# Designer Dogs Dumped!



## Keno's Mom (Nov 20, 2006)

About time someone prints the truth to the public!



http://www.dispatch.com/news-story.php?story=dispatch/2007/02/14/20070214-B1-02.html


----------



## RonE (Feb 3, 2007)

That's a good article and puts the problem in perspective.

The people buying these dogs and dumping them a few weeks or months later aren't the ones spending time on this forum or at the dog parks or in puppy classes. They're the ones looking for cute decorations.

BTW, the 'bug' (Boston Terrier/Pug) in the picture looks just like E.T. (the Extraterrestrial, for you youngsters out there.)


----------



## Meghan&Pedro (Nov 6, 2006)

Thats great to have this starting to come to light to the general public.

Meghan


----------



## babydolwv (Dec 5, 2006)

well lets hope that makes a few ppl think before buying a dog!! prob not some of them as they think oh im not like that... then they turn around and do it... i think any dog is a great dog with a bit of training and love


----------



## lovemygreys (Jan 20, 2007)

No real surprises in that story....people who buy designer dogs generally think they are going to be some "magical perfect dog" that will require zero work and will have zero behavior issues and zero shedding. It only stands to reason that someone who didn't want to put any work/effort into their pet, isn't going to want to put an work/effort into rehoming them...nope, just dump 'em at the shelter and let the taxpayers deal with it.

Same philosophy goes for all the people who buy a lab or golden or JRT or <insert breed here> b/c they look so darn nice and fluffy and cute in the Eddie Bauer catalogs or on TV shows....no one takes into consideration all the time/work/effort that goes into getting those dogs to look that way.


----------



## peace36 (Jan 29, 2007)

That is sad. I did notice that the article stated that there is a difference between a designer dog and a mutt. Mutt is of unknown ancestery. Designer dog is purposely bred 2 pure bred dogs.

I do wonder if the pounds are more full because of designer dogs. I think the people who got these dogs would have gotten a different dog and ditched it anyway if the designers were not availble.

The article states that the designer labordoodle made a wonderful family pet.

I think like I may have said before the designer dogs or mutts or purebreds are not the problem. The problem is people. They need to keep their dogs!


----------



## RobDar (Dec 28, 2006)

RonE said:


> A bored Plott is a force of Nature!1 LOL!! LOL!!! good lord how true that is!!!
> 
> 
> > lovemygreys said:
> ...


----------



## Captbob (Feb 2, 2007)

Most people don't have a clue as to what getting a new dog as a member of your household, entails. They are lazy about training the dog, having it spayed or neutered, taking it to the vet, walking and exercising the dog, socializing the dog, etc.. etc... It's such a shame that the dog has to suffer because of it's rather stupid master...


----------



## carolann (Jan 21, 2007)

So that's what a labrodoodle looks like! Interesting. 

Getting these dogs is just like parents who get their children live bunnies for Easter. Once the newness wears off no one wants to take care of the animal anymore and they get rid of it however they can. It's only an animal, right. What difference does it make! It's not like they have feelings. 

What has always baffled me is why these people want a dog in the first place. They don't spend any time or effort on him. They bring a dog home and when he chews up a piece of furniture because he is bored and no one pays attention, the dog is tied up in the back yard alone and ignored. Even worse, dumped off on some country road left to fend for themselves or starve. Oh well, it's only a dog.  

If my Copper was in a burning house, I would run in to save him. No question about it.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

That's a major problem with many designer owners as well as many people hopping on the toy dog fad- they don't think that they will be dogs. When they learn they STILL have to work and the dogs STILL shed and STILL need attention they dump them. It's very sad.


----------



## Weebles (Feb 12, 2007)

Umm... this is not just a problem with designer dogs. I know lots of people (including myself) who love their designer dogs and think of them as their fur children or parts of their families. I think this same problem occurs with all breeds - that's why there are so many problems with pit bulls and aggressive dogs - people don't take the time to train them and take care of them properly.


----------



## Keno's Mom (Nov 20, 2006)

_--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So that's what a labrodoodle looks like! Interesting_

That's what that ONE particular labradoodle looks like. Since its a mix, you get all kinds of results - they are not consistant. There are some that look more poodle, some look more lab and some inbetween.

Don't take the picture as the truth of the designer dog.


----------



## peace36 (Jan 29, 2007)

Keno's Mom said:


> _--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> So that's what a labrodoodle looks like! Interesting_
> 
> ...


Their looks may vairy but I bet they are all still pretty darn cute.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Weebles said:


> Umm... this is not just a problem with designer dogs. I know lots of people (including myself) who love their designer dogs and think of them as their fur children or parts of their families. I think this same problem occurs with all breeds - that's why there are so many problems with pit bulls and aggressive dogs - people don't take the time to train them and take care of them properly.


If you read what I said, I said *many* designer owners. Designers are a fad and small dogs are a fad and with these fads, many people who should not have dogs end up with them. It happens with all breeds, but as always it happens the most with the current trends. Remember 101 dalmatians? Or any other movie or celebrity owned dog that started a fad? People rush out to buy them, they are massed produced and magically these dogs still require work. Designer dogs work the same way. Unfortunately for me and for you the fad is to cross any dog, particularly a small breed, and to hand it out as no work pets. The trend is something small and fluffy- preferably mixed- that you can carry around in a purse.


----------



## Kerry (Jan 12, 2007)

I still say that a cockapoo isn't a "fad". This mix has been around for over 40 years.
Why is it a negative thing to describe a dog as a "no work" pet or as not having a job? How many people use terriers to chase rats or labs to retrieve ducks? They are household pets. That isn't a fair criticism of designer dogs.

Impulse buying is the problem, not what kind of dog someone chooses. And I agree about the goldens and labs...they look so adorable, but people don't know how big they get, how much they shed, and how much exercise they need.


----------



## tully (Jan 25, 2007)

Well, I just posted but will post here also. This is bugging me because there are tons of dogs in rescue. All types of breeds and mutts. People who get designer dogs are the same part of the population that get a Lab or a German Shep etc. Don't start using the designer point as your argument against new breeds. Again, I have a goldendoodle, who is now 1, had him since he was 8 weeks and I adore him! He is yes cute, fluffy, also demanding, active, chews etc. Everything that my Lab was as a pup. I love dogs and wanted another one. I wanted something different. I got him from a great breeder who I would recommend to anyone! He is our clown and makes us all laugh. I could not imagine not having him. Soo, I have a problem with this one sided conversation! If you don't know dogs, especially puppies, it doesn't matter what the breed is. There are those that will dump them and those that wont! And, he doesn't shed, that is not why I got him, but he doesn't. The Labdoodle sheds much more and again you have the Lab to contend with. I am not saying every designer dog should be created as I don't know about all of them. I can tell you I would get a goldendoodle again in a minute! I love him!


----------



## tully (Jan 25, 2007)

This is my adorable goldendoodle!


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

It's pretty simple, just as people meticulously customize a cup of coffee to suit their mood...a lowfat, decaf, mocha latte with chocolate sprinkles is particularly good...people want to design their pets to match their lifestyle. Maybe if the Humane Society promoted themselves as the Starbucks of dogs, and sold the dogs for hundreds of dollars people would flock to them. Instead, we have people promoting the breeding of mutts to fulfill a trend...wonderful. No wonder 20+ million dogs are euthanized every year here in the states. 

The Designer Dog breed quiz--can you tell which is which?


----------



## tully (Jan 25, 2007)

Sounds pretty self rightous to me: Sorry but I really have a problem with this thread. Like I said, there are all kinds of breeds, mutts etc. There will be people that take owning their animals seriously and those that wont. Where do you think all the millions of the breeds we have came from? Let's not be so closed minded. There is chaff and wheat. There will be fall out some will stay and some will go. Not everything is a trend.


----------



## peace36 (Jan 29, 2007)

There have been mutts for what seems like forever. I do not really think this is a new trend. Some people prefer mixed breeds mutts or designer dogs over a purebred and it is worth it for them to spend the same amount as some one spending it on a pure bred to get what they want.


There all decendents of the Wolf any way so there had to be all sorts of different breeding going on to get all these different pure breeds. I dont hear anyone complaining about that.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

Close minded would be not understanding genetics and the plight gambling with genes can have on a population of animals. Close minded would be overlooking a wealth of animals and buying one because it looks great this week. Close minded would be accepting irresponsible breeding as the best alternative. Self righteous would be not seeing the link between all these things, and not caring to protect people made breeds. And no one complains about the breeds we have because they all have histories hundreds to thousands of years old and they served people for many different reasons back then...but genetics was also less understood than it is today. The visionaries for today's designer dogs have got it all messed up, and that's the problem.


----------



## MagicToller (Jan 4, 2007)

> The visionaries for today's designer dogs have got it all messed up, and that's the problem.


We should really look into getting a clapping emotiocon.


----------



## tully (Jan 25, 2007)

Thanks Peace, I felt like I was standing alone . Sorry curb you and I have very different views. We have so many breeds of dogs and they all came out of breeding different dogs together. I look at my pup as a mutt and frankly I think mutts are more healthy and have less problems with genetics than over bred breeds. So, I am not jiggy with your points on breeding. I think you have it backwards . 

The bottom line is  we both must love our animals or we wouldn't be on this forum. Maybe we just need to agree to disagree. I am sure we are both good people with good hearts! I like both the standard poodle and the Golden and I think they are a great mix. He is a good hardy breed and that to me is what we are all wanting for our dogs. 

It is OK to buy a dog from a breeder just as it is OK for people to only get a dog from the pound or rescue. We are all called in our own ways. One way is not better or more profound then the other!


----------



## Kerry (Jan 12, 2007)

> It's pretty simple, just as people meticulously customize a cup of coffee to suit their mood...a lowfat, decaf, mocha latte with chocolate sprinkles is particularly good...people want to design their pets to match their lifestyle


What's wrong with that? The more my pet matches my lifestyle, the less chance I will give him away to a shelter.


----------



## Chloef_2799 (Feb 1, 2007)

I think if we showed people the cycle of people get dog, people breed dog, people sell puppies, puppies are not "right" for family, puppy goes to shelter, shelter takes x amount of tax dollars to care for puppy for several days/weeks, pup is adopted or put to sleep. If pup is put down that costs x amount of tax dollars. As cut and dry and as un-friendly as that sounds it is the truth and people need to see that.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

tully said:


> Thanks Peace, I felt like I was standing alone . Sorry curb you and I have very different views. We have so many breeds of dogs and they all came out of breeding different dogs together. I look at my pup as a mutt and frankly I think mutts are more healthy and have less problems with genetics than over bred breeds. So, I am not jiggy with your points on breeding. I think you have it backwards: .
> 
> The bottom line is  we both must love our animals or we wouldn't be on this forum. Maybe we just need to agree to disagree. I am sure we are both good people with good hearts! I like both the standard poodle and the Golden and I think they are a great mix. He is a good hardy breed and that to me is what we are all wanting for our dogs.
> 
> It is OK to buy a dog from a breeder just as it is OK for people to only get a dog from the pound or rescue. We are all called in our own ways. One way is not better or more profound then the other!


A) Mutts are not necessarily more healthy than purebreds- they CAN be, but they can also not be. The way to go about improving health involves a lot of genetic research and testing and crossing of SIMILAR breeds (Ie- poodle and golden are not similar) - designer breeders DON'T do that. If you have a lab with HD and cross it to a poodle with HD, that dog is probably going to STILL have HD even though it's a mutt. Also, they generally begin with lower quality breeding stock- so crossing two inbred low quality purebred dogs isn't going to do much of anything. You'd be much much much better off looking into a breeder who has health tested for generations if health istruly what is most important to you.

B) Your goldendoodle is not a breed- a breed breeds true and goldendoodles do not. I'm sure you didn't mean it like that, but it's a misuse of the word.

c) People have a right to go to a _responsible_ breeder. The problem with designer breeders is they are not responsible. They pump out dogs at an alarming rate with no health testing, no proven stock (in anything usually), and little concern for the actual dogs. Many purebred breeders aren't responsible either. I don't support either. It is up to the individual to research breeders and wanting a designer dog to me is in no way an excuse to go to a bad breeder. It promotes practises that are unethical.

And to Kerry's post, it IS a problem to advertise dogs as no hassle, little work pets because they will be JUST AS MUCH work as any other dog out there. People think they can get away with doing nothing and that equates with many more dogs being dumped.

And yes, now I'll be labeled as the resident purebred snob.


----------



## tully (Jan 25, 2007)

I did not read the article you are all talking about. I am just letting you know I disagree with what you are saying about desinger dogs. You can no more generalize about them as you could a German Shep. 
OK, you are a breed snob LOL, just kidding! 
Look, I have had both. I have had mutts, full breeds and now my first desginer dog. I am going to disagree with you in the fact that yes my pup is basically a mutt. My mutts have faired better in the long run the my breeds but that could just be a conwinkidink! 
I am sorry but I think you are all being a little to serious! I think the Universe is quite expansive and nothing is black and white. There is room for all of us. 
I don't spend a lot of my time focusing on rescue that is not my calling. If it is your calling, God Bless. 
I love my pups, I believe God sent them to me and they are my responsibility. I am not in to condeming others for what they chose. No one ever knows the big picture except for the Top Dog upstairs!


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

I guess what I don't get is how people can condone careless breeding of any kind of dog- purebred or mixed nowadays when we have so much more technology and knowledge available to us.

Oh, and as a note, my mutts have had far worse health problems than my purebreds, perhaps a fluke, who knows.


----------



## Lorina (Jul 1, 2006)

I can't go from being a person who's loaded the bodies of euthanized dogs into a morgue, then from the morgue to the crematory, and coming into work in the morning to smell of burnt flesh when I worked at a shelter, to being someone who sees just how much people pay for mix or poorly bred purebred puppies at pet stores or from BYBs (lots of clients bring in their paperwork to the vet with receipts attached), and not feel *something*.

No, that individual who buys a pet store, mill or BYB pup is not directly responsible for the dead dogs at the shelter. My anger and sadness is more directed at the breeders. I just can't get past the feeling that people are financially rewarding those who willingly contribute to pet overpopulation. Some may feel that one person buying one puppy isn't going to make a difference, but that's like saying one person chucking trash out their car window isn't polluting.


----------



## tully (Jan 25, 2007)

I think there are breeds that are totally over bred at this point. What about that? And, my point has still not been addressed. At some point, we had to breed two different types of dogs to get a new breed. We have done this more than once. Why does everything have to be all or nothing? You can get a dog with the best papers in the world and still have a problem. So, we can focus on all the good stuff or the bad stuff. Yes, we need to be savvy consumers and responsible for our pets. It is a pretty good guess all of us on this forum are. Like I said, some of these designer dogs will go by the way side but some will stay. And, I will bet you that one day the goldendoodle is going to be considered a breed. We can wait and see

I think it is wrong of you to judge people that decide to buy a dog verses getting a dog at rescue. If your heart is leading you to do that, wonderful. I have done both. I have gotten dogs out of rescue and I have purchased dogs from breeder.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

No, you're missing MY point. It's fine to get a dog from a breeder- there is nothing wrong with that. However, look at these breeders of these dogs and tell me that they are breeding up to the standard that a world full of way too many dogs should be breeding?

I'm just as guilty as anyone else who has fallen for this. I have a girl sheltie whom I absolutely adore. She's 11 years old now and healthy- thank God. I got her when I was a kid from a couple who wanted their dogs to have puppies because they thought they both made good pets. I spent $250 on her with her AKC papers and everything- doesn't sound too bad, does it? The owners were nice enough people that loved their dogs, but they were hardly qualified to be breeders. They didn't test their dogs for any genetic issues, they put an add in the paper and sold their puppies to whoever came and paid $250 assuming that the dog would get a good home. Like I said, they weren't horrible people, but their breeding wasn't responsible and neither was purchasing a dog from them. By purchasing from them, I condoned all their breeding practises. I've learned my lesson since then and all my other dogs have been from responsible breeders since then. Doesn't mean I love Nikki any less, it's just I've realized I made a HUGE mistake. Buying a purebred from a person or a mill like that is just the same as buying a designer dog. Luckily with a purebred you can actually find people who put the quality and health of their dogs above anything else.

Find me a goldendoodle breeder that does genetic testing and thoroughly screens owners the way a reputable purebred breeder does and then maybe I'll change my mind.


----------



## Keno's Mom (Nov 20, 2006)

_I got him from a great breeder who I would recommend to anyone! He is our clown and makes us all laugh. I could not imagine not having him. Soo, I have a problem with this one sided conversation! If you don't know dogs, especially puppies, it doesn't matter what the breed is. There are those that will dump them and those that wont! And, he doesn't shed, that is not why I got him, but he doesn't. The Labdoodle sheds much more and again you have the Lab to contend with. I am not saying every designer dog should be created as I don't know about all of them. I can tell you I would get a goldendoodle again in a minute! I love him!_

A "great breeder" does NOT produce mixed breed dogs or "designer dogs" - so this so called great breeder IMO is nothing more then a backyard breeder or a puppy mill type that is out to produce dogs for money - not to IMPROVE a purebred dog!

There is NO guarentee that any "poo" cross will not shed - you might have gotten on that didnt, but the next time, you might end up with one that sheds just as much as the normal lab or golden retriever. I'm willing to bet this "great breeder" also promotes the dogs as non-shedding or "AKC registered" or another puppy mill registration. 

If you really want this type of dog, next one you get, please search the shelters first to get one and not buy one from the backyard breeder/puppy mill breeder.

BTW a labradoodle is a lab and poodle cross. A goldendoodle is a golden retriver and poodle cross 



One other thing (someone mentioned cockapoos being around for 40 yrs). While it may be true they've been around that long they are STILL NOT A LEGIT PUREBRED DOG. They are still a mixed breed and cannot be registered in any legit association (AKC, Canadian Kennel Club (CKC), or UKC)......if they have been around that long, don't you think you'd have some consistency on type to become a purebred dog and go for legit registrations? Something wrong with this picture isn't it? Since they don't breed true, they are not a purebred dog but I know "breeders" try to make it seem so.....want to debate the "cockapoo"?


----------



## MagicToller (Jan 4, 2007)

> I will bet you that one day the goldendoodle is going to be considered a breed. We can wait and see


The "Doodle" breeds are already considered and marketed as legitamate breeds by fake registries and greedy ignorant people out to make a dollar. The question is not IF they will be, it's WHO considers them. The AKC? I think not.


----------



## Captbob (Feb 2, 2007)

MagicToller said:


> The "Doodle" breeds are already considered and marketed as legitamate breeds by fake registries and greedy ignorant people out to make a dollar. The question is not IF they will be, it's WHO considers them. The AKC? I think not.


Well if the AKC registers dogs from puppy mills, why wouldn't they register a designer dog?


----------



## MagicToller (Jan 4, 2007)

> Well if the AKC registers dogs from puppy mills, why wouldn't they register a designer dog?


Well this is true, that and the whole Petland Co. incident.. but I blame tainted people and breeders more than I do the AKC for registering milled puppies. The AKC is far from perfect, and carrying the title of AKC doesn't mean much either - but what I meant was recognition to participate in the conformation ring and performance events.


----------



## Kerry (Jan 12, 2007)

> And to Kerry's post, it IS a problem to advertise dogs as no hassle, little work pets because they will be JUST AS MUCH work as any other dog out there. People think they can get away with doing nothing and that equates with many more dogs being dumped.


If the dog is being advertised as "no hassle", I agree with you. I haven't seen that anywhere. 
But you are categorizing all people who buy designer dogs as:
#1. not understanding the responsibilities of owning a dog
#2. being unwilling to spay/neuter
#3. being more likely to dump their dog.

Again, my point is that impulsive pet buying is the problem. Even with the right questions, a good breeder can't identify owners who will be overwhelmed by a dog. "Do you have a fenced in yard?", "Are you aware that the vet bills will be expensive?", "Are you willing to train your dog daily and attend obedience classes?", "Are you ready for the grooming and shedding involved with this dog?"....all someone has to do is say, "yes, yes, yes" and off goes the puppy. Lots of people think they are ready to own a dog, but they're not. But the type of dog doesn't factor into the problem.

I really would like to understand how you think a cockapoo or labradoodle owner is more likely to dump their dog than the owner of a purebred Golden Retriever or Springer Spaniel? And please don't just repeat the same old songs about quality and genetics and "it's not a breed" and millions of dogs are euthanised every year. Those all sound good, but don't address the issue.

And I disagree that all dogs are the same amount of work. No way. My Golden required daily vacuuming and my cockapoo requires no additional vacuuming. And the less I have to get that vacuum out of the closet, the easier my day is! I wanted a poodle mix for that reason. Little dogs are easier all around, in my book. NOT training-wise, of course.

Curbside, I just took the "Designer Dog Quiz" you posted. 
So what is the point of that? You could put two labs that look alike or two beagles or two rotties....what does it prove? Ok. I can get a nice looking dog from a breeder or from a shelter. 
But I thought you couldn't get a designer dog from a "breeder". 
That quiz does nothing to support your ideas.


----------



## peace36 (Jan 29, 2007)

*Tully*

 yeah what Tully says! I'll just save my typing energy for another thread because I have already written my opion or Tully has...Good Job Tully.


----------



## Kerry (Jan 12, 2007)

> One other thing (someone mentioned cockapoos being around for 40 yrs). While it may be true they've been around that long they are STILL NOT A LEGIT PUREBRED DOG. They are still a mixed breed and cannot be registered in any legit association (AKC, Canadian Kennel Club (CKC), or UKC)......if they have been around that long, don't you think you'd have some consistency on type to become a purebred dog and go for legit registrations?


I wasn't trying to say that the cockapoo is a registered breed. I was saying that 40 + years does not qualify as a "fad". Please don't change around the meaning of my words.

What is the advantage of being "legit"? Some interesting information:
*
"There is a widely held belief that "AKC" or "AKC papers" and quality are one and the same. This is not the case. AKC is a registry body. A registration certificate identifies the dog as the offspring of a known sire and dam, born on a known date. It in no way indicates the quality or state of health of the dog."

The AKC does not guarantee the accuracy of the information on a dog’s "blue slip". The breeder, on the honor system, supplies this information to the AKC. The AKC is currently using DNA testing during it’s inspections to verify the parentage of dogs on the premises, but this is only done on a very small percentage of breeders.

The AKC does not guarantee the quality of any dog. When a dog is eligible for AKC registration, all that means is that the breeder is in good standing with the AKC and both the sire and the dam (as recorded by the breeder) are registered with the AKC. Blind dogs, deaf dogs, and dogs with physical deformities are every bit as eligible for registration as top show dogs.*

So my cockapoo doesn't have AKC papers...doesn't mean much to me. A healthy cocker spaniel was crossed with a healthy poodle. Result: healthy cockapoo.


----------



## Keno's Mom (Nov 20, 2006)

When a dog is registered in a legit association it means that the dog is purebred and can be shown IF it meets the written standard of the breed.

Mixes and designer dogs cannot be shown cause they are not a true breed of dog. They are a cross of two different purebred dogs - which makes them a mutt - not a dog that is registerable because its parents were!

As far as cockapoos not being a fad cause they've been around 40 yrs - tell me WHY after 40 yrs is it not considered to be a breed? Because the dogs don't breed true? Or is it cause no one bothered to make them breed true and become a legit purebred dog that will breed true and consistant.


----------



## Sawyer (Nov 14, 2006)

Th problem is the lack of understanding of why designer dogs are a problem in the first place. The first time I ever heard of a designer dog was watching the news - they did a piece on a new breed that does not shed, is good with families, and easy to train - the labradoodle. Honestly, it didn't occur to me then that this was a problem...after all, it was on the news. It wasn't until I researched our own dog that I realized the problem. 

CP mentioned that the "visionaries for today's designer dogs have got it all messed up, and that's the problem." And I agree, but on a different note, their vision is dead on: create a product that sells, at any cost.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

I really feel like anyone who is deciding on buying a designer dog, needs to understand some basic genetics to understand that designer dogs are not a good idea. Let me attempt to explain this simple concept to those of you who convienently overlook the genetics.

Gregor Mendel (1822-1884) developed basic laws of genetics using crosses between pea plants with different qualities...green or yellow peas, tall or short plants, etc. The same principles, now called Mendelian genetics, also apply to dogs. The most basic genetic scenario is where a gene on a specific locus determines each trait...the location of a particular gene is called the locus of the gene. For example, a straight or curly coat might be determined by two different versions of the same gene. These alternative versions, which differ slightly in their DNA sequence, are called alleles. An individual dog inherits one allele at this coat-type locus from each parent. The alleles may be the same or they may be different. If they are the same, the individual is homozygous at that locus. If they are different, the individual is heterozygous. 

Closely bred dogs tend to be homozygous at the loci that determine coat type. When you breed a dog that is homozygous for one coat type to a dog that is homozygous for a different coat type, then you get a litter of puppies that are all heterozygous at that locus. In reality, inheritance of coat type can be more complicated than that represented by simple Mendelian inheritance, but the basic principle is the same. All the Labradoodles in the litter will have similar coat types...in this case, wavy and low shedding, the result of the combination of the different alleles of their two parents. 

However, you can't breed one Labradoodle to another Labradoodle and get Labradoodle offspring, because they aren't a pure breed. You are instead breeding a heterozygote to another heterozygote. In this case, you will have some puppies that are more like Labs, some that are more like Poodles, and potentially everything in between. This is because these are mixes bred to mixes and not true-breeding individuals. The other thing to remember is that hereditary problems like hip dysplasia are present in both breeds and are not eliminated by cross-breeding.

So there in lies the problem, how do you fabricate a standard that's uniform when the offspring can be of any coat A-Z, and develop genetic tests for the offspring for when they breed? What will happen to the litter of puppies that don't meet your standard poo and doodle owners? If you can't develop a standard that is unique, how will you be able to prove conformation? If you can't prove conformation, how am I suppose to know that your're doing everything responsible as a breeder? If you're not doing everything responsible as a breeder, why should I give you my money for a pup? Give me nothing to prove the worth of your breeding program, and you will not see a single cent from me. I'll enjoy my shelter mutt, thank you!

Poo-Mix Rescue Dogs


----------



## lurcherloopy (Feb 11, 2007)

Kerry said:


> I really would like to understand how you think a cockapoo or labradoodle owner is more likely to dump their dog than the owner of a purebred Golden Retriever or Springer Spaniel? And please don't just repeat the same old songs about quality and genetics and "it's not a breed" and millions of dogs are euthanised every year. Those all sound good, but don't address the issue.
> 
> .


Well for one thing anyone getting a purebreed from a responsible breeder will be contracted to return the dog to the breeder, Ive yet to hear of a doodle breeder that does that. 

Responsible breeders dont just ask a few questions, they look very hard at propective families who are on the waiting lists for puppies not even conceived yet, so these families are willing to wait for the right dog from the right breeder.

I think the problem is more to do with caring where your dog comes from and the ones left behind in the byb or puppy mill to carry on churning out puppies in horrible conditions thats what I just couldnt buy into.


----------



## tully (Jan 25, 2007)

First off, I know a labdoodle is a cross and I know what a goldendoodle is. I have owned dogs my whole life. I am not a novice dog owner. I also did a lot of research before I got my doodle. 

Secondly, my breeder has bred standard poodles and golden retrievers for over 20 years before she decided to do this. They are all AKC registered and they are show dogs. 
She feeds them the raw food diet and she is an inspected licensed large dog breeder. So, sorry I trust her credentials. 

You keep talking about genetics. The breeders of the doodle are getting all the genetic information to claim them as a breed. Also, both her standards and goldens are all tested for everything you are talking about. 

The doodle was first created to be a service dog for those who where allergic to shedding dogs. This was a noble attempt to help others. YEs, some shed, some don't. Mine doesn't. I would never get a dog on that point but if you need a service dog and are allergic it is a chance they will not shed. 

I think you all need to do more research because you are incorrect in your statments. You all sound quite fanatic and it is hard to have a conversation with a fanatic. And, as the others posted there are many dogs that are in rescue and are aggressive and mis-bred. Again, I am not saying you should just mix any breed and make a designer dog; however, I think the golden doodle is a legitmate breed and will become registerd as a breed. We will see but I think I am correct. Again, all the breeds we have many came into being this same way.


----------



## MagicToller (Jan 4, 2007)

> I think the golden doodle is a legitmate breed


Where's their standard?

" There are currently no size classifications for the Goldendoodle. It is difficult for a hybrid litter to "breed true"; that is, it is difficult to know exactly what size a Goldendoodle will grow to as an adult, regardless of parental size. "


----------



## Keno's Mom (Nov 20, 2006)

I don't care if this "breeder" has breed both poodles and golden retrievers and they are show dogs..........NO ethical breeder will deliberatly cross 2 different breeds to create the designer dog! That is just plain stupid! While her poodles and her goldens are AKC registered, NONE OF HER GOLDENDOODLES ARE REGISTERED! They can't be. They are NOT a legit breed - they are a mutt or mixed breed - call it anything you want but do NOT call it a breed. There is no consistency in type. What "standard" is this breeder going by?

So why would this so called breeder be creating designer dogs? She cannot control the type of dogs that result from cross breeding. And she certainly can't control breeding of 2 goldendoodles.

It would be the same thing as if a cat breeder was working with 2 completely different breeds - such as a shorthair burmese and a long hair main **** - you would keep the breeding to MC x MC and Burm x Burn - you would NEVER create a designer cat of a MC and Burm for a fad.


----------



## lawlady (Feb 4, 2007)

Out of curiosity i looked online at labradoodle and goldendoodle 'breeders' websites. Several who advertised themselves as 'responsible, experienced breeders' were selling their pups for upwards of $2500.00. One was $3000.00. It's all about the money and supply-and-demand. They saw the window of opportunity and flew right through it. Responsible breeders *don't* take a breed they have devoted their life to and start crossing it. That makes absolutely no sense. 

It infuriates me to no end to see irresponsible breeding, and that is what that is. And i think people who spend that kind of money on an unregisterable, unshowable, unproven dog need a swift kick in the seat of their pants.

There. I feel better now. I just can't believe the prices these dogs are going for...

Linda and Zavie


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

tully said:


> I think you all need to do more research because you are incorrect in your statments. You all sound quite fanatic and it is hard to have a conversation with a fanatic. And, as the others posted there are many dogs that are in rescue and are aggressive and mis-bred. Again, I am not saying you should just mix any breed and make a designer dog; however, I think the golden doodle is a legitmate breed and will become registerd as a breed. We will see but I think I am correct. Again, all the breeds we have many came into being this same way.


Yes, it is easy to sound fanatic when you're watching your breed carelessly bred to each other and any other cute little small dog for the sake of money. I know so many people truly trying to improve the papillon in America- and the lines are getting better and better. It's disgusting to us that these people would breed less than qualified dogs together because celebrity X said it was cool to have a little cute dog- or better yet, a little cute mix. Might as well pay more for a poorly bred papi-poo than a show line papillon.


----------



## Weebles (Feb 12, 2007)

I don't understand what is wrong with creating a new breed. Those of you who talked about genetics are correct in saying that at first, you cannot tell what traits the puppies will have. However, you didn't mention that over time, these mixes can develop into their own standard by selecting dogs with certain traits and breeding them together. Think about breeds like the Silky Terrier who started as a mix between the Australian Terrier and the Yorkie, and now have their own standard. I would bet that most breeds started this way, so just imagine if everyone had always opposed designer dogs - we wouldn't have very many breeds!

Granted, there are a lot of irresponsible breeders (both for designer dogs and for purebreds), but I'm willing to bet that there have always been irresponsible breeders, and our current breeds developed just fine.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

I write this as light heartedly as one can be...

Fanatic? I didn't know defending all purebreds would be considered fanatical versus someone who's defending one concept of breeding (designer dogs). But ok, yes then by your definition and assumption I am fanatical. I need to do my research? Ok, lets do some research together of this claim about a non shedding, allergy free dog.

Let's start with the facts... Fur is not the problem, and if you're assuming animal allergies are caused by fur, you're wrong. Allergies are triggered and aggravated by proteins secreted by oil glands and shed with dander. These same proteins can be found in a dog's saliva, and their urine. What is dander you ask? Dander is microscopic particles of skin, fur and hair that animals continually shed. The proteins and other substances that cause an person's immune system to react are called allergens. So I must ask, are these doodle breeders breeding out skin, saliva, and urine? Because a pee-less dog would end most of our threads on housetraining. And I'm not sure how one will cope with a dog that has constant dry mouth, but I'm sure that's not an easy one to overcome. And if they're removing the largest organ on a dog's body, the skin, what an interesting animal doodles must be...I'm not sure if I would classify them as dogs then.

But wait, we all know that the severity of a reaction to allergens varies from person to person. So logically we could say that a person with a lower tollerance to allergens should have a smaller dog, right?...since the larger a dog is the more dander they have to shed. So I guess the next step for doodles is to breed them down to pocket size? I can see Paris Hilton now walking down the red carpet with three micro doodles sticking their head out of her hand bag. Wonderful! Contrary to the belief doodle and poo breeders would like buyers to believe, there is no such thing as an allergen free dog. People who suffer from allergies have symptoms whether the dog is present or not...period. What allergy sufferers need is not a mutt claimed to be allergy free and isn't, but an allergy specialist. Again, if the visionaries of doodles continue to promote their dogs like this, they've got it all messed up.



Weebles said:


> I don't understand what is wrong with creating a new breed. Those of you who talked about genetics are correct in saying that at first, you cannot tell what traits the puppies will have. However, you didn't mention that over time, these mixes can develop into their own standard by selecting dogs with certain traits and breeding them together.


What's wrong with double-doodles and triple-doodles is that with their popularity soaring, doodles have become the "Breed du Jour" and pet stores, puppy mills and backyard breeders are capitalizing on it's fame, selling fluffy puppies of dubious parentage and breeding to an unsuspecting public world-wide. Unless you're buying your doodle from Tegan Park Research Center, you're handicapped, and aren't allergy tested for doodles, you're buying into the fad.


----------



## Weebles (Feb 12, 2007)

Interesting... I would think the solution to this problem would be advocating and enforcing better regulations on ALL puppy breeding, rather than denouncing a certain kind of puppy because it is popular.


----------



## peace36 (Jan 29, 2007)

Weebles. your resplies really make a lot of sense. to me.

Curbside. I read some of yours but some of your posts are just too darn long It reminds me of when I was growing up and I had to sit through a really long boring monatanous (SP??) adult mass uuugggh!!! Try as I might I just could not keep my mind focused in on it. Your posts are too long for me!!

I bet someone else maybe can read the whole thing though.

If I went to get a dog and some one said here is a purebred poodle with award winning parents and lifetime guarentee and only has the best genes and they said oh and here is a cute little malti-poo mutt they are both the same price guess what I would have picked the malt-poo because that is what I prefer.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

Weebles said:


> Interesting... I would think the solution to this problem would be advocating and enforcing better regulations on ALL puppy breeding, rather than denouncing a certain kind of puppy because it is popular.


You should read more about my posts on breeding in general. This is a thread on designer dogs.



peace36 said:


> Curbside. I read some of yours but some of your posts are just too darn long It reminds me of when I was growing up and I had to sit through a really long boring monatanous (SP??) adult mass uuugggh!!! Try as I might I just could not keep my mind focused in on it. Your posts are too long for me!!
> 
> I bet someone else maybe can read the whole thing though.
> 
> If I went to get a dog and some one said here is a purebred poodle with award winning parents and lifetime guarentee and only has the best genes and they said oh and here is a cute little malti-poo mutt they are both the same price guess what I would have picked the malt-poo because that is what I prefer.


I won't comment on you comprehension or aptitude, but I'm sure you're capable of both.


----------



## Weebles (Feb 12, 2007)

Curbside Prophet said:


> You should read more about my posts on breeding in general. This is a thread on designer dogs.
> 
> Designer dogs AND the breeding of designer dogs. I think the post on Mendel led the thread a little more into breeding.


----------



## peace36 (Jan 29, 2007)

Curbside Prophet said:


> You should read more about my posts on breeding in general. This is a thread on designer dogs.
> 
> 
> 
> I won't comment on you comprehension or aptitude, but I'm sure you're capable of both.


awww, thanks curbside. Really the way I see it this is all not that complicated. I can see where you are coming from with the facts that I have read that you posted. I am just not into showing or breeding and think you and many people are getting way too upset about the designer dogs. I have pure breeds and mutts both and I really do not care if they are pure or not the problem is the people who do not keep and take care of them. 

Fact my mutts had less medical problems than the purebreeds and better temperments. That may not hold true for everyone but it does for the dogs I have had. I know you will say the pure breed must have came from a bad breeder if that is someones response I think it is lame and just and easy out.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

I shall repeat myself: WHY is it okay in this day and age for someone to breed dogs without utilizing all the technology and benefits we have available to us nowadays to try to ensure as much as we humanly can that we are producing the healthiest, highest quality dogs possible?

To me it has nothing to do with designers, but designers are the latest fad. It has to do with people beig lazy, selfish, and wanting a fad. The breeders don't put the time or effort into the dogs, they want the money, and people want a dog that is advertised as not acting like a dog or shedding like a dog. People shouldn't promote unethical breeders. Period. Doesn't matter whether the breeder is purebred or mutt. The only problem is I have NEVER seen someone I consider reputable breeding mixes. (with the possible exception of one or two cockapoo breeders as previously stated)


----------



## skunkstripe (Oct 28, 2006)

FWIW the "Labradoodle" breeders in Australia have been going about the breeding practices in a manner which strongly suggests a degree of responsiblity that has been lacking in the US.
http://www.laa.org.au/
I am not intending to condone the willy-nilly creation of F1 crosses, but perhaps someone would care to comment on the information in this site. It might make you cautious about bashing a "Labradoodle" owner from Australia.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

The Australian Labradoodle imo could've been a great idea, but unfortunately it isn't what they meant for it to be most of the time. I can't fault the people originally working on a low shedding guide dog- they seem to do everything right. They have multiple generations, and are focusing on a certain temperament and coat type (low shedding). They prefrom health tests and I'm pretty sure they keep a closed registry. But these same people are NOT the ones in the US selling F1 dogs for thousands of dollars and claiming all dogs to be shed-free. What happened and is what is seen nowadays in the United States is that someone saw a labradoodle, went 'Oh cute!' and began mass producing them and eventually a zillion other crosses. It's happened with other types of dogs today, but unfortunately it happened to the designers when they were barely even established. At least with other dogs there were long time fanciers around to help maintain some quality within lines. 

I know several labradoodles actually. On campus we have a guide dog training program and about half the dogs we get are labradoodles from a service dog breeder. The other half is from a golden breeder. I'm not sure what I think about that, but I know this breeder is not your average run of the mill designer breeder. They health test and DO breed for a specific coat type and service dog temperament.

just something for BOTH sides to keep in mind.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

skunkstripe said:


> http://www.laa.org.au/
> I am not intending to condone the willy-nilly creation of F1 crosses, but perhaps someone would care to comment on the information in this site.


The breeders at Tegan Park in Australia started their stock from labradors, poodles and labradoodles from Don Evans, another breeder who had discovered the breed independently of the Guide Dog Association. Those labradoodles were legitimate labradoodles, and they kept records of all subsequent breeding. They also determined which coats were low allergenic. They conducted extensive research and breeding programs to arrive at the dog that has become characterized as a "labradoodle". Contrary to popular knowledge, they are not the product of exclusively mixing in labradors and poodles. Other breeds were used occasionally, for certain characteristics.

The breeders at Tegan Park began calling their dogs, and those descended from that stock by breeders, "Australian labradoodles", to distinguish them from the labrador-poodle mixes that were being indiscriminately produced. The mixes were not quality controlled, many were allergenic, yet people with allergies were misled into buying them, expecting not to get allergic reactions.

However, the International Labradoodle Association (ILA) was set up (2004) originally to help maintain the quality and characteristics of the doodle designer dogs. Yet they now are seeking to call all labrador-poodle crosses "Australian labradoodles". If this is successful, consumers will have no way of knowing whether they are buying what they think they are, and what their health requirements determine they need. The end result will be more abandoned dogs being euthanased because of a careless association and even more careless breeders. Again, in order to be legit you have to separate yourself from what makes you a hybrid or mixed breed breeder. It's not an easy fight when you have associations like the ILA screwing up your vision.


----------



## skunkstripe (Oct 28, 2006)

Curbside thank you that was very informative. I guess the logical solution would be to call the "legit" Labradoodles "Australian Labradoodles" to distinguish them from the F1 Labradoodles. Another solution might be to simply find another name entirely.


----------



## Keno's Mom (Nov 20, 2006)

The last I heard about the Australian labradoodles is they quit the breeding as they were not really getting the desired results (and probably because of the flood of poodle-lab crosses showing up.

They couldn't get the consistency needed to really become a breed.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

skunkstripe said:


> I guess the logical solution would be to call the "legit" Labradoodles "Australian Labradoodles" to distinguish them from the F1 Labradoodles. Another solution might be to simply find another name entirely.


I'm afraid more than a simple name change is needed. Let's say for example a labradoodle can be proven to produce a labradoodle, everything is recorded, and someone wealthy enough to afford DNA testing of labradoodles exists. Let's also say a visionary can write a standard that's unique and reliable. In order for a labradoodle to be recognized by the AKC, certain requirements need to be met. I won't go into detail on this, but one of the requirements is the breed needs national recognition. Each country would have a certain requirement for a new breed to be recognized. I don't know exactly what Australia's requirements are, but I don't think this has been fulfilled yet by doodle breeders. Furthermore, the breed would also need to be recognized by the FCI (Fédération Cynologique Internationale), and their requirements seem to be prohibitive of new breeds. You can read their perspective here http://www.fci.be/uploaded_files/Article%20Prof.Denis_EN_jennifer_court.doc. It's an arduous task to say the least, as well it should be.


----------



## skunkstripe (Oct 28, 2006)

Indeed it is an arduous task.
My speculation tha a name change might be in order was simply to distinguish between what appear to be the more serious efforts in Australia from the slapdash F1 crosses in the US. I think if I had gone to the trouble that they have and then along came some Yank and crossed a Poodle with a Labrador and called it an Australian Labradoodle I would be ticked off.


----------



## peace36 (Jan 29, 2007)

Isnt the Bichon Frise a fairly new breed?? What is that a mix of? Poodle &???


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

The bichon was recognized in the 50s, but it's history dates back at least back to French courts. It's one of a group of dogs descended from the Barbet (water spaniel), I believe.

I found some intersting stats:



> The OFA (records health issues for various breeds) has recorded Hybrid dogs as being number 26 for hip dysplasia
> out of 142 breeds listed. This makes the hybrid worse than the German Shepherd (39), Golden Retriever(32),and
> much worse than the two founding breeds: Labrador Retriever (74), Poodle (70).


Anyone know if those are right? Hybrid in question was the labradoodle...


----------



## tully (Jan 25, 2007)

I agree with Peace and Weebles! Curb it seems like we are on the opposite side of this debate. I do agree with Peace, your posts are too long. As I age, I realize I have lost my focus! This is not intended to insult you but admit to my hormonal lobotomy 

I am wondering what are the last breeds that entered AKC? I will have to do some research, if I feel compelled. As I want to see what breeds came from where. 

Dogs are wild and live in packs. Lets say we had never domesticated dogs. Lets say they were all running around. They would breed regardless of man's intervention. They wouldn't care about genetics. 

I also do not show; I just have my babies as pets. 

I used the word fanatical maybe that was incorrect? I am a student of metaphysics so genetics, metaphysically speaking, mean diddley squat to me


----------



## Snowshoe (Nov 17, 2006)

yeah, I agree Curb and Keno's mom. 

What I think is a big problem here is that the people who have gone out and deliberately purchased a doodle feel like we're deliberately making them feel bad because they purchased a doodle. 

They seem to argue that we're either trying to make them feel inferior, or even seem to down right condone the breeding practices that got then their dog. 

However, rather then getting emotional with it and sticking to facts, I haven't seen one doodle owner arguing that their breeder did do genetic testing. Only one mentioned a hip clearance. 

I think the best way to dissuade us would be to present us with facts: 

First off, a legit reason to purchase a labradoodle. 

~ So we kind of decided that it was ok to have one if you're blind, or disabled and have allergies and need a "low shedding" service dog. 
I agree with that, if that is the case. Especially if you have a scenario like where Curb mentioned of this particular institute that tracks all specimens, coat types, etc. 

IF the doodle will ever be a recognized breed, it will be due to places like that. 

Second of all, the quality of breeder: 

~Ok, so I don't care what kind of dog you have- be it Doodle Dee, or purebred poodle, bad breeders are bad breeders. ANY breeder that doesn't do health testing sucks. Any person that breeds in a vacuum is worthless, and that's that. 

From what I've seen, none of what I've seen counters that argument with facts, except the current work being done on the Australian Labradoodles, which we decided were good for low shedding service dogs.

OBVIOUSLY there are bad pure bred dog breeders out there. I'd say the same things to them, and frequently do. 

I think the point of this thread was to illustrate that doodles end up in shelters, too. And also, that even though you can get a pet to meet most of your needs, THEY have needs, too. 

I think it's easy to forget that, especially when it comes to fads and what ever is popular.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

But dogs ARE man's responsibility and since they are, don't you think it's man's duty to take as best care of them as he can? So it's okay to forget about preventative measures to take when regarding genetic diseases because these dogs are just going to be pets and their soundness doesn't matter? Have any of you had a dog that had a genetic disorder? If you did, you'd know how heartbreaking and expensive it is. If it's something I can avoid, then I will. 

Sorry CP that your posts are ignored as they're 'too long'. If they'd be read, I'm sure other people would find them useful and relevant to the arguments. I wish some people actually did know a bit about genetics when looking into dog breeders. Breeding is entirely about genetics so it's ridiculous to say that genetics don't matter when dog breeding is the issue.


----------



## tully (Jan 25, 2007)

I guess this is how I look at it. If I want to pay money for a mutt, than that is OK. I mean to me really a doodle is a mutt. And like Peace, my mutts over the years have faired much better than my expensive well bred dogs. Yes, it could be just a fluke but that is my experience. I don't feel bad about getting my pup nor do I feel inferior. I don't really even feel that emotional about this topic. I simply don't agree with you. I mean that is what makes the world go round, right? 

I saw this site and wanted to say my two cents. I think the whole genetic testing thing is a bit of a scam to make the buyer feel better. My vet bought a Lab, my vet!, and ended up giving the dog over 3 surgeries by his first year. He had sooo many problems but had the papers. My Rory, Lab AKC all the tests done on him, has seizures. So, I mean come on! There are no promises just like there are no promises when you have a baby. The tests don't give you the ulitmate control or assurance of what you will end up with! 

Meanwhile, my doodle with no papers and no tests is healthy as an ox! Go figure:


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

I'll be brief then... I care not to dissuade opinons, I only care to share knowledge beyond generalizations. To that end, I'm sorry if I'm not intelligent enough to sum up a concept in three sentences. Whether you care to understand the genetics or not, is irrelevant. I only care to share information to people who are willing to learn...maybe by your own admission you're not one of them. For you then, I can only hope you don't own a dog that is ruined by poor genetics...but many people do, and it's only when it's too late do they question why, if at all...and that's sad.


----------



## tully (Jan 25, 2007)

Hey Curb, I have a dog right now that is a AKC bred Lab with all the papers and tests and he has seizures! I mean come on!


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

tully said:


> Hey Curb, I have a dog right now that is a AKC bred Lab with all the papers and tests and he has seizures! I mean come on!


Thanks for the anecdote!...I guess. What has you're breeder done about this? I'm sure there's more to "come on!" about with your breeder than there is to promoting good breeding practices.


----------



## Weebles (Feb 12, 2007)

Theoretically, a mutt (or mix) should be healthier. If a certain breed is predisposed to a condition and it is bred with another breed that is not predisposed, this condition will probably not show up since many mutations are recessive. Alternatively, if you breed two of the same dogs together, you have a guarantee that you will just continue to have these diseases.

Maybe I'm wrong about dogs, but this is how genetics work in general, so I don't know why it would be different for one species.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

No, genetics is much much more complex than that. You cannot throw two breeds together and expect all problems to be solved, you'd be much better off getting a purebred from a line known not to have the problem. It's always a gamble with genetics, but it's a MUCH safer bet.

And AKC papers alone mean nothing. Breeding a dog with aKC papers and breeding a well bred dog are two very different things.


----------



## peace36 (Jan 29, 2007)

Curbside Prophet said:


> Thanks for the anecdote!...I guess. What has you're breeder done about this? I'm sure there's more to "come on!" about with your breeder than there is to promoting good breeding practices.


Curbside. What should Tullys breeder do about it?


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

Weebles said:


> Theoretically, a mutt (or mix) should be healthier. If a certain breed is predisposed to a condition and it is bred with another breed that is not predisposed, this condition will probably not show up since many mutations are recessive. Alternatively, if you breed two of the same dogs together, you have a guarantee that you will just continue to have these diseases.
> 
> Maybe I'm wrong about dogs, but this is how genetics work in general, so I don't know why it would be different for one species.


You do understand that you can't write a standard for a hybrid, don't you? Because what you just stated is the first theory of hybridization. However, if you want to produce a standard which is identifiable you must go into multi generations. So you breed you're poodle to your lab, and you get one hybrid. Then you breed your hybrid to another poodle, or hybrid, so on and so forth. But you're theory of hybrid vigor doesn't hold up once you go into multi gen...in fact you can make things worse. If one dog is predisposed to one disease, and the other is predisposed to another disease, the offspring may not end up with either disease, but now you have a dog predisposed to both. No tests can be done, so what can breeders do? Role the dice? Hope? Cross their fingers? I'm not saying it can't be done, but this is exactly what designer dog breeders do. They role the dice to make a dollar, they hope for an unknowing buyer to come along, and they cross their fingers that the unknowing buyer doesn't find out they've been duped into buying something that isn't what it's suppose to be. I would explain more about first hybrid vigor, but some of you may fall asleep.



peace36 said:


> Curbside. What should Tullys breeder do about it?


Tully's breeder should discontinue the line immediately, and have all breeding stock from the parents spayed and neutered. As to what Tully can do about it, that depends on the contract that was signed.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

This is totally OT but CP what do you do in the real world? Is genetics just a hobby? 

Sorry, I'm a gene major and am just insanely curious.


----------



## blackrose (Oct 7, 2006)

Weebles said:


> Theoretically, a mutt (or mix) should be healthier. If a certain breed is predisposed to a condition and it is bred with another breed that is not predisposed, this condition will probably not show up since many mutations are recessive. Alternatively, if you breed two of the same dogs together, you have a guarantee that you will just continue to have these diseases.
> 
> Maybe I'm wrong about dogs, but this is how genetics work in general, so I don't know why it would be different for one species.


 No matter if you breed mutts or not, the health conditions are still the same. If you breed two different unhealth breeds together, what are you going to get? Healthy dogs? Not by a long shot. If you breed two dogs of the same breed that are healthy, what you you likely to get? A healthy dog. If you breed two unhealthy dogs of the same breed together, what are you likely to get? An unhealthy dog. If you breed two healthy mix breeds together, what are you most likely to get? A healthy dog. 

But then again, all of the above depends on the dogs line too. I have a mutt and a pure bred. Both are as healthy as a horse. But if I had them bred (they are both fixed, so I can't anyways), that doesn't meen squat for their puppies to be healthy. They may be carrying something from their great-great unhealth tested parents that cripple their puppies.



> You're looking at a "Pek-a-poo" puppy. His father was a Pekingese, his mother was a Poodle. You know for sure that both of them act normal for their breed, because they live next door to you.
> 
> But...since a Pekingese is very different from a Poodle, the Pekapoo puppy inherits conflicting characteristics.
> 
> ...





> It is almost unheard of for a mixed breed dog to have even one parent who has been tested for any genetic disorder. With a mixed breed dog, you have to put your faith in his genetic diversity, rather than in medical testing.
> 
> 
> Some mixed breed dogs are crosses of purebreds that share similar health problems. This means the same defective gene could come over from both parents and pair up in their puppies. For example, a "Cockapoo" puppy has one Cocker Spaniel parent and one Poodle parent. Both of these breeds are prone to a long list of similar defects that could easily pair up.
> ...


 The link of Purebred dogs vs Mixed Breeds: http://www.yourpurebredpuppy.com/tutorial1.html

This is mainly just talking about the down falls and up rises of adopting a purebred dog or a mutt. It isn't about designer dogs at all, but more towards the fact that many people won't adopt a dog from a shelter because the dogs there are all "mongrels" and they think a high price tag on a purebred answers all of their problems. A good read, however.


----------



## peace36 (Jan 29, 2007)

Curbside Prophet said:


> Tully's breeder should discontinue the line immediately, and have all breeding stock from the parents spayed and neutered. As to what Tully can do about it, that depends on the contract that was signed.


I think what happens would be he could return his dog. So many people bond with a dog and would just not do that so these guarentees mean nothing if that is the case. So big deal the "Guarentee" bit


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

Laurelin said:


> This is totally OT but CP what do you do in the real world? Is genetics just a hobby?
> 
> Sorry, I'm a gene major and am just insanely curious.


That's an open ended question, but I assure you genetics has nothing to do with how I make a living...if that was your question.  But just like you said, breeding is all about genetics, and I can't possibly see how one can find a good breeder without understanding some basic genetics. That's like going into an interview without knowing anything about the company you're interviewing with. Good luck getting that job, and good luck identifying a good breeder.


----------



## MagicToller (Jan 4, 2007)

> Theoretically, a mutt (or mix) should be healthier.


Again, that's a myth that's proving to be quite difficult to dispell from lingering in the air.

Haha.. self-quote from another thread..

"That isn't necessarily true. The inheritance of structural problems such as hip dysplasia is complex and can multiply through the generations; thus mixed breed dogs are also potential victims. Unlike [most] purebreds, mixed breeds are rarely if ever screened for genetic abnormalities, so there is no way to avoid the painful and expensive genetic diseases that plague pure bred dogs."


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

peace36 said:


> I think what happens would be he could return his dog. So many people bond with a dog and would just not do that so these guarentees mean nothing if that is the case. So big deal the "Guarentee" bit


Again, whether the dog can be returned depends on the contract that was signed. If there are no specific clauses about a guarantee into adulthood, or what should happen if the dog should ever get sick, well, that's a red flag, and not a contract I would sign. But I can't speak for Tully or the guarantee that was agreed to.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Curbside Prophet said:


> That's an open ended question, but I assure you genetics has nothing to do with how I make a living...if that was your question.  But just like you said, breeding is all about genetics, and I can't possibly see how one can find a good breeder without understanding some basic genetics.


That answers it. 

I'm just currently in the market trying to figure out what a person with a GENE degree can actually do lol. (Should've thought of that before choosing majors, eh?) And I'm always interested to learn more.


----------



## tully (Jan 25, 2007)

That is my point Curb, he had all the right stuff and he has seizures. Tests are not a guarantee. 
To be honest, I have not talked to the breeder. He started getting them at 9months. He is my dog and I love him and we are getting rid of them through holistic means. I know God sent him to me because of the way I would chose to treat this. 
I probably should contact the breeder so she knows but I hesitated beause I didn't want it to be interpreted as a blame fest. I really liked her, I liked and saw all her dogs, liked the papers, etc. Life is a gamble no matter how many tests you get! And, not every breeder is corrupt. Remember the old saying, sh*t happens!

First off,  I am a girl not a boy LOL!
Secondly, I totally disagree with you about the breeder ending the line. Seizures fall under several catagories and it is very hard to figure out exactly what is going on with him. There are such things as anomolies in the world Curb. You aren't a control freak r u?  LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Come on, don't lose your sense of humor! 
I believe any and all things can be healed!


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

tully said:


> That is my point Curb, he had all the right stuff and he has seizures. Tests are not a guarantee.
> To be honest, I have not talked to the breeder. He started getting them at 9months. He is my dog and I love him and we are getting rid of them through holistic means. I know God sent him to me because of the way I would chose to treat this.
> I probably should contact the breeder so she knows but I hesitated beause I didn't want it to be interpreted as a blame fest. I really liked her, I liked and saw all her dogs, liked the papers, etc. Life is a gamble no matter how many tests you get! And, not every breeder is corrupt. Remember the old saying, shit happens!


It certainly does happen, and despite our differing views, I still don't like the fact that it happened to you. It's hard enough to find good owners, and match them with healthy dogs, and then to add on the difficulty of finding the best breeder...that's another challenge onto itself. I'd rather you had a healthy dog...good owners should have healthy dogs. I'm not saying bad owners should have sick dogs, but all dogs need a good owner, and you're dog is lucky to have you. And you're right, genetic tests are not a 100% gurantee, nor do I think they ever will be in our lifetime, but it's the best breeders can do, as it is the closest to a guarantee we can get. Probably the best service you could provide to your dog would be to inform the breeder. Maybe she knows of another pup with a similar problem...you're call could be the deciding factor to get her to reconsider how she's been approaching her breeding program. There's no need for others to suffer what you're going through, especially if your breeder is willing to make improvements on her lines. That's what good breeders do, and I'd give her a chance to be a good breeder. If a blame fest insues, well, maybe she had no plans on being a good breeder to begin with.

Finally, I hope I did not assume your gender. I purposly try to avoid that if I don't know. My apology if I did.


----------



## Weebles (Feb 12, 2007)

Laurelin - I also have a degree in genetics - I do marketing. Not exactly related, but genetics doesn't give you many options other than genetic counseling or research.

On another note: Yes, I know genetics is much more complex than just crossing two breeds to make another one, however, this is a dog forum, not a genetics forum, and I didn't know everyone would get into such great detail!


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

Weebles said:


> On another note: Yes, I know genetics is much more complex than just crossing two breeds to make another one, however, this is a dog forum, not a genetics forum, and I didn't know everyone would get into such great detail!


Have you read the thread about Big Bang and Religion in the off topic forum? Lol. I'm amazed at what I read sometimes too. When they called our age the information age, they were serious.


----------



## tully (Jan 25, 2007)

OK, these are just some snippets I found. Look at the ancestory of all the below: 

I found a very interesting story on the Leonberger. The man that created this breed kenneled and sold 200 to 300 dogs a year. He was animal crazy and had all kinds of animals running around. He wanted the perfect big working dog. After 4 different trys he got it!
His first crap shoot was with a St. Bernard and a Newfoundland. That was ok but the monks said hey a little to lazy we need a big working dog. He went back to the breeding board! He added a Great Pyrenees to the mix; thus the leonberger was born! So, I guess they had designer dogs all the way back in 1846!

Here is the story of the min schanauzer again the breed was found by mixing!

One of three modern breeds with schnauzer in its name, the Miniature Schnauzer is descended from the Standard Schnauzer and the Affenpinscher, a toy dog with a terrier-like attitude, with perhaps a dollop of Poodle thrown in. The Standard Schnauzer, itself developed from a combination of German Poodle, gray wolf spitz, and wirehaired pinscher (the German "pinscher" is the British "terrier".

Etc:
Like many of the sporting breeds, the Golden was born in Britain in the 1800s. Breed ancestry includes the extinct Tweed Water Spaniel, a small Newfoundland, the Irish Setter and other water spaniels.

Like I said, man did not fall and when he got here all the breeds we have today of dogs were millling around. NO, man intervened and started way back when designing dogs to fit his purpose. That is the story of man my freind. We domesticated them and decided to put who with who. We are still doing it and will continue probably until the end of time!


----------



## skunkstripe (Oct 28, 2006)

What can you do with a gene degree? Become a professor for example like Mark Neff, geneticist at UC davis, who said in a recent NYT Magazine article: 
"I can go out and find the most bizarre German Shepherds in the world, and I can start crossing and inbreeding them......" and they would be German Shepherds by virtue of their all-German Shepherd pedigrees.

More recent additions to AKC recognized breeds include the Border Collie 1993(bitterly opposed by the USBCC)
http://www.bordercollie.org/akc.html
and the Parson Russell Terrier 2004
bitterly opposed by the JRTCA
http://www.terrier.com/jrtca/noakc.php3


----------



## tully (Jan 25, 2007)

I actually know several people that have gotten dogs from her and none of them have had this problem. I think I will take your advice though and tell her. I didn't really think of it from that perspective. 
I do believe it is an anomoly though. He is a great dog and honestly doing very well with acupuncture and herbs. I have taken him off all grains and that has made a difference. I am also working with a homeopath. He hasn't had to be on meds and I believe he will be healed. It is all good. Thanks for the kudos about being a good owner. 
Just making it clear on my gender with jest of course!


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

tully said:


> That is the story of man my freind. We domesticated them and decided to put who with who. We are still doing it and will continue probably until the end of time!


I didn't have knowledge of genetics in 1846 to argue against the GP, like I do today against designer dog breeders, lol. But they also didn't euthanize dogs in 1846 like they do today. Are you trying to imply that the GP was a designer dog like today's designer dog? That's an amusing stretch to say the least. Yes, at some point in time all purebreds started from some sort of mix, but the word "designer" can be spoken of in a completely different context than it could in 1846. You're fighting an uphill battle if you're trying to associate breeders from 1846 as designer dog breeders. The rules are much different today. And you know what they say, _either lead, follow, or get the f out of the way_. I don't have any problems with breeders having legitimate reasons to create new breeds, but they must do so to protect their vision...there has to be a communal will, and the fact is, there isn't one with today's designer dogs. There are exceptions, but they are few and far between. Your average poo and doodle is not the exception.


----------



## tully (Jan 25, 2007)

Curb, I get the feeling both you and I tend to lead so who is going to get out of the way?! LOL 
I did think that ws a pretty interesting story. If designing dogs is good enough for the Monks well by God it is good enough for me..

Well, I have to say I don't think man has really changed that much he just has a lot more technology now. I am not big into genetics. I could never get if Suzy had red hair and Tom's hair is straight who will be bald? LOL
I actually believe much more in thought than genetics soo we will hve to start a whole new thread on that topic.

I have actually been trying to understand metaphysics, as in quantum and or spiritual, in correlation to my pup Rory and his present circumstance


----------



## Wimble Woof (Jan 16, 2007)

Curbside Prophet said:


> I don't have any problems with breeders having legitimate reasons to create new breeds, but they must do so to protect their vision...there has to be a communal will, and the fact is, there isn't one with today's designer dogs. There are exceptions, but they are few and far between. Your average poo and doodle is not the exception.


I dont see what need there would be for any new breeds what so ever???
If you want a dog that wont irritate your allergies, there are breeds already.
If you want a good gun dog... there are breeds for that already (many sizes and varieties)
If you want a good protection dog... there are breeds for that already.
If you want a good herding dog there are breeds for that already....

Why mix up toys and poodles??? Why mix up Retrievers and Poodles??? 
And how many people actually "work" their dogs any more anyway??? 
Before in the 1800's dogs were bred with a purpose... they were worked, times have changed and we no longer need their services for what they were bred for ( for the most part) so what possible reason in the Millenium is there to create a new breed???


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

Wimble Woof said:


> I dont see what need there would be for any new breeds what so ever???
> If you want a dog that wont irritate your allergies, there are breeds already.
> If you want a good gun dog... there are breeds for that already (many sizes and varieties)
> If you want a good protection dog... there are breeds for that already.
> ...


I don't have a clue, and the FCI would agree with you, but I know one thing, anybody that can find a reason needs to be smarter than us.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

> I actually believe much more in thought than genetics soo we will hve to start a whole new thread on that topic./
> 
> 
> > How can you not believe in genetics? It's fact. If someone carrying one problem mates with someone carrying the same thing, there is a great probablility that their offspring will show this trait. Just curious as I don't believe I've ever heard someone say tat before.
> ...


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

tully said:


> I actually believe much more in thought than genetics soo we will hve to start a whole new thread on that topic.
> 
> I have actually been trying to understand metaphysics, as in quantum and or spiritual, in correlation to my pup Rory and his present circumstance


Ya, that would need to be a whole new thread, but an interesting one nevertheless.


----------



## Snowshoe (Nov 17, 2006)

Nice posts. I've enjoyed this thread, though at certain parts I find it disheartening. 

I really hope that more people then not understand the importance of genetic testing and locating a good breeder. 

To me, it boils down to this: 

Man created dog. 

Therefore: 

All of dog's problems, man also created.


----------



## tully (Jan 25, 2007)

Laur in the paradigm we have right now genetics is a fact in this form of matter and how we understand it. In the paradigm of quantum physics, where I believe science is going and we are moving towards in our evolution, creation is from the mind. The environment we see, create, touch, experience is all coming from within. To me all things, all things, come from thought. I am talking about a very different paradigm. You say genetics is a fact. In this finite space that may be true. Fact is a tricky word. I don't like using the word fact. This world will end as it is finite. So, fact today maybe not so much tomorrow. 
OK, we should maybe post a new thread on this one


----------



## skunkstripe (Oct 28, 2006)

Snowshoe said:


> Nice posts. I've enjoyed this thread, though at certain parts I find it disheartening.
> 
> I really hope that more people then not understand the importance of genetic testing and locating a good breeder.
> 
> ...



Now that is something all of us (most of us?) can agree on, even if we disagree about details.


----------



## peace36 (Jan 29, 2007)

Yep, I agree!


----------



## blackrose (Oct 7, 2006)

tully said:


> OK, these are just some snippets I found. Look at the ancestory of all the below:
> 
> I found a very interesting story on the Leonberger. The man that created this breed kenneled and sold 200 to 300 dogs a year. He was animal crazy and had all kinds of animals running around. He wanted the perfect big working dog. After 4 different trys he got it!
> His first crap shoot was with a St. Bernard and a Newfoundland. That was ok but the monks said hey a little to lazy we need a big working dog. He went back to the breeding board! He added a Great Pyrenees to the mix; thus the leonberger was born! So, I guess they had designer dogs all the way back in 1846!
> ...


 The invention of those breeds weren't designer dogs...they were bred for a purpose, a working purpose. The current breeds didn't fit what they needed in a working dog, so they developed a new one. What are today's designer dogs (Puggles, Jugs, Labradoodles, Boggles, Shih-poos, and God knows what else) doing that any other breed cannot do? Nothing. I don't see people complaining about Alasken Huskies. But those are working dogs, not just mutts with a high price tag that are for companionship. There are so many companion mutts in shelters, we don't need to be breeding more mutts.


----------



## anjamaka (Feb 4, 2007)

You know, it says a mutt is of unknown origin in that article, but my dog is of known origin so he must be a Border Husky! He is going to guard us from all those canadians. (joke)


----------



## Weebles (Feb 12, 2007)

Wimble Woof said:


> I dont see what need there would be for any new breeds what so ever???
> If you want a dog that wont irritate your allergies, there are breeds already.
> If you want a good gun dog... there are breeds for that already (many sizes and varieties)
> If you want a good protection dog... there are breeds for that already.
> ...


----------



## Keno's Mom (Nov 20, 2006)

If you want a cute fluffy lap dog there are TONS of them in the Toy Group - no need to create more. If you can't find one in that group I feel sorry for you


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

I have two cute little fluffy dogs and felt no need to buy a designer when I purchased my dogs. They're only companions- exactly what I wanted.

May I introduce you to the 

Papillon- http://www.akc.org/breeds/papillon/index.cfm
Havanese- http://www.akc.org/breeds/havanese/index.cfm
Maltese- http://www.akc.org/breeds/maltese/index.cfm
Toy Poodle- http://www.akc.org/breeds/poodle/index.cfm
Shih Tzu - http://www.akc.org/breeds/shih_tzu/index.cfm
Japanese Chin- http://www.akc.org/breeds/japanese_chin/index.cfm
Peke- http://www.akc.org/breeds/pekingese/index.cfm

etc etc etc


----------



## Weebles (Feb 12, 2007)

Hmm... yes, I am aware of the fact that there are already cute, fluffy dogs. I have one that I love. I was simply saying that people get dogs for different reasons, and one of them is for how they look (as shallow as that may seem). And you must admit, a lot of designer dogs are pretty darn cute.


----------



## Keno's Mom (Nov 20, 2006)

Yeah, but a lot of them are "ugly" too - you should see some of the results!


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Actually, to me all the poo mixes look the same. And they all look like poodles in pet type cuts. Maybe that's just me...


----------



## MagicToller (Jan 4, 2007)

> A fluffy, cute little dog is likely to be cuddled and played with by it's owner, so who's to say that's not a purpose?


We've already got toy breeds that are "cute little dogs who want to be cuddled and played with."


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

My local shelter has cute covered! Three of them will be euthanized tomorrow. Too bad they couldn't find a good home with someone who would rather spend hundreds of dollars for a trendy version of cute.


----------



## Tamara (Dec 6, 2006)

Keno's Mom said:


> Yeah, but a lot of them are "ugly" too - you should see some of the results!


Exactly have you ever seen a Frankenpoo they are hideous. 

As a lot have said there are cute, cuddily, small dogs in all colours, coat length - designer dogs are really not necessary not to mention health issues with haphazard breeding.


----------



## Weebles (Feb 12, 2007)

I'm not saying designer dogs are necessary, I'm saying there's nothing wrong with them. Yes, I agree some breeders are irresponsible, but that's for ALL breeders, not just those who breed designer dogs.

Second, I have never seen a dog that is ugly (designer, mutt, purebred, whatever). They're all cute.

As for the cute dogs in the shelters, of course that's horrible. But, unless my local shelters are completely different from most, these are not designer dogs. The shelters in my area almost never have little dogs or designer dogs. They have larger breeds and lots of pit bulls.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

It's all in the eyes of the beholder, right?


----------



## Weebles (Feb 12, 2007)

Touche... that is an odd looking dog. But it does look like it has personality and if it were mine, I would probably think it was the cutest thing in the world.


----------



## Tamara (Dec 6, 2006)

Weebles said:


> I'm not saying designer dogs are necessary, I'm saying there's nothing wrong with them. Yes, I agree some breeders are irresponsible, but that's for ALL breeders, not just those who breed designer dogs.
> 
> Second, I have never seen a dog that is ugly (designer, mutt, purebred, whatever). They're all cute.
> 
> As for the cute dogs in the shelters, of course that's horrible. But, unless my local shelters are completely different from most, these are not designer dogs. The shelters in my area almost never have little dogs or designer dogs. They have larger breeds and lots of pit bulls.


I agree all dogs are gorgeous 

But they don't have to be designer to be what you are looking for. Perhaps contact all the shelters in a 200 mile radius and let them know what type of dog you are looking for chances are they will either have or soon have a cute cuddily dog for you that really needs a home.


----------



## Weebles (Feb 12, 2007)

http://www.samugliestdog.com/

The "ugliest dog ever" was a purebred.


----------



## Tamara (Dec 6, 2006)

Careful Curb if Elsa sees you with that stunner she will get jelous


----------



## Weebles (Feb 12, 2007)

Tamara said:


> I agree all dogs are gorgeous
> 
> But they don't have to be designer to be what you are looking for. Perhaps contact all the shelters in a 200 mile radius and let them know what type of dog you are looking for chances are they will either have or soon have a cute cuddily dog for you that really needs a home.


True, but my point is that there are lots of dogs in shelters and I'd have to look at such a large radius to find a small or designer dog. Clearly, designer dogs are not being "dumped" in such large quantities.


----------



## Tamara (Dec 6, 2006)

I saw the cutest mixed breed in the park the other day - they think she is a Jack Russel x Papillon x poodle. Not Designer but a rescue.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

Weebles said:


> True, but my point is that there are lots of dogs in shelters and I'd have to look at such a large radius to find a small or designer dog. Clearly, designer dogs are not being "dumped" in such large quantities.


Poo-Mix Rescue Dogs

Then I guess an organization like this will be closing their doors soon because clearly the quantity or the trend isn't there.


----------



## tully (Jan 25, 2007)

I have thought a lot about your arguments on genetics and they just don't add up. You said that 1864 isn't today but genetics is exactly the same today as it was in 1846. The only difference is man knows more about it now. 

God sent dogs to this world and than we as co-creators started creating dogs to suit our needs! That is what man has always done! The story of the Leonberger is NO different than the story of the goldendoodle today! Back in 1846 when this guy decided to breed a bunch of different breeds to get what he wanted is the same as someone doing it today. 

Man is changing and with him so will the dog. For you to think it would be any different, tells me you don't understand man. Designing a dog to be a large working dog on a farm, is the same as designing a dog to suit someone today. I think your genetic argument has a lot of holes when it comes to dogs and breeding. Now, you wouldn't breed a mastiff with a miniture poodle on that I agree. However, there will always be new breeds as long as man is alive. 

Just as you pointed out man doesn't really need the working dog anymore.
The dog is man's best friend and man will be taking dog with him to the 50th century. The working dog will probably be obselete than. We are evolving and so will the dog.


----------



## Weebles (Feb 12, 2007)

Curbside Prophet said:


> Poo-Mix Rescue Dogs
> 
> Then I guess an organization like this will be closing their doors soon because clearly the quantity or the trend isn't there.


Maybe I didn't make my point clearly. Yes, there are mixed breed rescues and designer rescues. There are also purebred rescues and shelters which have very few or no designer dogs. There are far more rescues dedicated to purebreds or to any dog, and these shelters typically are not overrun with malti-poos and labradoodles. You all keep saying that they are such a fad and being dumped in such large quantities, but the reality is they are not being dumped as often as many other dogs.


----------



## tully (Jan 25, 2007)

I am right in step with ya Weebles. Plus, we have not even discussed the inner breeding of soo many pure breds, like the dalmation for instance. All the problems, chronic illnesses etc. I mean this is such a lopsided conversation. 

I guess the bigger question is what's the big fear of new breeds? Also, they might actually be more healthy without all the chronic problems of over bred breeds? 

Let me get one thing straight. My doodle is work. He is 85 pounds, tall like a standard, very energetic, chews etc. He is not sitting at my feet the way some of you are talking about the desiginer dog. Also, I did not get Tully because he was a designer dog. I got him because I feel in love with him. He is every bit as active as my Lab was as a pup. He is a hunting/water dog. He is AWESOME! Yes also fluffy, adorable and sooo cute. By the by my breeder absolutely told me if he did not work out she wanted him back! So, I don't know where you are all getting your information?


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

Weebles said:


> Maybe I didn't make my point clearly. Yes, there are mixed breed rescues and designer rescues. There are also purebred rescues and shelters which have very few or no designer dogs. There are far more rescues dedicated to purebreds or to any dog, and these shelters typically are not overrun with malti-poos and labradoodles. You all keep saying that they are such a fad and being dumped in such large quantities, but the reality is they are not being dumped as often as many other dogs.


O' so you still believe designer dogs are identifiable breeds, and wouldn't be labeled as a mutt? That's a farce if I ever heard one.

Poor breeding practices are still poor breeding practices whether it's with a purebred , hybrid, doodle, or poo. To claim that bad breeding practices are a reflection of purebreds, and therefore one should consider a designer dog instead, is ludicrous. Poor breeding practices will follow any breed if there isn't a communal will to change it...and this includes the doodles and poos. Again, if there is a communal will for a new dog, the visionaries must protect the communal will, and do what is required in order for the breed to be recognized. No one has done that with the doodle or poo. I think most defenders of designer dogs would better serve their time if they took the time to understand what a good breeder is. The facts are most people don't know what a good breeder is, or don't care. If this fits you, good luck promoting your "oh well" attitude.


----------



## skunkstripe (Oct 28, 2006)

Curbside Prophet said:


> O' so you still believe designer dogs are identifiable breeds, and wouldn't be labeled as a mutt? That's a farce if I ever heard one.


Curbside I'm sorry but you are incorrect. There is a difference in terminology for those who care to respect it. You do not have to take my word for it, have a look here:
http://mbdca.tripod.com/mixed_breed_faq.htm
There is some logic to keeping track of what mixes may be present in a mixed breed dog, for example personality traits and potential genetic disorders. And before anyone jumps in to say that once you start mixing you get an unidentifiable hodge-podge of random canine genes, allow me to remind everyone that when creating new breeds, dog fanciers years ago deliberately introduced several breeds to create one single breed. Now if the genes get "lost" why would they have done this to come up with the dogs that "breed true" today? According to the "complete crap shoot" argument they might as well have taken some healthy mongrel off the street instead.

Really, if I as a lover of mystery dogs can take the trouble to learn the terminology for things like "roan" "ticking" "merle" etc I think the PB fanatics can keep the terminology between mixed breeds, mongrels and mutts straight. The way the term "mutt" gets thrown around it sounds as if it is being used as an insult.


----------



## Weebles (Feb 12, 2007)

Curbside Prophet said:


> O' so you still believe designer dogs are identifiable breeds, and wouldn't be labeled as a mutt? That's a farce if I ever heard one.


Yes, I believe they are identifiable breeds. I am not in the business of showing dogs or breeding them, so I actually don't really care if they conform to some people's ideas of a breed. They may not all be identifiable now, but it takes time to create a new breed that would be recognized by people like you or the AKC. 

BTW...thanks Tully!


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

skunkstripe said:


> Curbside I'm sorry but you are incorrect. There is a difference in terminology for those who care to respect it. You do not have to take my word for it, have a look here:
> http://mbdca.tripod.com/mixed_breed_faq.htm


My point was it's extremely difficult to claim that designer dogs aren't being dumped when shelters and rescues are for the most part guessing at the breed. It doesn't seem fair to claim that many more purebreds are being dumped only because they are identifiable, and that designer dogs are excluded because they aren't as identifiable.


----------



## Weebles (Feb 12, 2007)

Curbside Prophet said:


> O' so you still believe designer dogs are identifiable breeds, and wouldn't be labeled as a mutt? That's a farce if I ever heard one.
> 
> Poor breeding practices are still poor breeding practices whether it's with a purebred , hybrid, doodle, or poo. To claim that bad breeding practices are a reflection of purebreds, and therefore one should consider a designer dog instead, is ludicrous. Poor breeding practices will follow any breed if there isn't a communal will to change it...and this includes the doodles and poos. Again, if there is a communal will for a new dog, the visionaries must protect the communal will, and do what is required in order for the breed to be recognized. No one has done that with the doodle or poo. I think most defenders of designer dogs would better serve their time if they took the time to understand what a good breeder is. The facts are most people don't know what a good breeder is, or don't care. If this fits you, good luck promoting your "oh well" attitude.


What about the fact that you are saying poor breeding practices are a reflection of designer dogs and therefore people should never buy them? Isn't that the same thing? 

There's quite a difference between having an "oh well" attitude and thinking it's ok to change.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

Weebles said:


> They may not all be identifiable now, but it takes time to create a new breed that would be recognized by people like you or the AKC.


You're absolutely correct...however, I could care less if it's AKC recognized, AKC recognition is not a sole determining factor in my mind...the FCI currently recognizes 338 breeds, and many have a purpose not requiring AKC recognition. The JRT was one of those breeds, but they are now recognized as others have pointed out. As long as they have responsible reasons for standardizing the breed, I'm all for it. Unfortunately, they have to muddle through these irresponsible designer dog breeders to stake their claim. To accept the irresponsible breeding as a step towards recognition is silly.



Weebles said:


> What about the fact that you are saying poor breeding practices are a reflection of designer dogs and therefore people should never buy them? Isn't that the same thing?
> 
> There's quite a difference between having an "oh well" attitude and thinking it's ok to change.


This is my opinion... It's ok to change if someone finds a need. I don't know if the labradoodle is a good example of fulfilling a need. But let's say someone developed a breed that had a keen ability to detect cancer, far surpassing any known breeds. Fine, develop that breed, standardize it, get all the DNA testing set up. Do all the things necessary to be recognized, so that I as a consumer can know research whether you're responsible breeder or not. But don't sell me a cancer sniffing dog until you've proven you can produce a cancer sniffing dog. Because somewhere in the equation, like today's designer dogs, people will promote their dogs to be something they're not to make a buck. It's a fallacy to promote something when you can't prove it's value to the public. Fine, you want a cute companion dog...do what's required, and give me (the consumer) a chance to prove you're giving me what you say you're giving me. I want everyone to have a healthy dog (genetics isn't perfect, I understand that), but show me you're doing what you can to be responsible. Just don't sell me your dog until it's ready. I didn't make up the rules, but we need to use what's there to help us determine a breeders value...that means conformation, trials, health testing, and DNA testing, and much much more. Things that doodle owners and poo owners have yet to accomplish. It's about being as responsible as possible. It's not about denouncing a love for a dog, or an attempt to establish a rank or value on a dog. No, it's about protecting you, the consumer from crap that ruins dogs. If you accept the crap in between...well then, you accept less than what you deserve. "Oh well!"


----------



## 3212 (Feb 4, 2007)

I am so confused about designer breeds! People claim that they are identifiable breeds and that they could potentially become an AKC recognized breeds, but they are clearly mixed breed dogs being sold at outrageous prices, aren't they? I mean a labradoodle is still just a cross-breeding between a lab and a poodle? And a Puggle is a beagle and a pug? So how can anyone say these are breeds....if I knew my pit/dalmation mix was bred from a pure dalmation and a pure pit could I charge someone 500 bucks by sticking the name Pitmation on her? I am not trying to be rude, I just don't understand how any pet store could try to charge that price for a mixed breed when there are probably thoasands of lab/poodle and pug/beagle mixes in shelters? I don't know much on the issue of designer breeds, so correct me if I am misinterpreting this issue, but I just don't understand them at all, I'm not against them or anything...just confused...


----------



## Snowshoe (Nov 17, 2006)

CrzyBritNAmerica said:


> I am so confused about designer breeds! People claim that they are identifiable breeds and that they could potentially become an AKC recognized breeds, but they are clearly mixed breed dogs being sold at outrageous prices, aren't they? I mean a labradoodle is still just a cross-breeding between a lab and a poodle? And a Puggle is a beagle and a pug? So how can anyone say these are breeds....if I knew my pit/dalmation mix was bred from a pure dalmation and a pure pit could I charge someone 500 bucks by sticking the name Pitmation on her? I am not trying to be rude, I just don't understand how any pet store could try to charge that price for a mixed breed when there are probably thoasands of lab/poodle and pug/beagle mixes in shelters? I don't know much on the issue of designer breeds, so correct me if I am misinterpreting this issue, but I just don't understand them at all, I'm not against them or anything...just confused...


I hope you get good answers to your question, because I've asked the same thing and never gotten anything solid.


----------



## 3212 (Feb 4, 2007)

Thanks! Then for both our sakes I hope we do! I am not against them I just don't understand how people can sell them and pass them off as a breed? I mean every time I waltz into our local pet shop at the mall (which is somewhat often as they have a lot of Three Dog Bakery natural treats there) they have a new "designer" breed or whatever they are...and a lot of them are over 1,000 bucks! And they're mixed breeds! I just don't understand that's all. I mean it was Labradoodles and Puggles, but I've seen really bizarre ones too and I can't see how they can sell these mixed breeds for that much money!


----------



## corsomom (Dec 30, 2006)

With millions of dogs being euthanised why support and encourage crappy breeders? (that goes for pure breds too)People breeding these mixes are doing it for the money becouse the dogs are in demand, I think its disgusting. (My Mother recently adopted a Golden/ poodle mix from her local shelter that someone had paid over $1000 for , then dumped after a few weeks)


----------



## 3212 (Feb 4, 2007)

It's awful! I mean I'm not even saying they aren't sweet dogs and yes they are incredibly cute, but come on 1,000 dollars for a mixed breed dog?? It's just sad that it's such a trend to have them right now. I have nothing against pure breds, but if you're buying one from a pet shop? Why? I've seen loads in shelters and rescues. Of course there are people who buy pure breds from breeders to show and breed and that's completely different. If you want just family pet then check out your shelters! The most common thing I've heard people say is that they want a puppy and shelters don't carry puppies, but thats bull. When I go to our local shelter I see cages with whole litters in them! Last time I was there they had 6 lab mix puppies from the same litter and 3 other shepard mixes in the cage over. It's sad!


----------



## Snowshoe (Nov 17, 2006)

CrzyBritNAmerica said:


> It's awful! I mean I'm not even saying they aren't sweet dogs and yes they are incredibly cute, but come on 1,000 dollars for a mixed breed dog?? It's just sad that it's such a trend to have them right now. I have nothing against pure breds, but if you're buying one from a pet shop? Why? I've seen loads in shelters and rescues. Of course there are people who buy pure breds from breeders to show and breed and that's completely different. If you want just family pet then check out your shelters! The most common thing I've heard people say is that they want a puppy and shelters don't carry puppies, but thats bull. When I go to our local shelter I see cages with whole litters in them! Last time I was there they had 6 lab mix puppies from the same litter and 3 other shepard mixes in the cage over. It's sad!


I don't say this very often on this forum, but I 100% agree with you, and I'm so glad you're on here asking these questions. 

It's like I've said before, what part of: could be short, tall, fat, short, long hair, curly hair, short hair, straight hair, wavy hair, red, brown, black, white could you NOT find at a humane society?


----------



## 3212 (Feb 4, 2007)

Snowshoe said:


> I don't say this very often on this forum, but I 100% agree with you, and I'm so glad you're on here asking these questions.
> 
> It's like I've said before, what part of: could be short, tall, fat, short, long hair, curly hair, short hair, straight hair, wavy hair, red, brown, black, white could you NOT find at a humane society?


Well I must say it's nice to be having positive responses in here!  It only happens some of the time!  But yeah I mean a dog is a dog when you get right down to it, and unless you plan to have a show/specific working dog...why not adopt? It just absolutely baffles me that people have to pay all that money for a dog when they can adopt one for a LOT less and save it's life. I mean I am not against people who adopt designer breeds and I don't think they are stupid or anything like that, but I think they are getting themselves ripped off big time. In the shelter I went to recently I saw several puggles and a labradoodle that are equally as lovable as the ones in the pet store, but they aren't a ridiculous amount of money. I just really can't get my head around these mixed breeds being passed off as "designer". I mean if I was to buy two pure bred dogs of different breeds; breed them and then give those puppies a cute designer name people would pay me 500-1500 dollars for them? I know there would be people that would pay it and it's sad.


----------



## skunkstripe (Oct 28, 2006)

CrzyBritNAmerica said:


> Well I must say it's nice to be having positive responses in here!  It only happens some of the time!  But yeah I mean a dog is a dog when you get right down to it, and unless you plan to have a show/specific working dog...why not adopt? It just absolutely baffles me that people have to pay all that money for a dog when they can adopt one for a LOT less and save it's life. I mean I am not against people who adopt designer breeds and I don't think they are stupid or anything like that, but I think they are getting themselves ripped off big time. In the shelter I went to recently I saw several puggles and a labradoodle that are equally as lovable as the ones in the pet store, but they aren't a ridiculous amount of money. I just really can't get my head around these mixed breeds being passed off as "designer". I mean if I was to buy two pure bred dogs of different breeds; breed them and then give those puppies a cute designer name people would pay me 500-1500 dollars for them? I know there would be people that would pay it and it's sad.


I'll drink to that!


----------



## Lorina (Jul 1, 2006)

If there's drinking, count me in!


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

Lorina said:


> If there's drinking, count me in!


I bet I'm not invited ....


----------



## Lorina (Jul 1, 2006)

Sure, but I think it might be BYOB.


----------



## 3212 (Feb 4, 2007)

I guess it would be kinda rude to drink to my own post...but I'm in!!


----------



## tully (Jan 25, 2007)

So, it is ok to buy a Lab lets say for $1,000 but not a goldendoodle? That is the stupidist bit of logic I have ever heard. There are plenty of breeds that are high priced. I just don't get what you are saying! You either have to be against buying all dogs or OK to buy any dog. I believe we live in the USA which is founded on free commerce. IF I want to spend $5,000 dollars on a dog what business is it of yours? I could say don't ever get a dog from rescue because they will be damaged. You should only buy a dog. See how absurd that sounds?

I don't know about any designer dogs except my doodle. So, I can't speak about any other breeds being matched. I think the doodle is an excellent dog and would get another one in a heart beat. I also agree with Weebles it takes time for a new dog to be accepted by the AKC and become a breed of its own. You all keep acting like your dogs did not come from design but they did. All dogs have been created by man's intervention. I don't know why you all seem to keep missing this point! The labdoodle was designed for the handicap just like the leonberger was designed to be a big working dog. Both were created by man's needs. I think the goldendoodle has been more successful, I am not sure why? I do think the labdood sheds more and is more hyper. That is what I have read and heard. Again, if u go back and read what I wrote about the guy who created the leonberger he had to mix a couple different breeds before he got what he wanted. Man has been doing this since the beginning of time. Why are you not getting that?


----------



## MagicToller (Jan 4, 2007)

> I also agree with Weebles it takes time for a new dog to be accepted by the AKC and become a breed of its own. You all keep acting like your dogs did not come from design but they did. All dogs have been created by man's intervention. I don't know why you all seem to keep missing this point! The labdoodle was designed for the handicap just like the leonberger was designed to be a big working dog. Both were created by man's needs. I think the goldendoodle has been more successful, I am not sure why? I do think the labdood sheds more and is more hyper. That is what I have read and heard. Again, if u go back and read what I wrote about the guy who created the leonberger he had to mix a couple different breeds before he got what he wanted. Man has been doing this since the beginning of time. Why are you not getting that?


The funny thing about being accepted into the AKC is the requirement of being an actual breed. This entails consistency, type, breeding true, and a breed standard. These hybrids are just that, hybrids - cleverly marketed to marathon for the Hybrid Vigor concept. The _very_ strong generations behind these dogs will always cause random pups to be tossed in the litters. Not an ideal thing when you're breeding for said purpose.

Yes, the early beginings of all of our breed's heritage include hybrids and mixes to fufill the purpose of the breed's engineer(s). Outcrossing, inbreeding, and linebreeding occured over many generations for the breed in mind to manifest. Early generation stock was not being sold out to people as they are now, where everyone is running to get a piece of the fab fad. The breeders and commitees strived for consistency in their stock for many years until this was accomplished. You don't just cross two purebreds and call it a day. Any idiot can snag two dogs and call them a breed, but that doesn't make it one.

pure·bred (pyŏŏr'brěd') Pronunciation Key 
adj. Of or belonging to a recognized strain established by breeding individuals of unmixed lineage over many generations.


----------



## Snowshoe (Nov 17, 2006)

tully said:


> So, it is ok to buy a Lab lets say for $1,000 but not a goldendoodle? That is the stupidist bit of logic I have ever heard.


If you want to pay $1000 for a dog that you can't show, and whose parents aren't health tested, then that's your call. Personally, if I'm paying that much for a dog, I'd want a life time health guarentee, and proof that the parents were health tested with OFA, CERF, PennHeart, and at least a full thyroid pannell. 

There's NO WAY I'd pay that much for a dog that didn't have all of those qualities. 




tully said:


> There are plenty of breeds that are high priced. I just don't get what you are saying! You either have to be against buying all dogs or OK to buy any dog. I believe we live in the USA which is founded on free commerce. IF I want to spend $5,000 dollars on a dog what business is it of yours? I could say don't ever get a dog from rescue because they will be damaged. You should only buy a dog. See how absurd that sounds?


Yeah, and you said it yourself...BREEDS. A "doodle" is no more a breed then the mutt across the street. You can't show a doodle, and they currently have no working purpose (unless you're talking about the Aussie group). And, if you could show me an excellent doodle breeder, I'd be thrilled to be proved wrong. Here are the qualification- they have to health test, they must breed to some kind of standard, and they must title their dogs in some way. 



tully said:


> I don't know about any designer dogs except my doodle.


How much do you know about your dog? Do you know the diseases that his or her parents had? Do you know if the breeder at least did health tests? 



tully said:


> So, I can't speak about any other breeds being matched.


A doodle isn't a breed. Im not sure what you're getting at, here. If you haven't done any research, then this conversation is pointless. 



tully said:


> I think the doodle is an excellent dog and would get another one in a heart beat. I also agree with Weebles it takes time for a new dog to be accepted by the AKC and become a breed of its own.


Yeah, like it has to breed true for several generations. Which a Doodle by sheer "design" can't, because it's supposed to be a mutt. 




tully said:


> You all keep acting like your dogs did not come from design but they did. All dogs have been created by man's intervention.


Yes, this is true. For example, Collies are for herding. Sheps are for police work. My particular breed was used for a watch dog on the barges which coursed the Dutch canals. 

All of these dogs accomplished their jobs. 

Labradoodles were SUPPOSED to be hypoallergenic guide dogs. However, if you read the previous posts, you see that those breeding efforts failed as NO DOG is hypoallergenic, and the F1 crosses still shed. 

They are only fodder now for people who want to make money. 




tully said:


> I don't know why you all seem to keep missing this point! The labdoodle was designed for the handicap just like the leonberger was designed to be a big working dog. Both were created by man's needs. I think the goldendoodle has been more successful, I am not sure why? I do think the labdood sheds more and is more hyper. That is what I have read and heard. Again, if u go back and read what I wrote about the guy who created the leonberger he had to mix a couple different breeds before he got what he wanted. Man has been doing this since the beginning of time. Why are you not getting that?


I totally know how you feel. I feel like you're missing our point, as well. And you can't generalize mixed breed dogs, not even if there are a blue million of them. 

Honestly, what purpose does a designer dog fufill that a pure bred can't? 

Hybrids are not healthier. (remember the genetics, thing?) 
They do not shed less. (see above)
They do not make better companions then any other kind of dog.


----------



## 3212 (Feb 4, 2007)

Wow Snowshoe...FABULOUS post! I agree with you 100%! That was my exact point. I for one do not believe in paying that much for a dog unless you have some kind of guarantee as Snowshoe described in more detail. This is why I don't believe in buying/selling dogs at a pet store at all. You are paying hundred (maybe thoasands) of dollars for a dog that you know nothing about. I totally agree that when you pay for a pure bred dog from a breeder then you are paying for the quality of that dog's breed/blood line. The dog will have papers, testing done and all the stuff that comes with buying a pure bred dog. from a trusted breeder. 
Designer dogs are not pure bred and they cannot be tested for their genetic defects, or like Snowshoe said...they cannot be show dogs. I'm SURE that designer dogs make wonderful pets, and yes they cute and as lovable as ANY other dog...but when it comes down to it they are mutts. You are paying the same price for a mutt that you could get at the shelter as a pure bred dog that has papers.


----------



## Lorina (Jul 1, 2006)

Yes, man created the hundreds of breeds of dogs as we know them today.

Man also created the horrible overpopulation problem.

Until there are no longer thousands of dogs being put to sleep every day for no reason other than there aren't enough homes, it sickens me that people are continuing to breed irresponsibly. That goes for purebreds as well as mixes. And what it seems to boil down to is everyone wants a _puppy_. Dogs are dying every day because people only seem to care about those first few months that are over in a blink of an eye anyway.


----------



## tully (Jan 25, 2007)

Ugh, I know my doodle isn't a breed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If you have read any of my posts, I have said that my doodle is basically a mutt. 

I bought him from a breeder who has both golden retrievers and standard poodles. She shows her dogs and has them all tested for all the stuff any breeder would test their breeds for. She gives a 2 year health guarantee and would take the dog back if it didn't work out. 

I think man will always be creating new breeds. I do think there is a lot of inner breeding and that needs to be addressed. That is more of concern than breeding a goldendoodle. I think the mutt is more hardy and you can't change my mind on that. 

There is no difference between what man used to do in 1846 in mixing breeds and now. Like I said, genetics has not changed just our understanding has. Whether you like it or not there will always be new mixes. I mean you can argue it all day but it isn't going to stop it from happening.

Also, I don't show dogs I just have them as pets. So, I am not that concerned about all the things a show person would be concerned about. I did a lottttt of research before I got my doodle so you need to get over the idea that I am a bimbo and didn't know what I was doing. 

Also, you all need to get over the fact that a lot of people chose to buy a dog verses getting one from a shelter. If you want to get dogs from a shelter great! If I want to buy a dog than great! Also, like I said if I want to spend a lot of money on a mutt that is my business. I am sorry that there are soo many dogs in shelters but none of mine have ever been in one. 

The Universe is vast my friend and can hold more than one belief system. Mine is not yours and yours is not mine. We are both right for ourselves. You will not be changing my mind nor will I you. Good debate though.

Also, my doodle does not shed. Sorry to burst your bubble. I have owned him for over a year so I know what I am talking about. My best friend has two and neither of them shed either. I know some do but some don't. So, maybe you need to do more research! 

Also, do you work for a living? Do you do it for the money? I am missing the whole money thing. Most people that work for a living do it for money. Breeders of your "real" breeds do it for money. I mean come on! There are bad and good breeders regardless of what is being bred. You can't say alll doodle breeders are evil. I mean your world is pretty small if that is what you think.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

I have a dear friend who is a drug addict. He and I can debate up and down about his drug problem, but no matter what I say he doesn't believe he's hurting anyone, other than himself. I guess by your logic, it's okay for him to destroy himself if it doesn't affect you or I. But unfortunately, it doesn't work that way. His drug use bring bad people into his neighborhood to the point where children are no longer safe to play outside. Poor breeding habits work the same way. You may think buying into a fad doesn't hurt anyone, but supporting crap like that only begets a bigger problem. If your breeder where a reputable breeder, she would do what's right to her breeding practice. The fact that she shows her dogs is meaningless if she doesn't understand breeding hybrid dogs is wrong. In fact, if she is a member of her breed club or a member of the AKC, she could be banned for this. The communal will says this isn't a good practice. The communal will says there are guidelines for establishing a new breed. Your breeder didn't do these things, but I'm sorry, if she can't follow the rules established by the communal will, she can't be a reputable breeder. And I'm sorry, but in my mind, if you support irresponsibility, you can't form a decent argument for supporting designer dogs. Yes, people will continue to experiment, so what! Follow the rules and do it right. Don't take short cuts. If you take short cuts, what else are you not doing to produce a healthy animal? I'll get over the fact that people have different ideas and will do things that aren't reasonable in my mind, but the bottom line is drugs are bad, and they hurt people more than the end user. So lets not support drug use or bad breeders. Without momentum from the communal will, there will never be new breeds recognized outside of the 338 listed by the FCI...period. If Tegan park had it right, people need to follow their lead, and not the lead of Ms. AKC breeder who had an idea to also make hybrids. It doesn't work that way. She needs to buy into Tegan Park's vision first and support their efforts...and that doesn't mean breeding more animals too. There's groundwork that needs to be established first, and all these willy nilly breeders are trying to skip ahead without a foundation...or worse, to chase a dollar out of unknowing buyers. It won't work, and you'll continue to have people debate this with you until the foundation is complete. So, good luck in supporting the missing links!


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

> In fact, if she is a member of her breed club or a member of the AKC, she could be banned for this.


Actually I can pretty much guarantee that she is not a member of either breed club which in most breeds is exactly where you want to be. I can't imagine what would happen if a show breeder of papillons began creating papipoos. They'd be kicked out of the PCA as well as loosing any legitimacy they had.

Breed clubs have bylaws that you are supposed to obey and if you don't and they find out, you will no longer be a part of the breed club.

For example:

From the Poodle Club of America (ironically also the PCA):

"6. Breeding programs should exist for the betterment of the breed. Each member will plan their breeding program to maintain and intensify the virtues of type , quality, temperament, and eliminate faults. All breeding shall be done selectively towards this goal and not purely for financial gain. Breeders may not intentionally allow a poodle to be bred to any other breed of dog."


----------



## Weebles (Feb 12, 2007)

Curbside, I agree with you on one thing: drugs are bad and it's painful to watch a loved one destroy themselves. I'm afraid you lost me on the connection to designer dogs... 

J/K, I do understand your analogy, but I really don't agree. There are responsible breeders out there, and I hope they do eventually establish standards. I realize they don't have them now, and I realize some breeders are irresponsible. But, there are many responsible breeders out there, and I don't think it's fair to assume that they are horrible and not taking care with breeding their dogs just because they don't do it the way that you would.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

All you people who are promoting designer dogs, show me a website where someone is responsibly producing companion hybrids. Not Tegan park or another guide dog kennel, but one of these responsible hybrid dog breeders that you keep mentioning. Requirements- dogs must be bred to a standard (ie: goal not money), must have titles, must be health checked, and owners must be thoroughly screened. 

Then maybe you could change a few peoples' minds.


----------



## MagicToller (Jan 4, 2007)

> Ugh, I know my doodle isn't a breed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If you have read any of my posts, I have said that my doodle is basically a mutt.


You mentioned earlier that you thought that the Doodle will gain recognition in the future. To gain recognition you must be a breed, so which is it?



> She shows her dogs and has them all tested for all the stuff any breeder would test their breeds for. She gives a 2 year health guarantee and would take the dog back if it didn't work out.


If she is indeed all that jazz in the ring, she should not be going out to breed hyrbids. Like CP said, if she is part of National Clubs and organizations (which she should be if she's really showing and breeding) then she is in no means to be breeding these dogs together - it's bizarre and it just doesn't add up. The allure of profit was probably too tasty to resist. If she is truly a lover of the breeds, she would not be crossing to make doodles. Period.



> I think the mutt is more hardy and you can't change my mind on that.


Then I guess you don't have a firm grasp on genetics? Mixed doesn't necessarily mean stronger or hardier.



> There is no difference between what man used to do in 1846 in mixing breeds and now.


Practices have come a very long way. In broadening the understanding, you change your methods.



> Also, you all need to get over the fact that a lot of people chose to buy a dog verses getting one from a shelter.


It's not the act of buying a dog that we have problems with, it's the buying of designer breeds. Yes you have the freedom to do so, that's what's great about this country, but don't expect us to take a back seat when our beloved breeds are being tarnished because people decided it would be cute to bring the world into remedial genetic concepts.



> Breeders of your "real" breeds do it for money.


Absolutely not, breeders will be _lucky _if the investments are neutralized by the money from the litter. Most of the time, it's a loss of money. True breeders do it for the love and improvement of the breed, and as a passion and hobby. 

"Reputable breeders only produce a litter with the goal of improving their breed and with the full intent of keeping a puppy from the litter with which to continue their efforts. They do not breed to make money, to supply the pet market during a wave of breed popularity, to give the kids a sex education, or simply because they happen to have two dogs of the same breed on the premises. These last are all spurious reasons to add more dogs to the current population. If the breeder has produced a litter for a silly reason, beware!"


----------



## Weebles (Feb 12, 2007)

Laurelin said:


> All you people who are promoting designer dogs, show me a website where someone is responsibly producing companion hybrids. Not Tegan park or another guide dog kennel, but one of these responsible hybrid dog breeders that you keep mentioning. Requirements- dogs must be bred to a standard (ie: goal not money), must have titles, must be health checked, and owners must be thoroughly screened.
> 
> Then maybe you could change a few peoples' minds.


How do you prove that dogs are not bred for money? How do you prove that owners are thoroughly screened? I highly doubt that ANY breeders do thorough screenings (because I think we all know that asking a few questions means very little). 

I highly doubt that anything I could show you would change your mind. Your mind is made up, as is mine.


----------



## Lorina (Jul 1, 2006)

Tully, I'm not saying anything against irresponsible breeding to change your mind. I'm not debating you. I'm posting in hope of changing the mind of people who are undecided about where or how to get their dog, who may not know much about adoption or rescues. I've met more people who know what a Labradoodle is than people who know what Petfinder.com is. And that's what makes me sad. I'm speaking out for *dogs*, all of them, as a species. Not mixes or purebreds. Not just my own sweet ball of fluff. All of them.


----------



## Weebles (Feb 12, 2007)

Lorina said:


> Tully, I'm not saying anything against irresponsible breeding to change your mind. I'm not debating you. I'm posting in hope of changing the mind of people who are undecided about where or how to get their dog, who may not know much about adoption or rescues. I've met more people who know what a Labradoodle is than people who know what Petfinder.com is. And that's what makes me sad. I'm speaking out for *dogs*, all of them, as a species. Not mixes or purebreds. Not just my own sweet ball of fluff. All of them.


I think we can all agree on that. I would love to see more people adopt or rescue a dog.


----------



## 3212 (Feb 4, 2007)

Weebles said:


> I think we can all agree on that. I would love to see more people adopt or rescue a dog.


How can you say then when you don't set that example yourself? You can't possible sit back and say you hope something happens and mean it if you aren't even doing it yourself...sorry if that's very abrubt, but seriously that makes no sense to me.


----------



## lurcherloopy (Feb 11, 2007)

Weebles said:


> How do you prove that dogs are not bred for money? How do you prove that owners are thoroughly screened? I highly doubt that ANY breeders do thorough screenings (because I think we all know that asking a few questions means very little).
> 
> I highly doubt that anything I could show you would change your mind. Your mind is made up, as is mine.


Sorry I dont know what sort of breeders you've come across but if anyone I was getting a dog from only asked a few questions of me I wouldnt be taking their dog! And that goes for breeders or rescues, why would anyone get a dog from someone like that?

I have no problem with mutts or people who own them I do have problems with people not researching the breeders or rescues before they take a dog and that also means visiting the premises, ensuring they see proof of health tests on parents, being prepared to go on a waiting list and a whole lot more.

Until people are prepared to do this unfortunately the puppy mills and bybs whether they are producing doodles, pure breeds or mutts will continue to prosper and dogs will continue to suffer both through bad breeding, bad owners and being pts through over population.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Well, applications instead of down payments and credit card payments without any kind of screening process would be a start. You can look up genetic tests on sites and see who has been screened and who hasn't. It's not that hard. There are records of all these things around, you just have to actually look. Just like you can look up titles and wins, there are many screening databases on the internet. Many breeders have their OFA and CERF results on their website. I know many good breeders have no websites, but you'd think with as many designer breeders there are that you could at least find one if there are any.

And yes, MANY breeders do very thorough screenings. You should have seen the hoops we went through to purchase all three of my dogs from responsible breeders. Trey had two weekend long periods of us keeping him before we could adopt him to make sure he got along with Nikki. Then we had to sign a billion contracts, send him to obedience training, get him neutered etc. We got off easier on that one because the breeder is a family friend. She still came over and inspected our home and how he was doing in it. With Beau, we were on a list for a breeder and didn't get a dog for two litters. First, we called her and she asked us a ton of questions on the phone. She had us come to her house and interviewed us for hours. I mean, she drilled us. She didn't come inspect the house, but she asked about every question you can think of. THEN she made us come visit again after the puppies were born before we were for sure buying a dog. This entire interview process took several months and the breeder was several hours away, so two round trip car rides to prove how serious we were about purchasing him. Harry was an easier dog to buy as he was from beau's breeder and she already new us. Both Harry and Beau have VERY strict contracts stating that if we can no longer care for them, they go back to the breeder. Period. Also, both must be shown to championship if possible. The difference between that and your average BYB is when we purchased Nikki, we walked up to the house, saw the pups, and they asked us which one we wanted- all in a matter of less than an hour. Luckily Nikki ended up with serious owners.

I talk to Beau and Harry's breeder very frequently and talked to Trey's up until a couple years ago when she went through a bunch of family problems and moved across the country. Beau and Harry's breeder calls about... once a month or so. Sometimes more depending on if we've been showing or not.


----------



## Weebles (Feb 12, 2007)

CrzyBritNAmerica said:


> How can you say then when you don't set that example yourself? You can't possible sit back and say you hope something happens and mean it if you aren't even doing it yourself...sorry if that's very abrubt, but seriously that makes no sense to me.


Ok, that was really rude. Before I got my dog, I had always adopted cats from shelters, and I really wanted to also adopt a dog. I looked around for several months to find the dog I wanted at a shelter, but could not find one. I'm not saying shelter dogs are bad, but I did not see any dogs that were what I wanted. There were no small dogs, with the exception of a few with some major issues. As a first time dog owner, I didn't want to take on more than I could handle, and as someone who lives in a high rise apartment, I could not feel good about adopting a big or medium sized dog. True, I could have looked in a 200 mile radius, as someone had suggested, but that's not really feasible.

I think it's great when people adopt from shelters or rescues. However, it's not the right option for everybody. Just like designer dogs make sense to some people and not to others.


----------



## 3212 (Feb 4, 2007)

I'm sorry, I wasn't meaning to be that rude. It just seemed like you were advocating buying dogs, and then suddenly saying you wish more people would adopt. But I can understand that the shelter dogs you looked at weren't a fit for you. Sometimes they aren't, especially for first time pet owners....but you did look there first so that's definitely something.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

Weebles said:


> But, there are many responsible breeders out there, and I don't think it's fair to assume that they are horrible and not taking care with breeding their dogs just because they don't do it the way that you would.


For one, I would never breed a dog. I don't have the passion, understanding, or time required to undertake such a goal. As far as whether there are many responsible breeders...the verdict is still out in my mind, and I couldn't make this statement. That being said, I would agree that my standard for what an excellent breeder is, is probably more critical than the average person. My description of what an excellent breeder is may be unreasonable in some breeders eyes, but it's my opinion that when you're dealing with life, you need to be on the ball. If you don't demand it, you won't get it. I demand all breeders to be more responsible because that's what they need to do to protect their craft. I'm certain reputable breeders agree with my view. The others need to get a clue, or they'll have to rely on the unknowing customer...which they certainly can do with the logic we've seen here. I'm not the unknowing customer...at least I won't allow myself to be one to the best of my abilities. And it pains me to read about unknowing customers...I feel like they've been duped even though they could have done more research. I can't blame them unless they decide to override their guilt by defending questionable practices. I'm not saying anyone here is doing that...emotions aren't as scientific as genetics...but people need to understand the difference between propaganda and the facts. The arguments for designer dogs aren't new...that's the truth. They've been around as long as the concept of a de$igner has been around. The problem is those who want to break away from the structure think of arguments to counter the structure...we see these same arguments here. Unfortunately, unless more people are open minded and willing to do research other than what can be revealed in a forum, the propaganda will continue, and the truth will continue to be clouded by it. That's exactly what the greedy, fad people want. They want people favoring ideas that will make them an extra buck. Again, I'm not against people making money, but prove to me first that you deserve it. That's what people need to do when considering to buy a puppy. They need to be prepared enough to make their breeder prove they are a good breeder. Unfortunately, all breeders are at an advantage...our dogs are too damn cute. Emotion precedes understanding and good judgment, for most consumers.


----------



## tully (Jan 25, 2007)

I think there are a couple of different things going on here.
One, if you are a shower of dogs you are going to be very particular about what breed etc. I get that totally. I don't show and don't have that personality.

Second issue, someone on this thread said what is the point of my doodle like my Lab is out there tilling the soil with my husband. Give me a break. I don't hunt so I guess really I have no business owning a lab. Some of you are totally contradicting yourselves. Some of these arguments are just silly! 

I have dogs for pets, you know pets? We walk 3 miles, they swim in the pool, we go for car rides. Stuff like that. That's it. They aren't working in any capacity and they aren't being shown. I also find it very hypocritical that if I had gotten my doodle in a shelter than you all would be patting me on the back. 

You say you aren't fanatics but you are. You say it is ok to buy but you really don't believe it. 

We all come from genetics some are better than others. Just because you understand some things about genetics doesn't mean it is the end all be all. I will tell anyone to get a doodle. 

The whole breeder thing is a joke. I mean even a breeder can not give you solid gurantees. There are just as many well bred dogs in shelter as mutts and hybrids. So, really I just think you are turning your wheels. Your arguments just don't really hold much weight. At the end of the day it is about the owner and working with the dog going through the puppy phase and sticking it out.


----------



## Lorina (Jul 1, 2006)

> I also find it very hypocritical that if I had gotten my doodle in a shelter than you all would be patting me on the back.


Why do you find that hypocritical? Adopting a dog is saving it's life, and making it possible for the rescue or shelter to continue saving lives, whether it's by emptying a kennel that can house another dog, or an adoption fee that will go towards helping other dogs. 

Buying a dog from a breeder, especially an irresponsible breeder, is rewarding that breeder for contributing to the overpopulation problem. 

Yes, you love your dog and you'll keep it for life, but that's one dog, out of how many from a litter, and out of how many litters that breeder churns out every year? Multiply that by the hundreds or thousands of other mixed breed or otherwise irresponsible breeders. Do you honestly believe they all found such good homes with families who will keep them for life? How many of them, or the offspring of those dogs, are going to end up in shelters? And how about the dogs' parents, who'll be used for breeding purposes until they develop testicular, ovarian or mammary cancers, or pyometras (infected, pus-filled uterus - very gross if you've ever seen or smelled one up close and personal)? What becomes of the moneymakers when they no longer make anyone money?


----------



## 3212 (Feb 4, 2007)

Lorina said:


> Why do you find that hypocritical? Adopting a dog is saving it's life, and making it possible for the rescue or shelter to continue saving lives, whether it's by emptying a kennel that can house another dog, or an adoption fee that will go towards helping other dogs.
> 
> Buying a dog from a breeder, especially an irresponsible breeder, is rewarding that breeder for contributing to the overpopulation problem.
> 
> Yes, you love your dog and you'll keep it for life, but that's one dog, out of how many from a litter, and out of how many litters that breeder churns out every year? Multiply that by the hundreds or thousands of other mixed breed or otherwise irresponsible breeders. Do you honestly believe they all found such good homes with families who will keep them for life? How many of them, or the offspring of those dogs, are going to end up in shelters? And how about the dogs' parents, who'll be used for breeding purposes until they develop testicular, ovarian or mammary cancers, or pyometras (infected, pus-filled uterus - very gross if you've ever seen or smelled one up close and personal)? What becomes of the moneymakers when they no longer make anyone money?



You definitely hit the nail on the head here. Breeders of pure bred dogs often do not make a profit on their puppies when they sell them...why? Because a good breeder will make sure to get all the puppies first shots, deworming, testing, toys, food....all the supplies you need to take care of and care for healthy puppies. And on top of that many people have a strict screening process for allowing someone to buy their puppies which means it may take them longer to sell the pups resulting in the cost for second and even third shots and anything else the pups may need. They spend so much on all that stuff that they rarely bring in much of a profit, if any at all. 

It's great that you love your dog and it's great that you take good care of her, but the point that everyone is trying to make is that yes you paid whatever you paid for your goldendoodle to people that will keep breeding and selling these expensive dogs for the money they can make off of them.


----------



## Snowshoe (Nov 17, 2006)

Right, about the costs...

Good breeders have oodles of tests done, which are pretty expensive, like OFA and CERF, thyroid pannels...

THEN you have to pay to show your dogs, grooming supplies, costs of campaigning your bitch or stud....

Yeah...so....

most don't make much, if any, money. 

Most of the time, since they are into dogs as a hobby, they don't need to make money. 

I think that showing and learning about breeding is alot of fun. Maybe other people "don't get it" but then maybe I'm a geek. I don't care.


----------



## DoggieLover (Feb 4, 2007)

CrzyBritNAmerica said:


> In the shelter I went to recently I saw several puggles and a labradoodle that are equally as lovable as the ones in the pet store, but they aren't a ridiculous amount of money.


I realize that I'm not speaking for everyone, but I am speaking for more than a few people when I say that some types of designer dogs just aren't available in shelters in some areas!! I couldn't find a puggle in a shelter in my area to save my life; they are still quite rare around here and there are no puggle breeders either. So because I wanted that particular kind of dog (I am NOT saying that it's a breed here) my only choice was to buy from an out of state breeder. Puggles do not seem to be as expensive as other designer dogs, I have seen puggle prices ranging from $300 to about $900, most in the $500 range. This is not outrageously unreasonable as I have come across puppies in shelters whose asking prices were about $400 or $500.

So while some people would love to save a life and adopt a "mutt" from a shelter, sometimes depending on your location, the dog that you're looking for just isn't available!



Snowshoe said:


> Honestly, what purpose does a designer dog fufill that a pure bred can't?


People choose different types (not necessarily breeds; I'm being careful with word usage here to avoid being attacked!) of dogs for different reasons. Honestly, if someone has done their research and determined that they would rather get a designer dog rather than a purebred, that is their own decision for their own personal reasons and it's rather annoying that others are passing judgment on their personal decisions.

Not to knock purebreds, but maybe they just couldn't find a purebred dog that would be a perfect match for them! This might be shocking to some of you but it's true in my case. I've gone over the reasons why before and I could mention them again but I won't go into detail unless asked to. All I'm going to say is that I did my research, asked questions at dog forums much like this one, and finally decided that a designer dog would best match what I was looking for in terms of looks and temperament. And guess what, my research paid off and I found that I was 100% right.


----------



## lurcherloopy (Feb 11, 2007)

DoggieLover said:


> I realize that I'm not speaking for everyone, but I am speaking for more than a few people when I say that some types of designer dogs just aren't available in shelters in some areas!! I couldn't find a puggle in a shelter in my area to save my life; they are still quite rare around here and there are no puggle breeders either. So because I wanted that particular kind of dog (I am NOT saying that it's a breed here) my only choice was to buy from an out of state breeder. Puggles do not seem to be as expensive as other designer dogs, I have seen puggle prices ranging from $300 to about $900, most in the $500 range. This is not outrageously unreasonable as I have come across puppies in shelters whose asking prices were about $400 or $500.
> 
> So while some people would love to save a life and adopt a "mutt" from a shelter, sometimes depending on your location, the dog that you're looking for just isn't available!
> 
> ...


I dont know if you read my last comment but again I think the point is being missed or maybe it isnt. 

Yes it is your personal choice and everyone elses where they get their dogs from maybe it just comes down as I said to actually caring where the dogs come from and how they are bred - some care, some dont.


----------



## MagicToller (Jan 4, 2007)

> You say you aren't fanatics but you are. You say it is ok to buy but you really don't believe it.


If it means defending the breeds that we love and do our best to try to make sure they arn't tarnished by some stupid popculture craze - sure, call me fanatic. I am for ethical and responsible breeding practices, I'm not at all crazy about the Hyrbid dog craze and it's tendancy to attract ignorant people. The same goes for the purebred world, alot of misinformed people are are caught up in the allure of owning a purebred dog, but the difference between an ethical breeder and the money-maker is that the ignorant one will still end up getting the pup without either a) educating themselves or b) moving along altogether.



> I will tell anyone to get a doodle.


Sigh. Yeah, I'm sure you will.



> The whole breeder thing is a joke. I mean even a breeder can not give you solid gurantees. There are just as many well bred dogs in shelter as mutts and hybrids. So, really I just think you are turning your wheels. Your arguments just don't really hold much weight. At the end of the day it is about the owner and working with the dog going through the puppy phase and sticking it out.


There is a difference between purebred and wellbred. The line between the two is very solid - purebred is in no way a ticket to the Happily Everafter of health and quality of life as many like to think. I will agree that there is just as many _purebred _ dogs, but _well_ bred dogs from caring breeders in no way match the amount of mutts and hybrids. Period.

..and yes, solid guarantees do exhist for certain aspects of health. One of the goals of the breeder is to keep this in mind during pairings, to create the healthiest littler of puppies possible - whether they express the effected allele or not.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

I think people need to know less about the designer dog fad and more about where good dogs come from.

http://www.dogforums.com/2-general-dog-forum/5110-where-good-dogs-come.html


----------



## Snowshoe (Nov 17, 2006)

I think that people who advocate designer dogs aren't researching enough into the different breeds. 

A portuguese water dog looks alot like a "labradoodle." However, I bet that most people who purchased a doodle would have no idea what breed that is. 

However, you're right. It's always good to emphasize the positive, and keep focused on good breeders.

BTW- There's a big difference between supporting ethical breeders, and supporting bybs. 

It IS ok to buy a dog, as long as you do it the right way. MOST people who buy the designer dogs seem to feel that we don't advocate buying a dog. We do...but the breeder should meet certain qualifications before they are considered ethical: 

They title their dogs
they do health/ genetic testing
Pup will come with a spay/neuther contract

If the breeder doesn't do all of those things (and that's JUST the basics of what a breeder should do) then they're not worth buying for. 

If those who breed doodles don't meet those qualifications, then that should say something to someone who is either going to purchase, or has purchased a doodle. 

I'll say it again, show me a good doodle breeder- one who doesn't breed in a vacuum and one who titles and provides health tests. 

I promise, I'll let up if someone can show me a doodle breeder that is quality. Otherwise, you'll never convince me that buying one of these dogs is OK, especially when you can get a mixed breed at a humane society for much less.


----------



## drfong (May 24, 2006)

Tully, I have read the first several pages of this thread but not all of it as it is very long so if I'm repeating someone please excuse me. You keep saying that mixing breeds is how we got all the breeds we have now, but that is only part true and deceptive in the designer dog arguement. Like your breeder friend who breeds top notch poodles and top notch labs (or golds, i don't remember which you said) they are using only a few dogs to produce offspring. When a particular dog breed is formed, lots of genetic material is used to produce the needed qualities and consistancy. Lets take for example my austrialian terriers. They were breed from mostly yorkies, carines and I think norfolks a couple hundred years ago. But the aussys didn't just import 3 dogs and start breeding them, lots and lots of dogs went into developing the breed standard. Silky terriers are basicly a cross between an Austrialian terrier and a yorkie, but you don't get a silkiy just by crossing a great yorkie and a great ausy. If you did you would get pups that may look just like silkies but they are mutts. If there is a real need for the doodle breeds like you say as far as service dogs that don't shed, than there should be a movement of breeders working together to get lots of genetic material for breeding toward an agreed apon standard that can be consistantly breed and working toward getting it accepted as a legitimate breed. They would not just be crossing their own dogs to sell the pups for lots of money.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

Darn you drfong! Why can't I have your skill for complete and accurate brevity?


----------



## drfong (May 24, 2006)

I don't know about that, I'm sure there is plenty of bad gramer and run on sentences in there.


----------



## 3212 (Feb 4, 2007)

Hey you got the point accross so I don't think it really matter lol. I agree with Cubside on this one!  Great post!


----------



## DoggieLover (Feb 4, 2007)

Snowshoe said:


> MOST people who buy the designer dogs seem to feel that we don't advocate buying a dog. We do...but the breeder should meet certain qualifications before they are considered ethical:
> 
> They title their dogs
> they do health/ genetic testing
> Pup will come with a spay/neuther contract


As to your first point, obviously it isn't possible for a designer dog breeder to title/register the puppies with the AKC since they are mixed-breeds. However, many are registered with the ACHC or CKC and both of their parents are registered with the AKC. I can show you breeders who do this.

Health/genetic testing: I'm a first-time dog owner and am still learning here, so I'm not sure that it's even possible to do health/genetic testing on designer dogs/mixed breeds...is it? I agree with you here, I have not heard of a designer dog breeder who does this (perhaps because it isn't possible) and while this would be a definite bonus in my book, if I have my heart set on purchasing a specific kind of dog and have verified that its purebred parents are both health certified by a vet and have been tested (which I did confirm), then this is good enough for me. Again, as someone mentioned, it's all about standards here - I'm buying this dog as a PET only and have absolutely no plans to show or breed. 

Spay/neuter contract: I can show you designer dog breeders who strongly recommend doing this and will have it done at a deeply discounted cost for the purchaser. Obviously they are not going to be as strict as breeders who show their AKC registered purebreds because designer dogs are purely pets and people who buy them clearly have no intention of showing them. Again, I am new to the dog world and I guess I just see a clear distinction between purebred dogs who are bred for showing purposes and dogs who are just meant to be pets/companions. I truely don't have a problem with this; what is most important to me is that:

1. The breeder is caring and does everything in his/her power to ensure that the puppies are properly socialized/cared for and go to good homes
2. The breeder's purebred dogs (parents of the puppies) are in excellent health, which can be proven by vet health certifications and testing. They also possess wonderful temperaments and are AKC registered
3. The breeder is available for advice/questions during the entire lifetime of the dog and is willing to take the dog back if the owner can no longer care for it
4. The breeder refuses to allow their puppies to go to their new homes until they are at least 8 weeks of age
5. The breeder ensures that the puppies are raised in a clean, humane environment (unlike puppy mills) and that their dogs only have several litters per year

I can show you designer dog breeders who do all of this and more. And yes, my designer dog breeder did have a waiting list. Again, it's all about standards - whether you are planning to show your dog vs purchase one as a companion, in my opinion, makes a big difference as to what your standards are. 

And as I mentioned before, I don't know about other designer dogs, but most puggles are priced at under $900. $500 is the average price, which I don't think is outrageously unreasonable. In fact, a mixed-breed puppy that I was considering adopting from a local shelter was priced at $450, so not much of a difference in cost at all. The main issue to me was that the shelter puppy was about 15 weeks old, whereas I could purchase a puggle puppy for just $50 cheaper, get the exact look that I wanted, and get a 9 week old puppy which is the perfect age to begin properly socializing him. I read that the most important socialization window is from 8-12 weeks old, so for the shelter puppy, this window of opportunity has already closed and who knows what kind of upbringing he received. I know that my puggle's breeder started socializing him from birth and I have continued it while he's been in my care. To me, this is WELL WORTH the $50 more, particularly since he is my first dog and I definitely don't need any serious behavioral problems!! I already have my hands full with his puppy training, basic commands, socializing, etc as it is, and I am still learning every day.


----------



## lurcherloopy (Feb 11, 2007)

DoggieLover said:


> As to your first point, obviously it isn't possible for a designer dog breeder to title/register the puppies with the AKC since they are mixed-breeds. However, many are registered with the ACHC or CKC and both of their parents are registered with the AKC. I can show you breeders who do this..


First yes some are, in the UK we also have some schemes like this, DLR is one, many people believe the are good, unfortunately they are used and even set up by puppy farmers to give themselves the look of respectability. These sort of registers are not really worth the paper they are printed on, certainly in the UK. You can register any sort of dog, there is not line history, and any amount of litters.



DoggieLover said:


> Health/genetic testing: I'm a first-time dog owner and am still learning here, so I'm not sure that it's even possible to do health/genetic testing on designer dogs/mixed breeds...is it? I agree with you here, I have not heard of a designer dog breeder who does this (perhaps because it isn't possible) and while this would be a definite bonus in my book, if I have my heart set on purchasing a specific kind of dog and have verified that its purebred parents are both health certified by a vet and have been tested (which I did confirm), then this is good enough for me. Again, as someone mentioned, it's all about standards here - I'm buying this dog as a PET only and have absolutely no plans to show or breed. ..


The health tests should have been done on the sire and dam before any breeding was planned and of course these are available for pugs and poodles. Of course designer dog breeders don’t do, why should they, these tests are for the good of the dogs and puppies not for the bank balance. You say you confirmed that the sire and dam of your puppy were tested, can I ask what were they tested for and did you see actually evidence of the results.

Yes it is about standards, its about the standard of care that goes into breeding dogs, not just for show dogs but for pet dogs as well. Why should pet dogs be treated any less that show dogs? Are they not just as worthy to be bred in a healthy ethical way?




DoggieLover said:


> Spay/neuter contract: I can show you designer dog breeders who strongly recommend doing this and will have it done at a deeply discounted cost for the purchaser. Obviously they are not going to be as strict as breeders who show their AKC registered purebreds because designer dogs are purely pets and people who buy them clearly have no intention of showing them. Again, I am new to the dog world and I guess I just see a clear distinction between purebred dogs who are bred for showing purposes and dogs who are just meant to be pets/companions. I truely don't have a problem with this; ..


Strongly recommends is just not good enough, they should be contracted to spey/neuter. Again I ask why are they not as strict? Why should pet dogs be treated in any way lesser than a show dog? Why should it be less important that you don’t breed your pet than you don’t breed your show dog, surely if anything it should be the other way round.




DoggieLover said:


> what is most important to me is that:
> 1. The breeder is caring and does everything in his/her power to ensure that the puppies are properly socialized/cared for and go to good homes.



And that should include interviewing extensively any potential owner and insisting the potential buyers visit the pups at least once before taking home.



DoggieLover said:


> 2. The breeder's purebred dogs (parents of the puppies) are in excellent health, which can be proven by vet health certifications and testing. They also possess wonderful temperaments and are AKC registered.



Sorry but a vet saying yes your dogs are healthy is not enough, they must be certified for all the recommended tests for that breed and that does not mean by the owners vets as many of them cannot be done by your average vet.



DoggieLover said:


> 3. The breeder is available for advice/questions during the entire lifetime of the dog and is willing to take the dog back if the owner can no longer care for it.



No the breeder has a contract signed that the dog WILL go back to them if there are any problems at all.




DoggieLover said:


> 4. The breeder refuses to allow their puppies to go to their new homes until they are at least 8 weeks of age
> 
> 
> 5. The breeder ensures that the puppies are raised in a clean, humane environment (unlike puppy mills) and that their dogs only have several litters per year.


Excuse me, several litters per year?!?!? If any breeder I looked at had several litters a year I would be running the other way very quickly. How on earth can a breeder achieve your item 1 if they have several litters a year? 




DoggieLover said:


> I can show you designer dog breeders who do all of this and more. And yes, my designer dog breeder did have a waiting list. Again, it's all about standards - whether you are planning to show your dog vs purchase one as a companion, in my opinion, makes a big difference as to what your standards are. .


As Ive pointed out I can show you a lot of puppy farmers and byb’s who do or say exactly the same. Yes its all about standards Im just not sure why you feel pet dogs should have any lesser standard of breeding and care than a dog that is to be shown.




DoggieLover said:


> And as I mentioned before, I don't know about other designer dogs, but most puggles are priced at under $900. $500 is the average price, which I don't think is outrageously unreasonable. In fact, a mixed-breed puppy that I was considering adopting from a local shelter was priced at $450, so not much of a difference in cost at all. The main issue to me was that the shelter puppy was about 15 weeks old, whereas I could purchase a puggle puppy for just $50 cheaper, get the exact look that I wanted, and get a 9 week old puppy which is the perfect age to begin properly socializing him. I read that the most important socialization window is from 8-12 weeks old, so for the shelter puppy, this window of opportunity has already closed and who knows what kind of upbringing he received. I know that my puggle's breeder started socializing him from birth and I have continued it while he's been in my care. To me, this is WELL WORTH the $50 more, particularly since he is my first dog and I definitely don't need any serious behavioral problems!! I already have my hands full with his puppy training, basic commands, socializing, etc as it is, and I am still learning every day..



Arh the age old a shelter dog will have problems, at 15 weeks it will have no more problems that any other pup, the age for socialising has not passed at all, I think you’ve missed the point on that one, the ages that puppies go are mainly to ensure that they are not taken too soon, not too late. Again if the shelter or rescue is a good one they will have socialised the puppy just as much as a breeder, they will also have started basic training. Just as you should do you research into a good breeder so you should for a good rescue or shelter.

]


----------



## tully (Jan 25, 2007)

Well, I talked to a really good friend of mine who majored in science and is in the field. She is also a dog lover, owner etc. She said your lessons on genetics and dogs are inaccurate. She also said the Jack Russell was just admited to the AKC. She also said that the doodle could be very well accepted by AKC but may be under another name. When I get more time, I will get specifics. 

Also, I have a golden doodle not a Labdoodle. They are different. You will find more labdoods in rescue than goldens. 

Most importantly, you are all in denial if you don't think every single breed we have is a designer dog! Man has designed them all! For you to say anything else is inaccurate. The golden retriever is from 4 different breeds. 

For whatever reason, you don't like the designer dogs of today but all dogs have been designed except for mutts. So, you all are wrong! I don't know why you feel better if you some how think your breed was not designed by man?

Testing does not guarantee anything. You can be assured that if you have a Lab for instance you will have a much higher rate of hip dysplasia I don't care what the tests say. Really the bottom line is why do you hate the idea of new breeds? And, they will continue to come. I just don't get why you aren't getting that? I also don't get why you think man in 1846 is any different than now. LIke Weebles pointed out, if you put the poodle and retriever together, you do have a less likely chance of heart problems. It recesses the genes. I simply don't agree with your science.


----------



## Keno's Mom (Nov 20, 2006)

The only difference between a goldendoodle and a labradoodle is one is a golden retriever x poodle cross and the other is a labrador x poodle cross - both are STILL mixed breeds and designer dogs - neither should be born!

The "other" associations are those that the puppy mills and backyard breeders use to make their dogs seem like they are purebred or better then the average dog with no papers. Those papers are totally WORTHLESS; no matter what they advocate.

The bottom line is the designer dogs are not consistant in type - you don't know what they will look like or how big they get. Just cause the 2 "purebreds" are AKC registered doesn't mean a darn thing when you breed them to another breed. Those pups become worthless (pets only - that should be spayed/neutered before going to new homes). If a person is breeding and selling designer dogs, they are not doing ANYONE a service, let alone the breeds. They are NOT improving on the breed at all. And IMO you are wasting your money paying $900 for a MUTT. I find it hard to believe a shelter dog costs $400 - most are adopted under $200 (which includes the spay/neuter).

Designer dog breeders are only in it for one thing - MONEY.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

tully said:


> Well, I talked to a really good friend of mine who majored in science and is in the field. She is also a dog lover, owner etc. She said your lessons on genetics and dogs are inaccurate. She also said the Jack Russell was just admited to the AKC. She also said that the doodle could be very well accepted by AKC but may be under another name. When I get more time, I will get specifics.
> 
> Testing does not guarantee anything. You can be assured that if you have a Lab for instance you will have a much higher rate of hip dysplasia I don't care what the tests say. Really the bottom line is why do you hate the idea of new breeds? And, they will continue to come. I just don't get why you aren't getting that? I also don't get why you think man in 1846 is any different than now. LIke Weebles pointed out, if you put the poodle and retriever together, you do have a less likely chance of heart problems. It recesses the genes. I simply don't agree with your science.


O' please invite your friend to our forum. I'd love to here about how the lessons on genetics are inaccurate. Until then, this opinion is hearsay. 

No one ever said genetic testing was a 100% guarantee. But we have said it's the best a breeder can do, therefore it is the responsible thing to do. I choose the more responsible, obviously you don't care, so why should anyone listen? I personally don't hate new breeds, I deplore breeders who try to take advantage of unsuspecting owners. I deplore breeders who aren't responsible, and I deplore breeders who don't follow the rules, or who don't try to amend them first before trying to make a buck. What's the harm in deploring these things? Why should I accept the inferior if I know better?


----------



## lurcherloopy (Feb 11, 2007)

tully said:


> Testing does not guarantee anything. You can be assured that if you have a Lab for instance you will have a much higher rate of hip dysplasia I don't care what the tests say. Really the bottom line is why do you hate the idea of new breeds? And, they will continue to come. I just don't get why you aren't getting that? I also don't get why you think man in 1846 is any different than now. LIke Weebles pointed out, if you put the poodle and retriever together, you do have a less likely chance of heart problems. It recesses the genes. I simply don't agree with your science.


Quite frankly Im shocked and saddened that anyone could say they dont care about health testing, so you think that breeding from unhealthy dogs is ok. Like I said I suppose some people care about where their dogs come from and that they've been bred ethically and to the very very best of the breeders ability to ensure the pups are healthy and go to good homes and some dont.

The UK Kennel Club have stated they will not recognise the doodles by the way and still only recognise the Parsons Jack Russel.


----------



## drfong (May 24, 2006)

Tully, I didn't say that every breed wasn't created by man. I think you completely missed the point. They all were. I also said that if there was a reason for the breed (other than to just make a buck) that I think responcible breeders would be working to develope the breed into a defined standard and geting it accepted. They are not. They are just mixing their 2 dogs of different breeds to sell them. I'm all for different breeds. As CS said please have your friend come join the discussion. I'm not sure what your pointy was with the Jack Russell. All accepted dog breeds (for confirmation) were recognized at different times, some long ago and other more recently. I think the Jack was really just a clarification between the Parsons Russell and the Jack. I don't know the details though. I have no problem with people buying dogs from breeders, I got both of mine that way. I don't have anything against you for buying your cross from a breeder. The only thing is why is the breeder even breeding the dogs. With millions of dogs being killed we don't have a shortage of dogs, so why are they breeding, to further improve and protect the breed? I don't think so there is no breed. To produce a needed dog for a purpose and create an accepted breed? I don't think so because they are not going about it correctly. It must be to make money selling a type of dog that people want to buy. Well I'm not for pure breed dog breeders doing that either. There are plenty of dogs to go around without unnessecary breeding, mixed or pure. I know you feel like you are being attacked because you bought a mixed breed, but I hope over time you can see that creating more dogs just for profit while literally tons of animalls die is not a good thing.
As to lab vs gold and what you find in shelters, I thinkk you find more black lab mixes and pit mixes in shelters period, regardless of what its mixed with.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

DoggieLover- you can get a CGC title on a mixed breed no problem. The ACHC and the CKC (not Canadian, Continental) are both bogus registries. They have absolutely no legitimacy and are around to trick people into thinking breeders are legitimate when they're not. Heck, AKC registration means very very little in this day and age. AKC registered parents don't mean a thing, CKC and ACHC registered dogs mean just as little. The only way AKC means much is with titles and sound lines. 

Tully- I'd be interested to hear from your friend as genetics is my major of study so I take it seriously. I can't imagine her arguments against genetic testing.

You can't just cross things and expect it to be magically better. That's what you're proposing, magic, not science. These breeders who are crossing do not have much, if any, knowledge in genetics. They are willy nilly crossing whatever for money. It has nothing to do with producing better dogs. Crossing breeds COULD improve health- if it's done right. That's the problem, it's not being done right at all. It's much more than saying whatever I cross will have better health than a purebred just because it's crossed.


----------



## 3212 (Feb 4, 2007)

I think it's crazy that people can take these designer breeders seriously. I mean I could go to a credited breeder who has real papers and tests for their dogs and purchase a purebred poodle and a pure bred labrador (or retriever) and then breed the two together and try to sell someone their puppies and call them labradoodles (or goldendoodles). Now I could easily tell people that they have been tested or even go as far as to make fake papers claiming they have been tested and that they are part of ACHC or CKC so that they seem "official" and worth something, but I am really just selling you mixed breeds for an outrageous price so that I can bring in a heft profit. It's lucicrous! ANYONE could do that and it's called ripping people off!


----------



## Keno's Mom (Nov 20, 2006)

Just as a warning - another "fake" registery that is quite popular is the ACA - also a known puppy mill/backyard breeder registry. My SIL got a Yorkie with ACA "papers". I sent her an article on the puppymill registries (ACA was near the top) so she would know!


----------



## Weebles (Feb 12, 2007)

drfong said:


> *Lets take for example my austrialian terriers. They were breed from mostly yorkies, carines and I think norfolks a couple hundred years ago. But the aussys didn't just import 3 dogs and start breeding them, lots and lots of dogs went into developing the breed standard. Silky terriers are basicly a cross between an Austrialian terrier and a yorkie, but you don't get a silkiy just by crossing a great yorkie and a great ausy.* .


Excellent quote! You know, Silkies are considered to be one of the more successful, early designer dogs. Now after years of breeding (and I'm guessing that not ALL breeders used genetic testing), they have a standard. In fact, it took a long time for the breed to be recognized because they could barely tell a Silky from a big Yorkie other than by the size of the dog. But, fast-forward several decades, and the Silkies are their own breed, complete with AKC registration. What would have happened if no one had bred these dogs together in first place? I don't think anyone really needed a Silky - they don't serve a completely different purpose than other breeds that were already in existence, but now many people love them.


----------



## Snowshoe (Nov 17, 2006)

I'd be curious to see what a labradoodle that "bred true" would look like.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

Snowshoe said:


> I'd be curious to see what a labradoodle that "bred true" would look like.


Probably like a Portuguese Waterdog, lol.


----------



## drfong (May 24, 2006)

> I don't think anyone really needed a Silky - they don't serve a completely different purpose than other breeds that were already in existence, but now many people love them.


I really think they came about to produce a healthier and more original yorkie type dog. Yorkies were originally much larger than they are today. I believe that breeding to make them small has added to why they are not typically healthy dogs like many other terriers. Silkies really look like a yorkie but have the size and general good health of a Austrialian. Were they needed, not really, but for what ever reason they exist as a breed because of generations of mixing genetic material so now a silky breed with a silky should give you a silky. It has a standard. I'm not against doodles becoming a breed, but it will not happen from the same parrents being breed together over and over again and having alot of the mutts out there. It comes from mixing lots of dogs with desired qualities to get a consistant desirable outcome.


----------



## Keno's Mom (Nov 20, 2006)

If they REALLY wanted the labradoodle or goldendoodle to be a breed, they would have some dedicated breeders get together and form a breed club and work on a set standard and THEN start breeding to that standard.

Instead you have people across the USA with NO coordination or purpose other then to throw a lab and poodle or golden and poodle together and call it a designer dog and charge people thousands of dollars for a mutt.

Heck if you look at some of the websites on their dogs, they can't even produce the same type in breeding. Its a mix of everything under the sun. No consistency at all.


----------



## Kerry (Jan 12, 2007)

> call it a designer dog and charge people thousands of dollars for a mutt.


What is a fair price for a purebred dog from a great breeder?


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

Kerry said:


> What is a fair price for a purebred dog from a great breeder?


Peace of mind.


----------



## Keno's Mom (Nov 20, 2006)

Depends on the breed of dog. Most are running high hundreds for a pet quality dog. But I do love your answer Prophet


----------



## Snowshoe (Nov 17, 2006)

Curbside Prophet said:


> Probably like a Portuguese Waterdog, lol.


Are you making fun of me? LOL!!!!!  

Anyway, you can expect to pay anywhere from $900 to $2000 depending on the breeder and the breed. 

However, one should ONLY pay that much if the breeder health tests, shows (or otherwise titles), provides a life time guarentee for the dog, is a member of the local breed club, etc. 

It's just common sense!


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Well, we got Trey as an older dog (as in about a year old) from a great breeder for $500 with all the mentioned qualities. For show prospect papillons it costs $1800- $2400 depending on the breeder/lines etc. A non-show dog runs about $1400 at the cheapest if you want to go through a great breeder. Most puppy mill papillons/BYB paps go for about $900 or so it seems around here.


----------



## Keno's Mom (Nov 20, 2006)

So you are advocating buying from a puppy mill or byb because its cheaper? Cheaper doesn't mean you are getting a good healthy dog. Puppy mills and byb do not spend the necessary money on their dogs to test for genetic problems or clearances - all they care about is how much the female will produce to make them money.


----------



## Snowshoe (Nov 17, 2006)

If someone isn't willing to pay that much, then they should adopt and save a life.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Keno's Mom said:


> So you are advocating buying from a puppy mill or byb because its cheaper? Cheaper doesn't mean you are getting a good healthy dog. Puppy mills and byb do not spend the necessary money on their dogs to test for genetic problems or clearances - all they care about is how much the female will produce to make them money.


If you're asking me, nooooooooooo. I was just throwing out prices I've noticed around here since someone asked.

Papipoos generally go for about as much as a pet quality pup from a show breeder.


----------



## DoggieLover (Feb 4, 2007)

lurcherloopy said:


> First yes some are, in the UK we also have some schemes like this, DLR is one, many people believe the are good, unfortunately they are used and even set up by puppy farmers to give themselves the look of respectability. These sort of registers are not really worth the paper they are printed on, certainly in the UK. You can register any sort of dog, there is not line history, and any amount of litters.


I realize that the ACHC and CKC and whatever else is out there isn't held in such high regard as the AKC. Frankly I could care less whether my dog is registered or not, I've had plenty of other animals such as horses that were not registered - papers don't mean squat to me because these animals are just pets/companions for me. I was just pointing out to another poster who was going on and on about titling that the parents can be registered with the AKC but the puppies obviously cannot. However, they can be registered with other organizations if registering/titling is of such importance to them. Again, this is important to some people, but not others.



lurcherloopy said:


> Yes it is about standards, its about the standard of care that goes into breeding dogs, not just for show dogs but for pet dogs as well. Why should pet dogs be treated any less that show dogs? Are they not just as worthy to be bred in a healthy ethical way?


I never said that pet dogs are treated "any less" than show dogs, but obviously if you just want a pet then you're not going to spend thousands upon thousands of dollars to purchase the dog. Therefore, the way you would go about searching for the dog and your breeder requirements are different. First, ideally, you would check local shelters and if they don't have the particular kind of dog that you're looking for, then you would find a breeder who treats their dogs in a humane way, etc etc all of the points I mentioned before. However, I'm only paying $500 here whereas you may have spent anywhere from $1500 to $3000 on up for your AKC registered purebred titled and whatever else show dog. I'm sorry, but I'm not going to spend that much on a pet dog. Different standards.




lurcherloopy said:


> Excuse me, several litters per year?!?!? If any breeder I looked at had several litters a year I would be running the other way very quickly. How on earth can a breeder achieve your item 1 if they have several litters a year?


Yeah, what's wrong with that??? 2-3 litters per year, in my opinion, is not someone who is re-breeding their bitch every chance they can get so as to get the most litters possible. On the other hand, we're not talking about someone who has little time to breed/raise puppies because they're out showing their dogs and are busy with shows, and who charges $2000 plus for their puppies. With 2-3 litters per year, the breeder has plenty of time to care for/socialize the puppies and ensure they go to good homes. Please explain what the problem is here.




lurcherloopy said:


> Arh the age old a shelter dog will have problems, at 15 weeks it will have no more problems that any other pup, the age for socialising has not passed at all, I think you’ve missed the point on that one, the ages that puppies go are mainly to ensure that they are not taken too soon, not too late. Again if the shelter or rescue is a good one they will have socialised the puppy just as much as a breeder, they will also have started basic training. Just as you should do you research into a good breeder so you should for a good rescue or shelter.


Again, let me reiterate that this is my very first puppy and I don't need any additional behavioral problems. I've been doing my research, and if you think that I've "missed the point" on this one, then so has just about every author who discusses the ideal socialization window between 8-12 weeks of age. Do you think these experts have also missed the point? Just as one example, Liz Palika, who wrote the Keep It Simple Series "Guide to Raising a Puppy" says that socialization is an ongoing process, but is especially important between 8 and 12 weeks of age. She also talks about a "fear period" during the 8th week of age, when fearful encounters may stay with a dog for life, and they will always be afraid of that particular object/animal/etc. The breeder's role is very important too in making sure that the puppy is handled and properly socialized from birth. Shelters often do NOT have the time to train and socialize every single puppy in their care. That would be an almost impossible task when you see how many dogs and many times, other kinds of animals, that they must care for. They will provide as much information as they can about the dog but you can never really know exactly how they were socialized, what kind of training they received or be able to talk first-hand to the breeder/person who raised them since birth. Since I am a FIRST-TIME DOG OWNER and am NEW TO PUPPIES, I don't want to take any chances. I do plan to get more dogs in the future, however, and at that time I will undoubtedly adopt from a shelter as I will have had much more dog experience, but at this time I just don't feel that I have the knowledge or experience to deal with any behavioral problems that are out of the ordinary. This is my prerogative and it irks me that people think they can tell me exactly where I need to get my dog from when they know nothing of my background or experience with dogs.

Also just want to reiterate that I spent just as much on my designer dog as they're charging for some of the mixed-breed shelter puppies I've come across. So NO, I don't feel that I was ripped off - for the price I paid, it's pretty much comparable to the cost at a shelter, and in addition I am guaranteed that he had a great beginning, was socialized/trained from birth, and I can talk first-hand to the person who raised him.


----------



## Snowshoe (Nov 17, 2006)

> I never said that pet dogs are treated "any less" than show dogs, but obviously if you just want a pet then you're not going to spend thousands upon thousands of dollars to purchase the dog. Therefore, the way you would go about searching for the dog and your breeder requirements are different. First, ideally, you would check local shelters and if they don't have the particular kind of dog that you're looking for, then you would find a breeder who treats their dogs in a humane way, etc etc all of the points I mentioned before. However, I'm only paying $500 here whereas you may have spent anywhere from $1500 to $3000 on up for your AKC registered purebred titled and whatever else show dog. I'm sorry, but I'm not going to spend that much on a pet dog. Different standards.


Well, then adopt from a shelter. Otherwise, you're feeding back yard breeders. BTW, just because you pay less does not mean you're getting a deal. Far from it. Though you may pay less in the short term, in the long run you may spend thousands in vet bills. 

Why not just do it the right way, or adopt from a shelter?  



> Yeah, what's wrong with that??? 2-3 litters per year, in my opinion, is not someone who is re-breeding their bitch every chance they can get so as to get the most litters possible. On the other hand, we're not talking about someone who has little time to breed/raise puppies because they're out showing their dogs and are busy with shows, and who charges $2000 plus for their puppies. With 2-3 litters per year, the breeder has plenty of time to care for/socialize the puppies and ensure they go to good homes. Please explain what the problem is here.


Actually, that is alot for one dog to produce. Bitches only go in heat from 2-4 times per year, depending on the breed or individual dog. So, if it was ONLY one dog being bred that much, then that is inhumane. 

Dogs should only have a litter every two years, and no more then three litters in a life time for them to live a healthy life.


----------



## tully (Jan 25, 2007)

I do care about my dogs very much and am a great pet owner. The point I was trying to make is no matter how many tests you get there are no gurantees!!!!!!!! I don't care who you are or who your breeder is. 

Yes every breed was created by man for his idea of what he was looking for. Example: The Lab was created to be a wonderful hunting, water dog and companion. I don't hunt so should I not own a Lab? That was my point. There are plenty of breeds that were designed at a certain time but now for a lot of us that design is obsolete. Yes, I walk my dog 3 miles every day and yes he swims in the summer in the pool but he isn't doing what he was designed to do. 
Pet owners have dogs for many reasons. Companionship, walking buddy, because they love dogs etc. They aren't into dogs for show. So, it is apples and oranges. I like the goldendoodle. I know the lab dood is a Lab and Poodle and the golden is a retriever and poodle. Why must you keep insulting my intelligence. They are two different dogs! I have the golden he does not shed no matter how much you want to tell me he does. He is as healthy as an ox, no heart problems, and is just a wonderful pet. I love him don't apologize for having him, don't apologize for paying for him and don't apologize if I get another one. You all also glossed over the fact that my breeder gave me a 2 year health guarantee and said if you don't want him send him back to me. You keep saying none of the doodle breeders do that but you are mistaken. Again, doodle breeders are not satan there are good and bad ones just like for every other breed!
You are elitists when it comes to this and that is fine. I am not so the road shall never meet. Plus, I believe in God's hand in all things and know he sent both my pups to me. So, I look at it all from a very different pair of glasses than you. They each have a soul and are here from Heaven and really it doesn't matter what body they show up in. God doesn't make mistakes!
I will send this to my friend she works in the lab every day. I am sure she knows at least as much as you Curb. She is very busy though so I don't know if I will be able to get her on here.


----------



## Lorina (Jul 1, 2006)

> and in addition I am guaranteed that he had a great beginning


Maybe that's the difference. I wanted to give a dog a great life that maybe didn't have a great beginning. It's not his fault he was purchased at one point by the wrong people.

My dog was found wandering the streets of NYC last spring with his eye popped out of the socket, so his life at one point must have really sucked. I'm happy that he never has to be homeless again. He has his own family, his own house, his own yard, more toys than any dog has a right to have, goes on long walks every day (except for during the Valentines' Day storm, then we just played in the yard), has regular meals, formal and informal obedience training, love, affection and belly rubs.

Yeah, we've had some issues. He's very wary of strangers and takes a long time to warm up to people. He had some problems with resource guarding that we've taken care of. And he's iffy when it comes to other dogs. Some he gets along with fine, some he doesn't like. But I've seen loads of people with dogs they've had since puppies have the same issues, and more.

It depends on your motivation for getting a pet, I guess. Some people want a dog for what the dog will bring to their lives, to meet their needs and wants. I wanted a dog for what I could bring to his life.

Edit: I don't mean to sound all holier-than-thou about rescuing. I'm just someone who has mostly had cats for pets. I don't expect a dog to be much different. I don't expect it to be a perfectly behaved robot that obeys my every word. It'd be nice, but I don't expect it. They're all individuals, just like us people. That's why it doesn't matter to me that I be there from puppyhood to mold it into the exact dog I want. Even a badly behaved dog listens better than my cats.


----------



## DoggieLover (Feb 4, 2007)

Snowshoe said:


> Well, then adopt from a shelter. Otherwise, you're feeding back yard breeders. BTW, just because you pay less does not mean you're getting a deal. Far from it. Though you may pay less in the short term, in the long run you may spend thousands in vet bills.
> 
> Why not just do it the right way, or adopt from a shelter?


I already explained why I didn't adopt from a shelter. Maybe if you had read my entire post you would have seen that part. Go back and read it again - look at what I wrote at the bottom. I'm not re-typing the whole thing again just because you didn't bother to read it.




Snowshoe said:


> Actually, that is alot for one dog to produce. Bitches only go in heat from 2-4 times per year, depending on the breed or individual dog. So, if it was ONLY one dog being bred that much, then that is inhumane.
> 
> Dogs should only have a litter every two years, and no more then three litters in a life time for them to live a healthy life.


I went to my breeder's site and noticed that she has more than one female so this explains why she's able to have so many litters per year.


----------



## Quincy (Feb 25, 2007)

Keno's Mom said:


> The last I heard about the Australian labradoodles is they quit the breeding as they were not really getting the desired results (and probably because of the flood of poodle-lab crosses showing up.
> 
> They couldn't get the consistency needed to really become a breed.


Have you considered that what you heard might NOT be correct. I just had a look at their website and the following was mentioned at this address:-
http://www.guidedogsvictoria.com.au/faq/guide-dog-faq/

Guide Dogs Victoria
Guide Dogs FAQ's

What breeds of dogs are used? 
In Australia, we use mainly Labradors. We have also crossed Labradors with Golden Retrievers, Curly-coat Retrievers and more recently, Standard Poodles, to produce the now well-known Labradoodle. In response to special requests, Guide Dogs Victoria may source other breeds, including German Shepherds from overseas Guide Dog Schools with whom Guide Dogs Victoria has a special relationship.

What are the reasons for experimenting with other breeds? 
Some clients have a preference for a certain breed, and we try to meet their needs. The Labradoodle was bred by Guide Dogs Victoria particularly for people who have an allergy to dog hair. The aim was to breed from Guide Dog Victoria's Labrador brood bitches (which have an excellent temperament for Guide Dog work) with the Poodle (which does not shed its coat) to produce a dog that may be more suitable for people with allergies to dog hair.



Laurelin said:


> The Australian Labradoodle imo could've been a great idea, but unfortunately it isn't what they meant for it to be most of the time. I can't fault the people originally working on a low shedding guide dog- they seem to do everything right. They have multiple generations, and are focusing on a certain temperament and coat type (low shedding). They prefrom health tests and I'm pretty sure they keep a closed registry. But these same people are NOT the ones in the US selling F1 dogs for thousands of dollars and claiming all dogs to be shed-free. What happened and is what is seen nowadays in the United States is that someone saw a labradoodle, went 'Oh cute!' and began mass producing them and eventually a zillion other crosses. It's happened with other types of dogs today, but unfortunately it happened to the designers when they were barely even established. At least with other dogs there were long time fanciers around to help maintain some quality within lines.


Maybe some forum members might like to have a look at this website:-
Australian Labradoodle Club of America
http://www.australianlabradoodleclub.us/


----------



## DoggieLover (Feb 4, 2007)

Snowshoe said:


> BTW, just because you pay less does not mean you're getting a deal. Far from it. Though you may pay less in the short term, in the long run you may spend thousands in vet bills.


Same is true of shelter dogs, isn't it? And yet I don't see you trying to discourage people to adopt dogs from shelters because of possible high vet bills later down the road. Interesting...


----------



## Quincy (Feb 25, 2007)

This is interesting in reference to their breeders, "must meet the following requirements", notice the MUST and this to health testing plus some other things, see at this address:-
http://www.australianlabradoodleclub.us/BreederMemberRequirements.html

This is interesting, look down the list at this address and see:-
http://www.optigen.com/opt9_test.html

"Labradoodles - OptiGen® prcd-PRA test"
also
"Cockapoos - OptiGen® prcd-PRA test"
and I suppose in time heaps more doggies will be added to the list.


----------



## lurcherloopy (Feb 11, 2007)

DoggieLover said:


> I realize that the ACHC and CKC and whatever else is out there isn't held in such high regard as the AKC. Frankly I could care less whether my dog is registered or not, I've had plenty of other animals such as horses that were not registered - papers don't mean squat to me because these animals are just pets/companions for me. I was just pointing out to another poster who was going on and on about titling that the parents can be registered with the AKC but the puppies obviously cannot. However, they can be registered with other organizations if registering/titling is of such importance to them. Again, this is important to some people, but not others..


My point on registering with dodgy registers was just that, they are worthless. If you dont care about how your dog was bred whether the lines were appropriate or not or even researched that unfortunately is your right.




DoggieLover said:


> I never said that pet dogs are treated "any less" than show dogs, but obviously if you just want a pet then you're not going to spend thousands upon thousands of dollars to purchase the dog. Therefore, the way you would go about searching for the dog and your breeder requirements are different. First, ideally, you would check local shelters and if they don't have the particular kind of dog that you're looking for, then you would find a breeder who treats their dogs in a humane way, etc etc all of the points I mentioned before. However, I'm only paying $500 here whereas you may have spent anywhere from $1500 to $3000 on up for your AKC registered purebred titled and whatever else show dog. I'm sorry, but I'm not going to spend that much on a pet dog. Different standards...


Again I ask why should dogs being classed as just a pet be any less well bred than a show dog, why should the parents not be health tested for all the appropriate tests for the breeds? I repeat my question what did your breeder test for in the sire and dam of your puppy? Why should a puppy that is meant to be a pet have any less right to a healthy life than a show dog?

I went over your points in my previous posts and your ideas on breeders are simply inadequate.





DoggieLover said:


> Yeah, what's wrong with that??? 2-3 litters per year, in my opinion, is not someone who is re-breeding their bitch every chance they can get so as to get the most litters possible. With 2-3 litters per year, the breeder has plenty of time to care for/socialize the puppies and ensure they go to good homes. Please explain what the problem is here....


Frankly if you see no problem with puppy farming theres not really much point is there? How many bitches does your breeder actually have? How can she possibly care for 3 litters a year, as you say you are new to the dog world and hopefully you will become more aware of what should go into raising good puppies.





DoggieLover said:


> . This is my prerogative and it irks me that people think they can tell me exactly where I need to get my dog from when they know nothing of my background or experience with dogs.
> 
> Also just want to reiterate that I spent just as much on my designer dog as they're charging for some of the mixed-breed shelter puppies I've come across. So NO, I don't feel that I was ripped off - for the price I paid, it's pretty much comparable to the cost at a shelter, and in addition I am guaranteed that he had a great beginning, was socialized/trained from birth, and I can talk first-hand to the person who raised him.


Its a shame you didnt research byb's and puppy farmers at the same time.

Im pleased you can talk to her, can I ask what her answers were to questions like how many times a year the bitch is bred from, what health tests all her dogs have had and did she show you proof. I assume you saw the dam, where were she and the puppies kept, what sort of temperament did the mum have? How old was the mum and when was she first bred.

These are basic questions anyone would who is researching a breeder for any dog, show or pet would ask.


----------



## tully (Jan 25, 2007)

Good point Doggie Lover. I made a similar point about 5 pages ago butttt some people want to ignore those points. Just like the fact my doode breeder said I want the dog back if it doesn't work and here is a 2 year health gurantee. 

I also find it interesting that the same people told me I should be able to give my dog back to the breeder due to his seizures. Is that what you would do with your show dog? I find that offensive. My pup is a part of my family and I would never consider giving him back. Also, if I had rescued my doodle from a shelter these same people would be patting me on the back. 

And, yes you do sound holier than though and that is why you had to preface that in your piece. You also said some people get dogs for themselves but others do it for the good of the animal. PLEASE! All of us don't do anything without an agenda or getting something back. Look at how you are telling us how saintly you are. You are getting something everytime you tell that story. Your ego also gets a big boost! Don't kid yourself you are getting something out of it! That is fine but at least be honest about it.

I also said in a past thread some of you say it is ok to buy a dog but really you look down on it. Again, God is the big picture not your beliefs. I say that whatever animal you end up with, no matter how you did, that is the animal that is suppose to be in your life. So, if I hadn't bought Tully I would have probably gotten him another way. Come on lets have a bigger picture here! This one is awful small!


----------



## lurcherloopy (Feb 11, 2007)

DoggieLover said:


> Same is true of shelter dogs, isn't it? And yet I don't see you trying to discourage people to adopt dogs from shelters because of possible high vet bills later down the road. Interesting...


No what we are trying to do is stop people buying into puppy farms, byb's and those who dont give a damn about dogs and see them just as money making machines.

Why would anyone discourage people to adopt a dog in need?


----------



## Lorina (Jul 1, 2006)

Yes. Saving a life makes me happy. That's why I left a good career in IT to become a vet tech. I wanted a job that would give me personal satisfaction. Something that would make me feel like I actually accomplished something worthwhile at the end of the day.

I also wanted pets that give me personal satisfaction. Not just from the company they give me, but in knowing I'm giving them a better life than they would have had otherwise. I also have a formerly feral cat I tamed and rescued, and my other cat is one that I fostered when it was underage & underweight and would have been put to sleep. I didn't set out to look for a one-eyed dog, but the special needs animals tug at my heart, and I want to give animals a chance that others would overlook. 

Yet you're the one making me out to be a bad person because I love and care about the underdogs. Maybe you're the one who needs a bigger picture. You can make all the excuses you want about how God put him in your life, but you chose to get him the way you did. I'm happy you're happy with him, but bringing God into it is a pretty lame way to relieve the guilt or whatever you're feeling. If you feel you make the right choice in buying your dog, that's fine. Be proud of the choice you made. Own your choice, don't blame it on God.


----------



## tully (Jan 25, 2007)

I am not making you out to be the bad person. I said, you did sound holier than though in response to YOUR post-script. 

I think it is great you want to help animals and rescue; however, it doesn't make you any more noble than any other pet owner that loves and takes care of their animal. If that is your calling, I believe God put that in your heart. When God puts something in our hearts as a calling, it comes from a greater place than our ego. That is what I believe anyway. 

I think people like having pets and I don't think it really matters where you get them from. Whether it be a breeder, a shelter, a mutt, a dog found off the street, once we own the animal we are responsible for their welfare. I am not hung up on how people get their pets. I think there are people on this site that are very invested in how you get a pet. I am not one of those people.

I TRY, it is a daily challenge, not to condem or judge others because really I don't know the big picture. Who's to say what kind of life Tully would have had if I didn't get him? Just like it is a crap shoot the dog we get it is the same for the dog and his owner. You all keep saying there are soo many designer dogs in shelter so it is a good thing I got Tully! If I hadn't, maybe he would be there too. I just look at all of this more from a metaphysical/spiritual place not a scientific one.

I didn't see the last part of your post. I don't feel guilty about getting Tully and would get him again in a heart beat. I think you are having a hard time accepting that. I don't agree with your philosophy. God is in every single thing I do all day long so it would be impossible for me to disclude him from any part of my life. 

I did not mean to hurt your feelings when I responded to the holier than though comment; however, in that piece, to me, you did sound holier than though. Maybe that was not your intent but that is how it came across on the post.


----------



## lurcherloopy (Feb 11, 2007)

tully said:


> I think people like having pets and I don't think it really matters where you get them from. Whether it be a breeder, a shelter, a mutt, a dog found off the street, once we own the animal we are responsible for their welfare. I am not hung up on how people get their pets. I think there are people on this site that are very invested in how you get a pet. I am not one of those people.
> 
> .


But thats just the point, if people did care where their pets came from puppy mills and byb would soon be out of business.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

Quincy said:


> This is interesting in reference to their breeders, "must meet the following requirements", notice the MUST and this to health testing plus some other things, see at this address:-
> http://www.australianlabradoodleclub.us/BreederMemberRequirements.html
> 
> This is interesting, look down the list at this address and see:-
> ...


Just a point of clarity here, these tests are only available to ALA accredited breeders. They're not available to Joe Blow breeding hybrid doodles. Any emerging breed must take this step before becoming recognized...IMO. But they've still got a long way to go.



tully said:


> Good point Doggie Lover. I made a similar point about 5 pages ago butttt some people want to ignore those points. Just like the fact my doode breeder said I want the dog back if it doesn't work and here is a 2 year health gurantee.
> 
> I also find it interesting that the same people told me I should be able to give my dog back to the breeder due to his seizures. Is that what you would do with your show dog? I find that offensive. My pup is a part of my family and I would never consider giving him back. Also, if I had rescued my doodle from a shelter these same people would be patting me on the back.
> 
> ...


Again, it's not about your relationship with your dog. It's about what people should look for between a bad breeder and a good one. If the terms that you signed were acceptable to you, but aren't everything a breeder can do to insure they are giving you the best animal possible, don't be offended by those who advocate for more responsibility. Because to do so, would be to advocate the alternative.


----------



## Lorina (Jul 1, 2006)

tully said:


> You all keep saying there are soo many designer dogs in shelter so it is a good thing I got Tully! If I hadn't, maybe he would be there too.


Holy rationalizations, Batman! 

I hate quoting myself, but...



Lorina said:


> Yes, you love your dog and you'll keep it for life, but that's one dog, out of how many from a litter, and out of how many litters that breeder churns out every year? Multiply that by the hundreds or thousands of other mixed breed or otherwise irresponsible breeders. Do you honestly believe they all found such good homes with families who will keep them for life? How many of them, or the offspring of those dogs, are going to end up in shelters? And how about the dogs' parents, who'll be used for breeding purposes until they develop testicular, ovarian or mammary cancers, or pyometras (infected, pus-filled uterus - very gross if you've ever seen or smelled one up close and personal)? What becomes of the moneymakers when they no longer make anyone money?


My feelings are not hurt by being called holier than thou. I was perfectly aware of how that post could be construed, or I wouldn't have added that comment. 

However, I do find it offensive that you think my view is narrow. My eyes have been opened wide up by working in animal care, even though it's just been three years. I used to be ignorant of the overpopulation problem. I had no idea how many dogs and cats were put to sleep every single day just one half mile from my house. I didn't know the smoke coming from the chimney of the animal shelter was from the bodies of euthanized animals being cremated. Believe me, I wish I could get the image out of my head of bodies lined up on the floor, some with needles still in their hearts or paws. I wish I could forget the smell of burnt flesh. Having seen what I've seen and knowing what I know, I can not approve of breeders who willingly contribute to the overpopulation problem, all to line their own pockets.


----------



## tully (Jan 25, 2007)

You are misunderstanding my post. I did not say you were narrow. I meant this whole topic is myopic. Everyone is going to have their biased opinions, me, you, curbside prophet, etc. We all have had our own experiences and from that comes our understanding, views etc. My point of view is esoteric in nature so it really is a different thought system. 

I am saying that in the Big Picture of the Universe this is a small conversation. What I mean is there are no accidents in the Universe. The animals in our lives are there for a reason and a purpose. I am saying in the bigger picture the animal you are with, regardless of how you got him/her, you have a responsibility for. Their souls are in your care. You are both teachers for one another. It doesn't really matter where they came from. 

It sounds like you are called to be an advocate for shelters and rescue animals. That is your life journey. I respect that is your passion; however, it isn't mine. I am not saying there isn't an over population of animals. I agree the shelter and pounds are dismal. I have had mutts from the shelter and I have had breeds that I bought. At this point in my life, I choose to buy my dogs. You choose to get them from the shelter. That is all I am saying. I am not trying to change anyone's mind. I am offering a different view on the subject. That is all.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

Well my view is to consider adoption first, and if adoption offers nothing to you, do the best you can in finding the best breeder possible. I'm merely trying to offer techniques in finding the best breeder possible because there is a direct link between bad breeders and "designer dogs", while emphasizing that there are millions of unique designer dogs sitting in your shelter today waiting for a home. You may be able to rationalize why your dog is in your life, but there are others reading this thread who have yet to decide on where they will get there next dog. To them I write...


----------



## blackrose (Oct 7, 2006)

tully said:


> At this point in my life, I choose to buy my dogs.


 I think that is what it is mainly about....no one has any problem when people buy a dog from a responsible breeder. But since 'doodle breeders aren't responsible....you see the delima. 
The person who cares about responsible dog ownership/purchasing says, "Don't buy from an irresponsible breeder!" They tell this to anyone who is going to/has purchased from one. They educate and tell them their other options. For people with purebreds, the options are shelters, rescues, adoptions, and reputable/ethical/responsible breeders. Since no mixed breed breeder is responsible, that cuts the "Responsible breeder" option out for the people who want to purchase a mixed breed. 

If you think about it, it isn't a Poodle mix debate....it is an irresponsible breeder debate. People who own 'Doodles just think we are trying to cram the, "All breeders are evil, adopt from a shelter" thought down their throat because that is the only option availible to them to get a mixed breed responsibly....from a shelter or rescue. 

So its not the fact that you choose to buy your dog...a lot of people buy their dogs. It is a fact of _where you buy that dog from_. If someone told us, "I'm going to go buy a Yorkie puppy from Wizard of Claws, any thoughts?" We'd all scream, "NOOOOOOOO!! That is an *irresponsible* breeder (PUPPY MILL!!!), you want to buy one from a reputable breeder or adopt from a shelter."
If someone says, "I'm going to go buy a Goldendoodle from a breeder, any thoughts?" We say, "NOOOOOOO! That is from an* irresponsible *breeder. You can't buy one from a reputable breeder because there are none, so if you want one, you'll need to adopt."
You can always choose to not do that, but then you have bought a dog irresponsibly. You may not regreat doing it (who would, it is their dog!), but it fuels the fire for that irresponsible breeder to just churn out more dogs.



Curbside Prophet said:


> Well my view is to consider adoption first, and if adoption offers nothing to you, do the best you can in finding the best breeder possible.


 Ah, there we go. This makes it so much easier to say. lol Since there are no good breeders to buy from, you have to adopt! lol And people are always complaining, "There aren't any 'Doodles in a shelter near me, Wah wah wah wah wah." There haven't been any near me for a couple of months (in shelters...I don't know how many 'need to rehome' ads I've seen), but low and behold, there is an intire newborn litter of Labradoodles up for adoption about thirty minutes away from me. You just have to wait, because buying a dog responsibly takes time.


----------



## tully (Jan 25, 2007)

Well, at the end of the day these are all opinions. Mine is no more or less relavant then yours. I simply don't agree with you. I think my doodle breeder is very responsible. I have stayed in touch with her for over a year. She feeds her dogs the raw food diet, She shows her AKC breeds and often comes home with a first or second place, and she tests her dogs. 

This is a fruitless conversation because you think you are right for everybody. You can only speak for yourself and you own conscience. It gets a little scary when you start trying to speak for all or issuing an edict of your own belief. 

Just like our animals come into our lives for a reason so do the people. Nothing is ever black and white. 

There will be people that listen and agree with you and those that listen and or agree with me. It is like the vegans I worked with when I was at a holisitic dog food store. I was desecrated by them because I choose to eat meat. These arguments usually took place in front of the raw food meat section. How apropos. These same people who were soo indignant about animal rights but were totally pro abortion. So, it was kind of hard to take them seriously. 

For me, this is the end of this discussion. We aren't going to agree and I think I have made all the points I felt lead to do. Thanks for the interesting debate. I guess we will see what happens with the doodle. I know mine is safe, happy, healthy and in good care. At the end of the day, I am blessed with two great animals that have enriched my life.

Check out these two web sites:
www.family-pets.com
and www.goldendoodles.com
Genetics
Here is expert from link. More on link:

"Hybrid vigour is not a theory, it is the name given to describe something that happens repeatably throughout all species in the animal and plant kingdom. When unrelated breeds of any animal species are mated the offspring in the first generation will be more healthy, fertile, and (in animals) mentally stable than either parent breed. This first F1 (Filial1) generation as the geneticists call it, will be intermediate in characterisics to the parent breeds and the offspring will resemble each other."


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

If you truly don't care about where your dog came from then that is sad. Like I said, I am no better as my first dog is from a BYB. They weren't bad, evil, horrible people, but they should NEVER have bred dogs. I wish you could see the difference. I love my dog, I'm glad I got her, and I'd never give her up. However, I've since researched and vowed to do the right thing from then on out (which I have) instead of the easy way out. Buying a dog responsibly takes time. People nowadays want an instant gratification for everything and use that as an excuse. Most people who buy from purebred responsible breeders wait a long time and/or travel quite a ways for their dog. It has nothing to do with showing- it's my responsibility as a pet buyer to put the effort into buying a dog that I know was bred right from a breeder that does the best they can to produce few healthy litters out of love and desire to better the breed. 

None of you have shown us anything to say otherwise. I've still yet to see a site of a poodle/golden or poodle/lab or anything that breeds responsibly. (And we've been through that the ALA doesn't count as your average American designer breeder). Like I've said, show me these so called responsible designer breeders you all defend so much.

God has nothing to do with pet buying. Pet buying is a choice. Do you want to put in the effort or not? It's foolish to blame me buying my BYB dog on God or fate... I decided to. I am greatful she's in my life, but I still was the one to purchase her. 

Not to be rude or anythig, but I don't think you know much about showing. 1st and 2nd could mean quite a few thing.s I'll assume you just aren't familiar with the terms. 1st is a class win, then there's Reserve dog/bitch, best of winners, best of opposite sex, and best of breed. And that's just in breed competition. But like I said, anyone showing and crossbreeding would NOT be allowed in breed clubs and would definitely be looked down upon at shows. They'd probably lose all access to other breeders' lines (aka high quality dogs) for fear of them being used in the latest designer cross.

And no offense, but your doodle is just a year old. Most health problems show up later in life. I hope you don't have to deal with any, but it's a bit premature to say that he's healthy...



tully said:


> "Hybrid vigour is not a theory, it is the name given to describe something that happens repeatably throughout all species in the animal and plant kingdom. When unrelated breeds of any animal species are mated the offspring in the first generation will be more healthy, fertile, and (in animals) mentally stable than either parent breed. This first F1 (Filial1) generation as the geneticists call it, will be intermediate in characterisics to the parent breeds and the offspring will resemble each other."


Okay...

A- it's harder to apply things like this to domestic animals. 

B- Hybrid vigour generally is a term used to describe a certain trait. In one trait, a heterozygote might have advantages that a homozygous individual does not. Usually, the homozygous dominant individual is the wild type (part of the reason domestics are more difficult as there is so much variation and no set 'wild type') and the homozygous recessive is lethal. the heterozygote (or carrier) would be healthy and still have benefits of having the carried recessive trait. One of the most prominent examples of this is that people who carry sickle cell anemia (but do not have it) have a much lower chance of getting malaria. Therefore, the hybrid state is healthier. 

Combining dogs without testing is not a way to try for healthier dogs. If health was the motive it would be done via carefully planned crosses to related breeds with lines known to compliment each other. That's not what's being done. 

A poodle from a mill with many genetic issues crossed with a golden from a mill with more gentic issues will most likely not be healthier than a golden or a poodle from a reputable breeder. The puppies may or may not be healthier than the parent poodle or the parent golden but not a well bred dog. It all depends on the individuals used in the crosses. What do they carry? If the line is not well known, they should NOT be bred.

The term hybrid vigour DOES NOT apply to domestic animals in almost any situation where it is used. It is used _when_ a crossed offspring does end up healthier than it's parents- generally only at ONE locus. (IE- you cannot say an animal will be healhtier at all loci just because it is a hybrid) Crossed offspring are not always healthier than the parents. Hybrids that are healthier than the parents are said to have hybrid vigor or outbreeding enhancement. Hybrids that are less healthy than the parents are said to have suffered outbreeding depression. Both happen quite frequently- it depends on the genes and how they interact with each other. Are they fully dominant? Is the mutation recessive? Incompletely dominant? Does codominance occur? Is there any epistasis? Etc.

The term hybrid vigor as applied to domestic dogs is just a term used to add some sort of 'scientific' backing for what they are doing. It is being completely misconstrued and twisted to suit their own ends.


----------



## wendallb (Jan 14, 2007)

Dog dumping,

I live in the country and it seems that unhappy dog owners think the country is a nice place to get rid of there dogs.

Every dog I have is a dumped dog and this really makes me angry as I'm sure it does you.

I once found a litter of pups dumped right down the road from where I live and without help they would not live. I took the pups to the local SPCA and paid them to take the pups so they would not die.

This is a real problem for people that live out in the country and wish we could stop this practice.

I will get off my soapbox now!

All the Best,


----------



## Keno's Mom (Nov 20, 2006)

Tully,

I just don't understand how in the world you can consider your dog's breeder a "responsible" breeder when she is deliberatly mixing her two purebred dogs together to have the "designer dogs'? Those doodles are NOT purebred dogs - she's creating more mutts. And the only reason I see to do this is to sell them for money only - no other reason.

I'm willing to bet that other breeders don't know she's doing this. So it really doesn't matter much that she shows her dogs (the purebreds) and wins 1st/2nd places - only to go behind dedicated breeders and breed designer dogs for money.

How is that responsible? If she wants to improve each breed individually that's totally different - but no ethical breeder that has more then one breed goes and breeds designer dogs.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

blackrose said:


> Ah, there we go. This makes it so much easier to say. lol Since there are no good breeders to buy from, you have to adopt! lol.


If you're referring to doodle breeders, I would agree. My statement was mean't in finding the best purebred breeder. Breeding hybrids or mixes would exclude you from being the best.



Laurelin said:


> The term hybrid vigor as applied to domestic dogs is just a term used to add some sort of 'scientific' backing for what they are doing. It is being completely misconstrued and twisted to suit their own ends.


Thank you for explaining that. It was very clear in my mind.


----------



## DoggieLover (Feb 4, 2007)

People are going to choose to purchase a designer dog instead of a purebred for a number of reasons. There is no way to prevent or ignore this fact.

In my situation, I looked into shelters as a first option but was informed that none of them had the particular kind of dog that I was looking for and in fact, never had ever seen that kind of dog before. They are still quite rare in my area. 

What, then, is a person supposed to do in this kind of a situation? Do you suggest that I MOVE simply so that I can adopt from a shelter rather than purchase from a breeder, since under your logic, all designer dog breeders are BYBs or puppy mills? Obviously not. 

Do you suggest that I just settle for a different kind of dog, even after all the research I've done, even if that dog isn't a perfect match for my personality and lifestyle? Given that I am a first-time dog owner and have NO experience training or raising dogs, I want to ensure that the dog is an excellent fit so as to minimize any potential problems, behavioral or otherwise, that might ultimately result in me having to rehome him. Keep in mind that this would only be as a last result and I REALLY do not want to have to do it. 

I already had to do this with my very first horse due to lack of knowledge and horrible luck with a trainer who had the wrong motives ($) in mind. I ruined that horse to the point where she was un-rideable and I ended up having to sell her to someone with a lot more training experience. So why would I settle for a dog that isn't a perfect match for me, and possibly have to repeat this heartbreaking/frustrating experience all over again? Sorry but that's not a chance that I'm willing to take.

So for all of you that look down upon me because I purchased my designer dog from a breeder rather than adopting from a shelter due to my circumstances and background, please keep in mind that I had very valid reasons for doing so, all of which I have just explained above. I realize that many of you do not agree with my decision, but I just want to point out that in certain circumstances, adopting from a shelter may not be the best way to go if there's a chance that that particular dog may ultimately be rehomed again. And isn't that what the shelters are trying to avoid, with their rigorous application/interview/home check process? I wonder if I would even have passed this process, as I would have been completely honest with them about my past experiences, the fact that I am a FIRST-TIME DOG OWNER, and the fact that I was VERY afraid of dogs growing up due to a bad experience, so this is a sort of "facing my fears" step in the right direction. They may very well have told me to go through a breeder instead to avoid the possibility of getting a dog with potential behavioral/socialization problems that I am not equipped to handle.


----------



## Keno's Mom (Nov 20, 2006)

So you are trying to justify a designer dog because out of the hundreds of legit breeds you could NOT find any dog to fit your needs? I find that very hard to believe.

What is your designer dog?

And how do you really know the designer dog is the one that is right - when the designer dogs are not consistant in type?


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

I have a model for what I believe is an excellent breeder...I try to preach about it to help people understand that choosing a breeder is not easy. In fact it's to the contrary. It should be obvious that an important trait of a good breeder is good values. Like, good breeders care about placing good dogs in good homes. They may be passionate about canine competition, but winning isn't the most important thing to them. A commitment to breeding excellent dogs is. Plus decency towards dogs and humans alike. The breeding of dogs will lead you to some of the kindest people you'll ever want to meet...it will also expose you to competitive and insecure personalities who use dogs as ego or greed crutches. Why else would you dabble with doodles and poos if there's no standard yet? In the case of the later, you wouldn't want their stomachs...you wouldn't want their low self esteem or to share in their profit...you might not want their puppies either. I contend you demand the best from breeders, and that you avoid designer dogs until they are consistent and recognized by the communal will. Otherwise, consider adoption, or find a different breed suited for your needs. There's too many of either to say none of them suited my needs. If none are available today, spend your time learning how to improve you're training skills until one does appear.


----------



## DoggieLover (Feb 4, 2007)

Keno's Mom said:


> So you are trying to justify a designer dog because out of the hundreds of legit breeds you could NOT find any dog to fit your needs? I find that very hard to believe.
> 
> What is your designer dog?
> 
> And how do you really know the designer dog is the one that is right - when the designer dogs are not consistant in type?


Yes. It's sad but true - none of the purebreds fit what I was looking for in terms of looks and temperament. I spent months doing research online, reading books, and asking for advice in dog forums much like this one. I finally decided on a puggle. These are the qualities that I was looking for:

1. Small/toy dog (I live in an apartment, no fenced-in yard)
2. Not a barker/yappy (neighbors will complain and I dislike yappy dogs in general)
3. Gets along with children, strangers, other animals (I have other small animals including rodents, and my niece/nephew visit regularly)
4. Friendly and sweet-tempered, not aggressive or dominant
5. Playful and somewhat energetic but not excessively hyper
6. Moderate shedding is fine, but don't want an excessive shedder or have to do an enormous amount of grooming

In general, puggles fit all of these qualities perfectly. I love goldens and labs, and will definitely get one in the future when I have a larger place with a fenced-in yard. Basically, I like the personalities/temperaments of larger dogs better but need a small apartment dog for now.

These are the small dogs I was considering based on looks only - I think all of these dogs are adorable: Jack Russell terrier, beagle, chihuahua, puggle, yorkie, corgi

After doing further research, I immediately ruled out any terriers since I own small animals/rodents - I don't want their lives to be in danger because of the dog. I cannot be watching at all times and want to rule out any chances of accidents happening. In addition, I found that JRTs would likely be too hyper/energetic for me/apartment living in general, and yorkies require too much grooming.

Found out that beagles are LOUD - my neighbors would not appreciate their howling/baying. Also, they're somewhat larger than the others that I was considering and may not be suited for apartment living.

Found out that corgis are herders - wanted to avoid herders due to potential ankle/heel nipping issues and don't want them nipping at/trying to herd my other small animals. I think Australian shepherds are beautiful too but had already ruled them out due to larger size and the fact that they are herders.

I had narrowed my choices down to either a chihuahua or a puggle and was informed by posters at dog forums that chihuahuas in general are more likely to be yappy, don't generally get along with strangers and are not recommended for children or other animals. I was told that a puggle would be a much better fit for me and after doing extensive research on puggles, I found this to be true. A few people suggested getting a pug if I really wanted a purebred, but I'm not especially fond of the pug smashed-in face look, and I didn't particularly care whether the dog was a purebred or designer dog.

So this is why I decided on a puggle and all of my research paid off, as I found that puggles, in general, are exactly what I was looking for.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

DoggieLover said:


> 1. Small/toy dog (I live in an apartment, no fenced-in yard)
> 2. Not a barker/yappy (neighbors will complain and I dislike yappy dogs in general)
> 3. Gets along with children, strangers, other animals (I have other small animals including rodents, and my niece/nephew visit regularly)
> 4. Friendly and sweet-tempered, not aggressive or dominant
> ...


I'm not trying to be critical, but did you ever consider the besenji? Most of these qualities are a product of good socialization and training...that would begin with any good breeder.


----------



## Snowshoe (Nov 17, 2006)

Yeah, or an Italian Greyhound. 

If they're not used for racing, they make great companions for cats and small pets. They're small, good with kids, and they're not big barkers. 

Plus, they have very little maintenance in regards to their coats. 

Sounds like maybe the poster was just set on getting a puggle.


----------



## DoggieLover (Feb 4, 2007)

Curbside Prophet said:


> I'm not trying to be critical, but did you ever consider the besenji? Most of these qualities are a product of good socialization and training...that would begin with any good breeder.


Yes, the basenji was suggested as well - they are somewhat larger and I wasn't particularly fond of their look. What can I say, I'm picky.  And yes, I realize that good socialization and training are key factors, and individuals can vary, which is why I included the words *in general* in my descriptions. However, when a large number of people tell you something, such as "chihuahuas are yappy and don't like strangers" and when you actually spend time with someone who has a chihuahua and find this to be true (particularly when you learn that the chi bit the apt maintenance man), you tend to trust generalities as there's more of a chance that your dog will turn out to be this way regardless of socialization/training. Of course, there is a chance that you might get one of the individuals who don't fit this mold, but as I mentioned in a previous post, I don't want to take any chances here with my very first dog, given my background.


----------



## drfong (May 24, 2006)

Tully and Doggielover, as I sit and look at my dogs sleeping on the couch, I wouldn't trade them for anything, nor do I appoligize for buying them. I wouldn't do it again though. They are both from non showing breeders. They are both great dogs. Brady is about the most even tempered dog you've ever seen. Groomers, vets, family and friends, everyone wants to take him. But we got them before I started learning about the huge problem with over breeding of dogs and the tons of dogs that are killed every day. It's not that all non showing breeders are bad people, its just that when you buy from them you promote the industry. You say that all opinions are just that and equal, but I would say that is not true. My challange to you, as it was to myself is to look past the fact that you as an individual got a great dog and look at what is better for dogs in general. Do some research about the pet industry and the shear numbers and money and then evaluate if back yard breeding of either mixed or pure breed dogs is a good thing. I think if you can look at the information you may starte to see things differently. I don't think your bad people for buying a dog from a breeder, I bought 2. I just wish you would be less defensive of that decission and look at the larger picture. There are some people here that are very adiment about the subject but I think most of them work in the pet industry either in vet offices or shelters and see the dark side that no one wants to talk about. I also am going to start a new thread about religion and pets because it has come up a few times here. We'll see how it goes.


----------



## DoggieLover (Feb 4, 2007)

Snowshoe said:


> Yeah, or an Italian Greyhound.


It's funny, because I took the breed temperament test that someone posted on here recently, and whippet was #1...I know that they're very similar to greyhounds. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't greyhounds larger than puggles/chihuahuas/yorkies and don't they need more exercise? Do they require a fenced-in yard, or would they do okay in small apartments?

I was under the impression that they require a house with a fenced-in yard, which is why I never really considered them, but I could be wrong.



drfong said:


> Tully and Doggielover, as I sit and look at my dogs sleeping on the couch, I wouldn't trade them for anything, nor do I appoligize for buying them. I wouldn't do it again though. They are both from non showing breeders. They are both great dogs. Brady is about the most even tempered dog you've ever seen.


Drfong, I completely agree with you. I 100% plan to adopt my future dogs from shelters since I will have a great deal more experience in training, socialization, etc by that time. As I mentioned before, the reason why I chose to go through a breeder this time is because there are no puggles in local shelters where I live and because I'm a first-time dog owner and still have a lot to learn.

I'm learning through experience with my puggle and also through reading the information posted on this site and in books, so I will know A LOT more about dogs when I decide to get another one. Hopefully, at that time, I will live in a much larger place and can adopt the lab or golden that I have my heart set on.  

Thanks for not being judgmental about my decision or my current situation.


----------



## drfong (May 24, 2006)

I think italian grey hounds are smaller than whippets, which are smaller than greyhounds. I don't know how much. I have heard they do well in apartments, and no matter what kind of dog one gets, it will need lots of exercise to keep it from developing problems.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

Elsa and I have an italian greyhound acquaintance named bandito. I have a fond place for him because on our first introduction he pee'd on my scooter while Elsa and I rested. I would have returned the gesture had the owner not been so embaraced. He couldn't have weighed more than 8 pounds and he was as docile as any dog could be. I liked him a lot. However, I too think my next dog will be a bit larger...and I don't know why, but I've got an affection for bearded ladies. Probably in a year or two I'd like to rescue a wirehaired pointing griffon. I joined the awpga rescue group just last week.


----------



## DoggieLover (Feb 4, 2007)

drfong said:


> I think italian grey hounds are smaller than whippets, which are smaller than greyhounds. I don't know how much. I have heard they do well in apartments, and no matter what kind of dog one gets, it will need lots of exercise to keep it from developing problems.


Good to know! I think italian greyhounds are beautiful - I'm going to add them to my list along with labs and goldens as possible next dogs to adopt once my puggle is grown up and I have more experience. Maybe if I still live in an apt by the time I'm ready for a second dog, I will adopt an italian greyhound instead of a lab or golden. 

I live in a *tiny* one bedroom apartment with no fenced-in yard but I would take both dogs for daily walks. This has been enough exercise for my puggle...what about an italian greyhound? I know there are some greyhound experts out there so I'm just waiting for one of them to come along and offer some advice.  Also, do italian greyhounds bark a lot or are they pretty quiet dogs like my puggle?


----------



## Snowshoe (Nov 17, 2006)

DoggieLover said:


> Good to know! I think italian greyhounds are beautiful - I'm going to add them to my list along with labs and goldens as possible next dogs to adopt once my puggle is grown up and I have more experience. Maybe if I still live in an apt by the time I'm ready for a second dog, I will adopt an italian greyhound instead of a lab or golden.
> 
> I live in a *tiny* one bedroom apartment with no fenced-in yard but I would take both dogs for daily walks. This has been enough exercise for my puggle...what about an italian greyhound? I know there are some greyhound experts out there so I'm just waiting for one of them to come along and offer some advice.  Also, do italian greyhounds bark a lot or are they pretty quiet dogs like my puggle?


Ah hah!!! So you DIDN"T look at all of the smaller breeds, did you?  

Just teasing. 

Anyway, they're not very barky. And, as someone mentioned, they're pretty small. 

VERY cute little boogers!


----------



## DoggieLover (Feb 4, 2007)

Hmmm...I've been looking around for info on italian greyhounds and found a rescue organization in my area. However, a note on their website says: "In order to adopt, you must have a completely fenced yard, pass a home inspection & a reference check." Argh, I doubt that my one bedroom apt will meet their requirements. Guess this is another dog to put on my list of future breeds to research once I have a bigger place with a fenced-in yard...

In addition, I noticed that all of the IGs available for adoption were surrendered because of housetraining issues. I would still love to adopt one in the future, but still hold firm that I would have chosen a puggle over an IG as a first dog because of this. I do not have the experience to deal with any serious training/behavioral issues and if other people were unable to housetrain these dogs, to the point where they gave them up, then I doubt very much that I would be able to.

My puggle is progressing very nicely with his housetraining which is a huge relief for me!


----------



## lurcherloopy (Feb 11, 2007)

DoggieLover said:


> What, then, is a person supposed to do in this kind of a situation? Do you suggest that I MOVE simply so that I can adopt from a shelter rather than purchase from a breeder, since under your logic, all designer dog breeders are BYBs or puppy mills? Obviously not.
> 
> Do you suggest that I just settle for a different kind of dog, even after all the research I've done, even if that dog isn't a perfect match for my personality and lifestyle? Given that I am a first-time dog owner and have NO experience training or raising dogs, I want to ensure that the dog is an excellent fit so as to minimize any potential problems, behavioral or otherwise, that might ultimately result in me having to rehome him. Keep in mind that this would only be as a last result and I REALLY do not want to have to do it.
> 
> So for all of you that look down upon me because I purchased my designer dog from a breeder rather than adopting from a shelter due to my circumstances and background, please keep in mind that I had very valid reasons for doing so, all of which I have just explained above. I realize that many of you do not agree with my decision, but I just want to point out that in certain circumstances, adopting from a shelter may not be the best way to go if there's a chance that that particular dog may ultimately be rehomed again. And isn't that what the shelters are trying to avoid, with their rigorous application/interview/home check process? I wonder if I would even have passed this process, as I would have been completely honest with them about my past experiences, the fact that I am a FIRST-TIME DOG OWNER, and the fact that I was VERY afraid of dogs growing up due to a bad experience, so this is a sort of "facing my fears" step in the right direction. They may very well have told me to go through a breeder instead to avoid the possibility of getting a dog with potential behavioral/socialization problems that I am not equipped to handle.


Sorry but how can you know your dog is going to suit your lifestyle, if you say a pug wouldnt and a beagle wouldnt? Your dog could grow up to have just the traits you dont like in those breeds, its a cross so you can have no idea whether it will be more like the sire or dam. 

Did you see the sire and dam to ascertain their temperaments?

As you insist not all designer dog breeders are puppy farmers or byb's can you please answer the questions I asked in previous posts re health testing certs etc, they should be easily to hand as you say you've done your research.


----------



## Keno's Mom (Nov 20, 2006)

I wish you luck on your "designer" dog. Just keep in mind since its a mutt you have NO control as to if your pup will have the desired traits you want. Pugs and beagles are two different types of dogs - not even closely related in type and your pup could take on the traits of one or the other parent - so its no guarentee that the dog will have the best of both breeds in the end.

Because puggles are NOT a breed and you have no control as to type and personality. And keep in mind that beagles are stubborn little dogs. They are hunter types and if your dog takes after that side, you may have some problems if he ever is loose - beagles tend to take off on the scent trail and not listen to you very well.

So what happens to this pup if the pup doesn't live up to your "ideal" ?


----------



## tully (Jan 25, 2007)

In response to your words, "God has nothing to do with pet buying. Pet buying is a choice."

You are simply not getting my belief system. I believe I am a Spirit in this world of matter. I am here to heal the areas in my life of seperation. Every choice I make has to do with Spirit. I choose not to view this world through the Ego and or physical matter. So, for me all choices have to do with God. It is fine if that isn't what you believe but that is what I believe. You can only speak for yourself. If you think God has nothing to do with your choices, that is fine. God has everything to do with all my choices. I say there are no accidents in the Universe and all things fall under the catagory of Universal Principle. I believe all animals have souls it doesn't matter what body they come in. They are all creations from Heaven. We see the world differently. Both my dogs are here in my life through prayer so that is what is real to me. You don't know the stories of how they came into my life. I can tell you in both instances it was through meditation and discernment. Thus, the world continues on its axis and we continue to debate the ideas of this illusion we call life.


----------



## Dogsareme (Mar 1, 2007)

Alot of people just don't seem to understand designer dogs are Mutts, plain and simple. Though most people who are crazy about designer dogs are dog illiterates and just think they are another breed. IF they would just go and check out the pound they can find hundreds of designer dogs (not ones bred on purpose) for example a GSD/lab cross, they could call it a Labgerm  lol or a Pitbull/Collie could become the Colebull  All the mutts can be given names and be sold as designer dogs and these people would not know the difference.

sigh* if only people would open there eyes.


----------



## DoggieLover (Feb 4, 2007)

Dogsareme said:


> Alot of people just don't seem to understand designer dogs are Mutts, plain and simple. Though most people who are crazy about designer dogs are dog illiterates and just think they are another breed. IF they would just go and check out the pound they can find hundreds of designer dogs (not ones bred on purpose) for example a GSD/lab cross, they could call it a Labgerm  lol or a Pitbull/Collie could become the Colebull  All the mutts can be given names and be sold as designer dogs and these people would not know the difference.
> 
> sigh* if only people would open there eyes.


Ummm....hello? I realize that. I did my research before purchasing the dog as I already mentioned. I was purposely not responding to this thread as it's obvious that we're never going to agree on this subject and I would rather spend my time reading the informational posts and asking questions to learn about my new puppy, instead of wasting my time arguing with people. Enough is enough.


----------



## Dogsareme (Mar 1, 2007)

DoggieLover said:


> Ummm....hello? I realize that. I did my research before purchasing the dog as I already mentioned. I was purposely not responding to this thread as it's obvious that we're never going to agree on this subject and I would rather spend my time reading the informational posts and asking questions to learn about my new puppy, instead of wasting my time arguing with people. Enough is enough.



I'm sorry to say I did'nt read this whole thread so I was not singling you out to insult you. I'm infact not ever sure what you posted. 
But either way I was not saying it's a bad thing to own a designer dog, I just wish people would not breed them for the sole purpose of a fad. If you did research before you bought well congradulations I really think that's great, honest. People need to do that before they get a dog, designer or not I think it's vital. 
If you own a fad dog, absolutly nothing against you, I would never turn down a designer dog if one was offered to me, but I honestly would not pay thousands for it. 
But for the record I hope they did not get you into the designer dog thing because they said it's hypo-allergetic. Because that is absolutly not true. When people are allergic to dogs it from their dander and syliva, not the fur. And when crossed with a poodle that does not guarantee that dog will not shed. Hypo-allergenic is a ploy to get people intrested and buying, their is absolutly no such thing.


----------



## Chloef_2799 (Feb 1, 2007)

I thought this website was aggravating. It says pure breds and claims to sell purebred puppies but hardly any of them are purebreds. Gr!
http://www.purebredpups.com/PuppiesSold.html
can anyone say bad breeders???


----------



## curlgirl (Apr 8, 2007)

You are so right Chloef! How can they claim to be selling only purebred puppies and then on the same page have a lahsapoo or a schnoodle? Those are mixed breeds! So while they might have pure bloodlines, once they are mixed they are not purebreds anymore! A misinformed consumer might buy one of these dogs thinking they are purebred only to find out they did not get what they wanted.  

Designer Dogs are no different than any other dog. They might be bred to be cute and fluffy, but they need love and attention just the same as any other animal. A lot of people have the misconception that these dogs are "accessories" meant to be carried in a bag that matches their new shoes. Don't get a dog, ANY dog, if you don't want to put the time into loving it and training it. 

I also find it absolutely disgusting that some people think they can get a dog and then if they don't like it return it or get rid of it. Once you take that dog home, you are his or her family. It is is heartbreaking for an animal to be uprooted and given to a shelter or another owner once they have gotten attached to you. 

The decision to get a dog, designer or not, should not be taken lightly. It's a big responsibility. We knew that we wanted a small dog that does not shed because of my allergies and the fact that we don't have a very large house. We talked to veterinarians and breeders and did our research online. I wanted a cute little dog that loves affection and loves to play. By being informed, we found the right breed. Or in this case, the right "designer breed". 

Right now, my Maltipoo is sleeping on my bed, on top of a pile of folded laundry and I don't have the heart to move him!


----------

