Crossbreeding for Sport/Work/Companionship

[Linds]

Since that appears to so far be the winner on the Controversy thread and RTH yelled at us I'm making it's own thread. We've discussed it before but discuss it again!

What are your thoughts in relation to breeding mixes for work, sport, family etc.? If you're for it, why? If you are against it, why?

Aaand go!

 

[CrystalGSD]

I'm for it just as long as the breeder health tests, cares about temperament, and doesn't begin to focus on quantity over quality.

 

[DJEtzel]

I just don't gaf. Lol. I'll buy or rescue whatever I think will be the best fit for what I need, if it's a cross, as long as it's health tested, placed responsibly and will serve my purpose, whatevs.

 

[LauraLeigh]

I'm for it just as long as the breeder health tests, cares about temperament, and doesn't begin to focus on quantity over quality.

Pretty much this, as I said in the other thread, don't much care "what" you breed anymore, well, I don't care for breeding dogs that are so extreme their quality of life is iffy, or lifespan very short... I just want breeders to be honest and responsible, not pumping out tons of pups and selling them to the first person with enough cash! And if your purposely breeding extra drivey sport bred dogs, make sure you have homes for that kind of dog, even the "washouts" because many regular dog owners can't manage that type of dog...

 

[Maxy24]

I'm fine with it, I'd evaluate breeds of mixes like any other breeder, but I have one reservation. One of the reasons I suggest breeders for certain people is because of the predictability that comes with going to a responsible breeder. There is a reason we recommend certain breeds for people, they have predictable traits (so long as you're going to a good breeder who works to preserve those traits). With mixes I feel like some of that predictability goes away...but maybe not? I guess certain things are going to be predictable, the traits required for the dog to be successful in whatever area (sport, companionship, etc.) the breeder is focusing on, but then a lot of other things are going to be ignored/left up to chance. If the breeds being mixed are different enough that can lead to a wide variety of puppy personalities and physiques. But I don't know, a lot of the mixes I've seen do have a lot in common, so perhaps the mixes are more predictable than you'd expect or perhaps the traits that are left up to chance aren't the ones that people tend to care about most.

 

[Stillwater]

ABSOLUTELY NOT. But a caveat here, I am not in the sport dog world. I am in the AKC world, I do conformation and performance with my dogs. If my purebred cannot do the job it is bred for, it is not in my home and it will not be used for breeding. Even if it's conformation is good, if it has no natural instinct (For instance if my Parsons do not hunt) it is not bred.

I will not deny that there are some very nice intended mix breeds though, that worked out and excel at what they were created for. BUT.. of the litter of mongrels, how many excelled at what they were bred for?

With my sports, I want a purebred. But I do what I do with intention of promoting my breeding stock and I LOVE watching a purebred dog do instinctive sports. It thrills me clear to the bone.

It takes a very knowledgeable person to crossbreed. People who think they know what they are doing usually do not, then the ones that do not think they have enough knowledge usually do. The problem is the ones that THINK they know. You have to study what the instincts for the dogs are before you begin crossing them. You need to have known healthy bloodlines. You need to know the pedigrees of the dogs behind you, what they excelled at. Then you breed them and chances are.. what 1 puppy will be what you want. Because again, there will be no consistency in the litter because they are complete outcrosses from completely different breeds. Each puppy could look completely different and express different traits from the different breeds. Good or bad. It takes careful breeding, and generations of breeding and some line breeding to get a consistent dog.

So playing devils advocate on myself here. I am aware that purebred breeders also do not have every puppy, or even every litter work out as a show dog or performance dog. But that is when it comes to choosing your bloodlines and breeders. I chose breeders with a long history of double titled dogs. My PRTs come from a breeder whose show terriers go home and they spend their weeks out in the barnyard killing rats, then bathed and groomed and into the show ring. They do they job they were meant for. This same breeder also is consistent on more than half the litter are champions. That is what I seek out when I look for a purebred dog to compete with.

 

[Kat09Tails]

As long as the same standards of breeding apply and the breeder responsible for ALL the pups they produce. I say go for it with the caveat that no matter what you breed not every pup is going to turn out as intended unless you set your bar for success very low. A breeder has to be responsible for the long term success of those dogs too. I am not sure if there is a ton of demand for failed sport mix dogs in other fields and I am not sure if disposing of them in the typical way Alaskan huskies are is the standard of doing right by the dog most people would support.

 

[release the hounds]

I was just trying to be the kick in the ass you needed to get this thread off the ground

 

[Annabell]

I am not a fan of crossbreeding for anything, but it is worse when dogs are crossbred for companion purposes. If you can't find your perfect dog in a purebred, then go look at shelter dogs! There are so many different personalities out there, so it would be almost impossible to not find what you want in a companion. It irks me to no end to see neurotic doodles and micro-tiny-teacup-chi-schon-poo-morkie things that have terrible health and even worse personalities. I know that there are some "responsible" doodle breeders out there in the sense that they health test and whatnot, but to me breeding mixes like that is a form of irresponsible breeding.

As far as sport mixes go, I am not fond of them. I am looking at a sport-bred BC for my next dog, but a lot of the kennels I find also breed sport mixes like border-whippets, border-jacks, and border-staffys. These kennels produce litter after litter of dogs, and all of it is merely so that they can win in a sport. I just think it is a useless breeding practice to produce crossbreeds. Like I said in my other post, I think it would be really neat to produce a new breed of dog that could excel at sports and conformation as well as have stable temperaments. No matter how well a breeder knows the parents of a litter, it is still a mix of two breeds, and what comes out is not guaranteed to have a stable temperament or even great sporting capabilities.

I am not someone that is against dog sports. In fact, I think they are a great energy outlet and allow for people to bond with their dogs. I just think that there are so many different options other than sport mixes when looking for a performance dog. There are lines of dogs (especially BC's) that are bred specifically to be performance dogs. These dogs are great at what they do, and they are purebreds. Also, if someone is not looking for a puppy and doesn't mind their dog being altered, there is also the rescue option. I have seen many dogs adopted from the rescue I volunteer to be flyball, disc, agility, dog diving, SAR, and even hunting dogs.

 

[BostonBanker]

I think that, done well, crossbreeding is fabulous. While I understand the desire to keep lines pure, and I think there are (a few) breeds that have genuine working reasons to stay pure, there is no part of me that thinks it is the right answer genetically. I don't believe it is possible for a limited gene pool, however well managed, to be as genetically sound as a well managed open gene pool. I'm from the warmblood world of horses - where 'purebred' is non-existent, and bringing in outside blood has been the key to producing the top sport horses in the world.

While I expect my next dog will be purebred, I adore the borderstaff/stacks/jacks I know from the sport world. They are pretty much my ideal in a lot of ways, and when I got Gusto, the litter was assumed to be borderstaffs (although none of them grew up to look like it, in my opinion). I certainly wouldn't rule one of them out for a future dog.

Take all that, of course, with the caveat that I'm in the dog sport world and not the conformation world, which has never really appealed to me.

 

[Slick]

As long as the breeder health tests, breeds for stable dogs, makes sure that all puppies find a home, and will take the dogs back if it doesn't work out, I couldn't care less.

What I have a problem with is the BYBs who are creating more dogs to go into shelters and be euthanized.

 

[Julee]

As long as the breeder health tests, breeds for stable dogs, makes sure that all puppies find a home, and will take the dogs back if it doesn't work out, I couldn't care less.

This. I'm iffy on "companion" breeders... I just want the dogs to do SOMETHING.

 

[Laurelin]

I like sports mixes if they are bred well. They appeal to me more than purebreds for many reasons.

I don't like people breeding litter after litter of ANYTHING. I don't think it matters if the breeder is pumping out 100000 borderjacks or 100000 border collies a year.

It's not what you breed it's how.

ETA: And breeding for drive and speed and no care about anything else can happen in mixes and purebreds too. The sport mixes I've met have been nice little dogs. Good drive but good off switch too. Decently consistent too.

 

[Laurelin]

I think that, done well, crossbreeding is fabulous. While I understand the desire to keep lines pure, and I think there are (a few) breeds that have genuine working reasons to stay pure, there is no part of me that thinks it is the right answer genetically. I don't believe it is possible for a limited gene pool, however well managed, to be as genetically sound as a well managed open gene pool. I'm from the warmblood world of horses - where 'purebred' is non-existent, and bringing in outside blood has been the key to producing the top sport horses in the world. .

Agreed completely. I find the whole notion of keeping lines pure to be antiquated.

 

[LauraLeigh]

This. I'm iffy on "companion" breeders... I just want the dogs to do SOMETHING.

I kind of get what you mean, but to me, I think a companion is doing something, possibly the most important job... Bring a stable companion is likely the job of 90% of the dogs out there, Chaz is an exception because of the level of very knowledgable owners here...

There are "breeds" now that are bred for strictly companionship, and I have no issue with that, nor do I with some of the mixes fur that reason as long as the breeder meets my prior criteria, registered breed or not

 

[Julee]

I mean more along the lines of have some sort of title or job to prove themselves. Low level obedience or rally, therapy dog, CGC....

 

[LauraLeigh]

I mean more along the lines of have some sort of title or job to prove themselves. Low level obedience or rally, therapy dog, CGC....

Depending on the area and availability I can agree with that, in my hometown for instance there is basic obedience classes but no where to actually title a dog, no agility since the one place closed shop, I'm not sure outside of travelling a fair distance where titles could be achieved there, of any kind without a pretty big drive. Even getting health clearances means a whole day trip to Halifax about 4 hours away, but at least that only needs to be done once a year, and IMO is mandatory

This is one of the only trainers in my town.....

http://m.thevanguard.ca/Living/2010-10-27/article-1894152/Dog-training-wisdom-/1

 

[CharlieDog]

I'm way more open to this now than I used to be. If I was in the right place, I would have no problem buying a purpose bred GSD/Malinois or Malinois/Dutch or Dutch/GSD.

As it stands, my Dutch is KNPV lines, and likely has Malinois as grand parents or great grandparents. She looks amazingly like Sloan in a lot of pictures I've taken of her, but even more so in person. If she was fawn, or Sloan was brindle, we could pass them off as littermates. It just doesn't bother me anymore.

I prefer to focus on temperament and health testing. My Malinois has both of these in his lines, and I'm thrilled with it. My Labrador is purebred, but she won't even fetch. Whether this is a product off her first home, or a product of her breeding, I don't know, but a purebred field Lab that won't fetch is ridiculous.

Ozzy is what could conceivably be considered a sport mix. His mother was a purebred Australian Shepherd that competed in cattle driving. His father was a JRT that killed rats regularly in the barn. He lost the genetic lottery in conformation, but his drive is through the roof. Had I been better at keeping him from bad experiences with other dogs, I have no doubt he could be a 4 second or under dog in flyball. As it is, his knees are too straight for me to want to compete in disc work with him (we do it at home, sparingly, but he's amazing at it) but trying to teach him to pass in flyball would be a miracle.

I do believe purpose bred crosses are going to become more common. I can't remember who it is on here that has several different types of lurchers and fiests for hunting, but his dogs are amazing, and I would love to own one of that type one day.

 

[elegy]

I kind of get what you mean, but to me, I think a companion is doing something, possibly the most important job... Bring a stable companion is likely the job of 90% of the dogs out there,

agreed, and it has taken me a long time to come to that. show breeders are often outside of the average dog-owner's scope, both price-wise and "good enough" wise (whether real or perceived). most people i know don't want the energy or intensity of working bred dogs. so they turn to puppymills and bybers who they think can give them what they want.

i like to think that if more people were breeding *nice* dogs for companionship- dogs out of parents with stable temperaments and appropriate health testing, who would follow up on and stand behind the pups they produce, fewer people would go the puppybroker or puppyfarmer way.

 

[meepitsmeagan]

I think that, done well, crossbreeding is fabulous. While I understand the desire to keep lines pure, and I think there are (a few) breeds that have genuine working reasons to stay pure, there is no part of me that thinks it is the right answer genetically. I don't believe it is possible for a limited gene pool, however well managed, to be as genetically sound as a well managed open gene pool. I'm from the warmblood world of horses - where 'purebred' is non-existent, and bringing in outside blood has been the key to producing the top sport horses in the world.

I agree with a lot of this. I wouldn't be opposed to a nice border staffy someday.

I don't like purposeful crosses for pet homes though. I just don't get it. And the stupid toy crosses? Lord no.