Cross breeding Controversial

IMO Most crossbreed breeders are only doing it to increase their own bank accounts.
Interesting is the fact that the original Labradoodle maker!! has now stated he regrettted doing what he did in the beginning

Taken from article---
Conron, who is writing a memoir about life with the labradoodle, says that despite the fact that the dogs have helped so many blind people, he regrets creating the first crossbreed. "I opened a Pandora's box, that's what I did. I released a Frankenstein. So many people are just breeding for the money." Today, people pay ridiculous prices for poodle crossbreeds, and unscrupulous breeders are crossing poodles with inappropriate dogs simply so they can say they were the first to do it. There are cavoodles (cavalier king charles spaniel/poodle), groodles (golden retriever/ poodle) schnoodles (shnauser/poodle), and even roodles (rottweiller/poodle). "A lot of them are just crazy," Conron says. "So many of them have problems. I believe that one-third of dogs bred today are the poodle crosses. People say aren't you proud of yourself, and I say, no. Not in the slightest. I've done so much harm to pure breeding and made these charlatans quite rich."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/nov/13/inventors-idea-regret

omg, call me nosey but I would love to see what a rottie x poodle looks like. I have a friend who has a JRT X ESS, very odd looking

The thing is - I am still 'anti'....it just does not sit right....but I cannot put my finger on why.....the only reason I can come up with, is that it is breedist and snobby.....
I hate the thought of BCs being crossed with everything they are to produce faster medium and small dogs for agility and flyball....I don't like it.....it feels wrong....but the dogs (if produced with health tests and knowledge of parents/grandparents etc with homes set up..etc etc)are still dogs.

I cannot see any logical reason against it - other than it feels wrong.

BTW - it was also the other thread - where a couple of people said they would always have crossbreeds!

I always support them because there are good breeders out there but I wouldnt always have crossbreeds either. Will always have rescues, i long to own a RBT but havent seen many (any) in rescue so would consider a pup and have been searching for the right breeder even though it is much further down the line

why are you anti, if you dont know why? :?

We went to a puppy socialisation thing at the vets last week. There was one black, woolly haired little thing that was the only other crossbreed other than ours. Someone asked the owner 'What breed is that?' and she replied 'Cockerpoo' and then proudly tugged at her coat and said 'She doesn't shed at all'. And this was a 9 week old puppy. Call me vindictive, but I kind of hope that when that dog's adult coat comes through it sheds like a spaniel. I did tell her that the coats of very young puppies don't shed anyway, but otherwise bit my tongue. It looks like a nice enough dog, though.

When people asked what Otto was (although he is definitely not such a guessing game, clearly a German Pointer, and I think most people would just assume GSP) we said German Pointer crossbreed. I suppose we could just say German Pointer, but after the cockapoo thing I wanted to make it clear that we weren't afraid to call a cross a cross.

In general I think crossbreeds/non-pedigrees can be lovely dogs. But whereas in the past they'd have been working dogs (farm dogs, gamekeeper's dogs) or complete accidents advertised cheap in the local paper, nowadays crosses are a sort of fashion accessory. And unfortunately a lot of people are ignorant enough to believe that if you cross breed A and breed B you will get the desirable traits of both breeds (e.g. all poodle crosses will be non-shedding and hypoallergenic, but without the highly-strung temperament of the poodle), and a lot of people willing to exploit that ignorance.

We don't mind a bit (obviously) that Otto isn't a KC registered pedigree, because he's a super little puppy, but we wouldn't have been attracted to the litter if we thought that he had been bred for money (at 200 quid, I think he was a fair deal, taking into consideration that his docking cost 50) or for some gimmicky reason. Also, his particular cross is of two very similar breeds, so we knew pretty much what we were getting.

I’m not sure if I can explain what I think, but I will do my best

I don’t think breeders should ever breed purely with the thought of producing pups as pets. I think if breeders do that, then they forget about what the dogs are meant to look like… I see so many of the popular breeds, who although I can tell what breed they are, they are an extremely poor example. Those dogs must have been bred purely for being pets, as they wouldn’t ever be successful in the show ring. it seems to be more a case of someone putting two dogs of the same breed together without caring if they are good examples of the breed. IMO, breeders should be trying to produce the best possible dogs that fit the breed standard, and do their best to improve on what dogs they already have. If those dogs go to pet homes, then I have absolutely no problem with that (although, I do believe that the breeder should keep a pup) but at least they actually look how they are supposed to!

There are so many dogs in rescue, that people need to think long and hard before bringing even more lives into this world… and poorly bred dogs should IMO not be being bred, even if they are going to be ‘just’ a pet.

When people breed crossbreeds, they are usually always just trying to produce pets. They have no purpose in breeding, and they just stick any two dogs together. There are the occasional times when people breed for something specific, such as the lua dalmation, and the guy that Hali mentioned. I have no problem if people set up a detailed breeding plans, and have a specific aim at the end… sticking two dogs together for a pet, is not a real aim and it doesn’t really achieve anything. If people are wanting a pet, then they can go to a rescue or get a pedigree from a breeder, there is no need to cross two dogs just for the sake of it. take the ‘puggle’ for example, now what does a ‘puggle’ offer that a pug and beagle cant? Or any other breed for that matter?

Too many dogs are being bred as it is, never mind people just deciding to purposely breed a litter of crosses. I wonder why the woman with the ‘puggle’ wants a pup from her dog? and why she wants to breed? (other than wanting a pup). i think most pedigree breeders shouldnt be breeding, so i definitey dont think the crossbreed breeders should.

I am not sure if I have explained my point very well, I know what I mean but it is harder to explain…

I understand - but I think it is an odd thing.

I have started questioning why it is such a bad thing that cross breeding is going on - and I agree, that accidental litters/ money making is not right - but that is across the board for me.
However - a well thought out researched cross.... even (or maybe especially) if it is just for one litter with no future purpose in mind - I can find no logical reason against it.

Whole point of the thread....trying to discover that one!!

I feel your pain

:-( :-( :-(

We did not ask to have him docked, and we would much prefer that he were undocked. We found out about the litter when they were 3 weeks old, by which time of course they had already been docked. His parents are working dogs, and working German Pointers can be legally docked, which he is. It happened, and we decided that it didn't bother us enough to stop us getting the puppy. A shame, but he's never had it so doesn't miss it, and still has enough to wag and communicate.

bumpty bump..
Did mollet in the uk or leavitt in the us have a good reason to breed a new bulldog type.???

Sorry - don't know enough about it.

Most certainly not an insult BM, Do you forget that for most of us our dogs are pets BEFORE anything else?

because then you are breeding for something, what is the point in having breeds who have specific things about them, if people don’t breed to keep and improve on them? some people like a specific breed coz it looks or behaves a certain way, or coz it can do a specific job. If people don’t breed to work on those things and to improve on them, then breeds will lose those things that define the breed. Which is why I think people should only breed from the very best dogs of that breed. I find it offensive that you call me breedist, I love crosses and I own one. I am not at all breedist, I just have a definite opinion on why breeders should breed, and part of why I feel so strong about that is coz my dog was from a rescue that was fit to bursting of dogs… and he was from an accidental litter. People are breeding too much (both intentional and unintentional) and IMO strong legislation needs to be put in place to stop all the idiot breeders who breed for self gain. I have had people who look down their nose at Jake coz he is a cross, that is breedist!

yes, and breeding does need to be looked at. But if breeding pedigrees needs to be looked at then breeding crossbreeds for not a decent reason, certainly does!

did you not read when I said ‘If those dogs go to pet homes, then I have absolutely no problem with that’. of course I have no problems with dogs being pets, my dog is a pet! and I think any dog, whether used for showing, agility, work etc, should always be first and foremost, a pet! I put just in ‘’ to try and put across the point that I don’t think they are ‘just’ a pet in the way that it sounds, but when they are doing nothing else (eg, showing, agility, work) they are just a pet! obviously that bit didn’t come across too well, but considering I had already put that I have no problem with dogs being pets, and the fact that my dog is a pet, I thought that that bit wouldn’t come under scrutiny.

so, what health issues doesn’t it have that a pug does? and surely whether or not a ‘puggle’ is more biddable than most beagles, depends on what aspects of personality the dogs gets from each breed? Also, if people want a dog that is most biddable, why not just choose a breed that is? I just do not understand the need to cross them.

I think lurchers are a bit different, but again, if they are being bred to gain certain traits for work then I have no problem. If it is just two dogs stuck together with no real thought and what they are trying to gain, then I do not agree with it. Lurchers are rife in rescues though, so it makes me reluctant to accept their breeding when there are way too many as it is.

Poorly bred pedigrees are still allowed, unfortunately. But I have never agreed with that, so it is a bit of a moot point. If this thread was about poorly bred pedigrees I would be posting strongly against it… but the thread is about cross breeding… so I am posting in reference to that. whether it be a poorly bred pedigree, or a cross breed, I am still against both breeding… and I have already said that I think dogs bred from should be the very best examples of their breed (which includes them being health tested).

If the litter is being bred for a purpose, and the breeder is going to continue on to get a certain type of dog, then I think that is different. But just sticking two dogs together to create a random mix, I do not agree with.

but he did have it, even if it was just for a short time...

Nor can I if the litter was being bred for a reason, working or what ever. But not to start a new trend, or simply supply a pet market for self gain.

..... lurchers