to distract from your original post is a bad tactic...it's like having a discussion on global warming (or what have you) while sitting in a 1964 Cadillac El Dorado, getting 2 MPG, sucking down cheeseburgers from McDonalds in the original non-biodegradeable styrofoam containers, and throwing it out the window...you're arguing that it's not happening, but you're doing nothing to help the problem that's already been noticed.


----------



## dog-man

the point is:

the Pitbull advocates continually make a distinction between the bad breeders and owners, and the good ones.

but when the topic comes to doodles, the bad breeders and foolish owners are made to be one and the same with the good ones.

the silliness of this is exacerbated by the fact that bad breeders of pitbulls create very dangerous dogs...and the goldendoodle is generally a sweet dog, even with a bad breeder.

i'm not looking to make this a pitbull thread.
i just don't get the different reactions on each subject.
ok, you don't agree with crossbreeding without the intent of creating a standardized breed...but why do so many people get so bent out of shape...even with the good breeders and owners?

the issues of purebreed vs crossbreed is not so cut and dry, that it deserves this type of reaction.

i think it is just people who have belonged to a certain philosophy of dogs for so long...they just can't open their minds to the downsides of their way, and the possibility of another responsible philosophy of breeding.

so, they have to demonize the good with the bad.

just like people demonize the good pitties with the bad.


----------



## Curbside Prophet

dog-man said:


> i think it is just people who have belonged to a certain philosophy of dogs for so long...they just can't open their minds to the downsides of their way, and the possibility of another responsible philosophy of breeding.


You speak as if "doodle" breeding is a new concept. Nothing you presented is new. It's pretty easy to separate "doodle" breeders from those who are trying to do something responsible (read emerging breed) and those who want you to buy into a fad (read designer dog). The later lends itself too easily to problems that don't help dogs. Not to mention all the data your breeders have produced (none).


----------



## dog-man

Curbside Prophet said:


> You speak as if "doodle" breeding is a new concept. Nothing you presented is new. It's pretty easy to separate "doodle" breeders from those who are trying to do something responsible (read emerging breed) and those who want you to buy into a fad (read designer dog). The later lends itself too easily to problems that don't help dogs. Not to mention all the data your breeders have produced (none).


C.B.,

i was kinda hoping that you would disappear when i said i wouldn't respond to your vague and evasive posts.

anyway, i'll make an exception here.

you have a definition of a responsible breeder of dog-crosses, that they are working to create a new breed.

well, guess what?
although not a silly position, it is not inherently true....it is an opinion.
and the opinion has some strengths and some weaknesses to it.

and therefore, there are those who have other priorities and definitions.
and guess what? we're not just a group of ignorant fools (i'm sure you'll have some unfunny, immature remark ready for that one).

and we have the great dogs to back us up.


----------



## Quincy

Curbside Prophet said:


> That's not entirely true. How the brindle Besenji came to be is an example of how it did work. Registries like the AKC do have a history, although limited by frequency, of approving crosses when breeders organized their political force. But I think your last point is a fair statement.


Registries like the AKC do have special registers where things can be done, even in regards to new breed recognition, but what has happened over time is they changed the rules where today it's more difficult. And the part you mentioned was not written by me but by the breeder Dr Cattanach who I think has for years held positions in "The Kennel Club" in England.
.


----------



## Rainbow.Paws

dog-man said:


> the point is:
> 
> the Pitbull advocates continually make a distinction between the bad breeders and owners, and the good ones.
> 
> but when the topic comes to doodles, the bad breeders and foolish owners are made to be one and the same with the good ones.
> 
> the silliness of this is exacerbated by the fact that bad breeders of pitbulls create very dangerous dogs...and the goldendoodle is generally a sweet dog, even with a bad breeder.
> 
> i'm not looking to make this a pitbull thread.
> i just don't get the different reactions on each subject.
> ok, you don't agree with crossbreeding without the intent of creating a standardized breed...but why do so many people get so bent out of shape...even with the good breeders and owners?
> 
> the issues of purebreed vs crossbreed is not so cut and dry, that it deserves this type of reaction.
> 
> i think it is just people who have belonged to a certain philosophy of dogs for so long...they just can't open their minds to the downsides of their way, and the possibility of another responsible philosophy of breeding.
> 
> so, they have to demonize the good with the bad.
> 
> just like people demonize the good pitties with the bad.



thats what you aren't getting, we don't believe there are "good breeders" for mixed breeds. They may care for for them, feed them, love them but that is what makes a good owner- not a good breeder. Ofcourse this is my opinion. there are nice breeders who aren't pumping out tons of dogs, selling to petstores or mistreating the dogs but that doesn't mean they are 'good breeders' it means they aren't abusive and love their dogs. In my eyes Love doesn't equal right. In my eyes there is more to a good breeder than raising a cute, sweet puppy.

You are right in that there are dowsides to pure breeding, there is a fine line between inbreeding and line breeding and I've read about many breeders getting obsessive trying to stick to the 'rules' to create THE perfect specimen. Look at Dalmations- another breed I love, but has been damaged because of all the breeding. Not sure if that went to far off the topic, I tend to ramble.

I don't believe there are bad pits or bad dogs period, it always comes back to people and I believe it always will.


----------



## dog-man

Rainbow.Paws said:


> thats what you aren't getting, we don't believe there are "good breeders" for mixed breeds. .



where do you get this opinion from?

there are many goldendoodle breeders that do the same health testing and background checks of the parent dogs, as the better purebred breeders do.

why can you not consider this as a possibilty?


----------



## Curbside Prophet

dog-man said:


> i was kinda hoping that you would disappear when i said i wouldn't respond to your vague and evasive posts.


And I was hoping you would be a man of your word. 



> we're not just a group of ignorant fools


If you're their spokesman, please, keep enlightening yourself. 



> (i'm sure you'll have some unfunny, immature remark ready for that one).


How did I do?



> and we have the great dogs to back us up.


And my great dog is from a puppy mill but you don't see me advocating buying dogs from puppy mills. Why? Anecdotes are not proof. So again I'll ask the question, where is you're breeder's data stored?


----------



## Quincy

wabanafcr I understand, and certainly NOT cross-breeding to provide lip service to the idea of genetic diversity, but a carefully devised well managed program. 

By the way, I think that to a degree some practical application experience may have been lost over the decades, and where I'd like to have a nice long chat with someone like Dr Cattanach of Steynmere Boxers, and I noted his references at the KC and BSAVA. And I do like to have chats with those who are actually developing a breed, and one of the co-founder developer of the "Australian Labradoodle" has over 50 years of breeding experience, and had bred and shown pure bred dogs plus also was a show judge.

Also we have entered a new era where new tools in DNA are gradually becoming more available to breeders, and I'm hearing of research projects to identify DNA markers for Glaucoma and Lens Luxation in many breeds of dogs.

Catch you later as I've some things to do
.


----------



## dog-man

Curbside Prophet said:


> And I was hoping you would be a man of your word.
> .


i assumed you would be a man of honor and not take pot shots when i am not responding to you.



Curbside Prophet said:


> If you're their spokesman, please, keep enlightening yourself.
> 
> How did I do?


exactly as i anticipated.



Curbside Prophet said:


> And my great dog is from a puppy mill but you don't see me advocating buying dogs from puppy mills. Why? Anecdotes are not proof. So again I'll ask the question, where is you're breeder's data stored?


i seem to remember that your dog is not so great...even if you love him.

there are goldendoodle forums, in which they only advertise breeders who uphold high standards of breeding policy.
look up the individual breeders, and see what they say.
each is an individual.

to make an assumption that they are all in the category of a puppy mill is close-minded.


----------



## Canadian Dog

The following is a link to breeders who health test their stock.

http://www.goldendoodle-labradoodle.org/breeder-directory.html

Breeders forums:

http://disc.yourwebapps.com/Indices/179154.html
http://disc.yourwebapps.com/Indices/222994.html

Doodle forum:
http://labradoodle-dogs.net/forums/index.php


----------



## Curbside Prophet

dog-man said:


> i assumed you would be a man of honor and not take pot shots when i am not responding to you.


There's nothing random about my criticism. Many, except you and people like you, have called it fair. Nor do I care who you are responding to. Everything written is open to comment. But don't assume my response to your words is a request for you to respond in kind. You're not likely to entertain me that much, but interacting with words does. 



> i seem to remember that your dog is not so great...even if you love him.


Again, you read only what you want to read. Par for you seems to be making erroneous deductions, and you then wonder why I'm critical about what you write. My dog is wonderful and she's everything I expected and wanted, in spite of her origins, and I've never spoken about her in terms that are a detriment to what she is. Just as you have with your dog. This is nothing unique among dog owners. 

What's not so great has been, will always be who her breeder was...a miller. Elsa's crappy coat, structure, and fears are to the detriment of her beginnings, not of Elsa. Let's get our memory straight. 



> to make an assumption that they are all in the category of a puppy mill is close-minded.


To deduce that was my implication is also close-minded but on par for you. I've always said good breeders are far and few between. This is a truth. Take a look up at the sky one night and count the stars. Allow those to represent excellent breeders. That number may seem like a lot but visible stars account for less than 1% of all stars.

So to suggest that a fraction of a fraction of breeders amounts to anything significant is a bit of a stretch. I like to eat octopus...does that mean everyone else does too? No.

I know you're seeking validation in your choices, but Oinest should be all the validation you need. Just as Elsa is all the validation I need...but there's no way in heck I'm going to advocate milling dogs, so don't expect me to validate your choices. The depth of breeding "space" is empty in spite of the stars. Doodledom is no different.


----------



## ACampbell

Just like any "breed" (I'll use the term loosely here) out of the dozens you'll find online, only a couple will be "good" breeders and ethical...this is not just a "doodle" thing...nor am I standing up for doodles or purebreds.
So what it seems like if I wanted to create my own designer breed, as long as I do my health testing and all it's ok? Even though all I'm selling is a crossbreed? What kind of market is going to buy that crossbreed...is it going to be Paris Hilton types? People who don't really care but want the latest "fad" out there? I think that's the distinction that people are making with doodles...same things goes for all those [email protected] that pumped out litter upon litter of puppies after 101 Dalmations came out...to appease the public and add supply to the demand.
What happened to all the Dalmations that people bought and realize "OMG this dog is huge and unruly and we can't have it anymore now that the kids have found a new interest"? They went to shelters and rescues, some where PTS due to temperamental issues, some got homes...is this what you want for your "breed"? 
I think this is a more definitive relation to the doodle explosion, don't you?

So, when there's genetic problems, and when there's other issues with coats shedding etc...where do these dogs, who didn't ask to be born, go? To the shelters, to rescues...all because someone thought they could make a quick buck and pump out puppies...
Same goes for any breed. 
I truly think that's sad.

On the note of getting them recognized...I really don't see it happening anytime soon (not to be the pessimist but that's my thought) considering how many "poo" mixes have been bred and bred for X amount of years (yeah they are nothing new - Cockapoos have been around for quite a long time and still aren't recognized) and how can you recognize that which you have no standard for? Personality is only half the battle, conformation, coat, color, etc are all other parts of a standard to which I've yet to see any specific information on.



Curbside Prophet said:


> To deduce that was my implication is also close-minded but on par for you. I've always said good breeders are far and few between. This is a truth. Take a look up at the sky one night and count the stars. Allow those to represent excellent breeders. That number may seem like a lot but visible stars account for less than 1% of all stars.



Excellent analogy...it really puts things into perspective on the good/bad/ and plain ugly of breeders.


----------



## dog-man

Curbside Prophet said:


> Again, you read only what you want to read.
> 
> What's not so great has been, will always be who her breeder was...a miller. Elsa's crappy coat, structure, and fears are to the detriment of her beginnings, not of Elsa. Let's get our memory straight.


somehow it still sounds to me that Elsa is not a quality dog, in terms of breeding.
you mention coat, structure and fears.

ok, it is the breeders fault and not Elsa's.
and she may have some fine qualities.

but it sounds like your dog is very much the product of the puppy mill system...while the many goldendoodles you were disparaging as a group are healthy, happy dogs...the result of conscientious breeders.

anyway, your responses annoy me again, for their lack of content and logic, clothed in a pretensious, pseudo-intellectual manner.

ok, respond away, and i'll try to ignore you.


----------



## Curbside Prophet

dog-man said:


> but it sounds like your dog is very much the product of the puppy mill system...while the many goldendoodles you were disparaging as a group are healthy, happy dogs...the result of conscientious breeders.


And many puppy milled dogs are happy and healthy too, Elsa's not excluded from this group IMO. Again, is this a reason to advocate milling practices? Your data on "doodle" breeding practices is equal to that of millers, so what are we to conclude from your anecdotes other than you need validation? 



> anyway, your responses annoy me again, for their lack of content and logic, clothed in a pretensious, pseudo-intellectual manner.


And you've had absolutely no effect on my mood. So that sucks you feel that way, but predictable. 



> ok, respond away, and i'll try to ignore you.


Jump off a bridge or don't, it won't change my day.


----------



## dog-man

Curbside Prophet said:


> Jump off a bridge or don't, it won't change my day.


----------



## Curbside Prophet

Now is he jumping or levitating?


----------



## doxies13isenough

B-line I think we need more doggy pictures.....


----------



## dog-man

doxies13isenough said:


> B-line I think we need more doggy pictures.....


----------



## dog-man




----------



## ACampbell

dog-man said:


> anyway, your responses annoy me again, for their lack of content and logic, clothed in a pretensious, pseudo-intellectual manner.



Psst...it's [pretentious] 

Love the photos by the way, very cute.


----------



## Curbside Prophet

Here's a doodle.








Oh wait...or is that a doodle of a PWD?


----------



## Quincy

Here's another doodle.








Oh wait...or is that a doodle of a Lagotto?

Whilst waiting for years on the AKC FFS maybe a good time to go play with a ball. So many breeds do look somewhat similar particularly if they have similar "hairstyles".
.


----------



## Curbside Prophet

Quincy said:


> Oh wait...or is that a doodle of a Lagotto?


Reminds me of a lovely poodle mix I adored at the shelter last year named Muffin.








Something about muffin-tops that are endearing. And I don't mean poorly worn pants on a chubby girl.


----------



## Quincy

Curbside Prophet said:


> Reminds me of a lovely poodle mix I adored at the shelter last year named Muffin.
> Something about muffin-tops that are endearing. And I don't mean poorly worn pants on a chubby girl.


I understand, and by the way did Muffin like to play with balls 

Just to add, here is where I got that Lagotto photo:-
http://lagottous.com/
.


----------



## Curbside Prophet

Quincy said:


> did Muffin like to play with balls


Very toy motivated complete with head shake and all. Had I considered it more and if he wasn't so similar to Elsa in play, he would have been mine.


----------



## Quincy

Curbside Prophet said:


> Very toy motivated complete with head shake and all. Had I considered it more and if he wasn't so similar to Elsa in play, he would have been mine.


I've noticed quite a few dogs of many breeds do that head shake with toys, even with the Cavaliers that I had.

By the way, I haven't got a fancy pool at my home, but I do have something like this, and that Lagotto looks somewhat like my Quincy when he is doing that:-









.


----------



## Quincy

Some of the people seen in this photo are allergic to dogs to varying degrees, they can go to things like this where there are only these dogs, but going to an AKC dog show where there are heaps of assorted dogs is another story, and yes some here are really not interested in AKC breed recognition, besides they and their own Club already recognizes their dogs.









.


----------



## ACampbell

Curbside Prophet said:


> Reminds me of a lovely poodle mix I adored at the shelter last year named Muffin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Something about muffin-tops that are endearing. And I don't mean poorly worn pants on a chubby girl.


Einstein hair...I love it!


----------



## Curbside Prophet

Since there's still some possibility of comparing (why not), are there any "doodles" as cool as Girella the PWD?
http://girella.com/dog-likes-music.htm

Girella with Franz Ferdinand


----------



## Hound

Your comparison of the level of energy of these three dog breeds is very accurate. However, it remains to be the pet owner’s choice whether to settle for the natural high of a Poodle, or go for a Golden Retriever and Doodle that need regular activities to expend all its energy. Those of you who are still evaluating which of these breeds to get as your pet must first think if you can actually afford the time required in making sure that these high-energy breeds get the attention and exercise that they need to be healthy.


----------



## zimandtakandgrrandmimi

this thread is wayy old dude.


----------



## Marsh Muppet

I assume these rating are on a scale of 1 to 5.



dog-man said:


> Energy Level and Exercise Requirements:
> PWD: 4
> Golden: 3
> 
> Playfulness, Affection Level, Friendliness toward other pets:
> PWD: 4
> Golden:5
> 
> Friendliness toward dogs, friendliness toward strangers:
> PWD: 3
> Golden: 5
> 
> Watchdog Ability: PWD: 4 Golden: 3
> Protection Ability: PWD: 3 Golden: 2
> personally, i wanted LESS watchdog and protection nature.
> 
> Ease of Training: PWD: 3
> Golden: 5
> 
> the golden description fit my needs better, and it worked out the way i hoped.


I would rate the Golden thusly: 

Energy Level and Exercise Requirements:
Golden: 5 -- Young Goldens got some serious juice.

Playfulness, Affection Level, Friendliness toward other pets: 
Golden: 5 -- The reputation is well deserved.

Friendliness toward dogs, friendliness toward strangers: 
Golden: 3 -- They lose points based on friendliness toward other dogs, but are indiscriminate where people are concerned.

Watchdog Ability: 
Golden: 3 -- Will typically bark to alert.

Protection Ability: 
Golden: 0 to 1 -- I wouldn't ever count on my Golden to protect me...unless I were attacked by an angry Mallard. That just doesn't happen enough to be a factor.

Ease of Training: 
Golden: 3 to 4 -- Can be difficult to focus before 1 year. They are whip-smart and willing, but kinda gnat-brained as youngsters.


----------

