Whats with all the _______doodles?

Gempress · Mar 9, 2006

BudgetsDad said:

We say mutts because they are mutts. That is the correct word, no negative connotations (at least for me).

Nobody is being elitist on here. You seem to think that we only disapprove of people breeding mutts, and love purebreds. Wrong! If you read some of the other threads, most Chazzers disagree with ANY kind of irresponsible breeding, whether it be mutts or purebreds.

A good breeder does it only to improve the breed. They use dogs who have proven their worth, either through conformation, obedience, etc., and are a credit to the breed. Just because Rover "is so sweet and is AKC registered" does not mean he needs to be bred. They also do exhaustive health tests on potential breeding dogs to make sure they will not pass on health problems to the puppies. If a person cannot do that, they should not be breeding dogs. I don't care if its a litter of mutts or a litter of Great Danes.

I have yet to find a single "doodle" breeder who does more than make sure that the parent dogs have four legs, two eyes and a tail.

DanL · Mar 9, 2006

It's not that people are against mutts. I've had mutts my whole life from the time I was a kid, but I also enjoy purebreds because they have a specific purpose- whether its the companionship of our pug to the athleticism, intelligence and eventual protectiveness of our GSD. Our 12 year old is a mutt- an accidental "oops" breeding. The thing with these people breeding "designer" dogs is they are NOT the typical accidental breeding that creates the mutt you see in the shelter. It's being done on purpose for the sole reason of making money. That is where it is wrong in principle. People might think that because they see the mother and father that they are getting a dog of good temprament but you still never know, so using that as an excuse vs going to the pound and getting a dog off of death row is irrelevant.

bubbatd · Mar 9, 2006

Dan... right on !! I fault those who breed for a " fad" dog and ask big $$s.

joce · Mar 9, 2006

I got my mutt form the pound for thirty bucks and not only saved a life but also avoided supporting a nasty byb.

JennSLK · Mar 9, 2006

Nice post Dan

Serena · Mar 9, 2006

BudgetsDad said:

There is no disdain for mixed breeds, I have one myself, many of us here have mixes or loved one at one time or another. There however is disdain for breeding them and all mixed breeders are irresponsible.

The reason you see people saying "I can't believe anyone would pay that much for a mutt" has nothing to do with the dog, but rather the fact of the irresponsible breeders the money is going to...From the same aspect lets say someone bought a purebred dog from Kennel XYZ..Kennel XYZ is a known puppy mill, if someone said "I just got a puppy from Kennel XYZ, I may say something like "Ugh I can't believe you paid that for a Kennel XYZ puppy"...The difference lays in the fact that all breeders of mutts, cross-breeds, mixes are irresponsible.

It is also necessary to point out that the only time you will hear someone saying anything along the lines of "I can't believe you paid that for a mutt here" is when someone comes to brag about the latest designer mutt they just purchased..."I just bought a "Fluffadoodasnugapoo" from a breeder" is going to result in dissapointment, and that time will be used to educate.

Now on the other hand if someone comes and says "I just adopted a Fluffadoodasnugapoo from the shelter" it would be much different...The person would hear things like: "congratulations, and "thats great".

It's not about paying for a mix that is the bad thing, its lining the pockets of irresponsible breeders that is bothersome, just like lining the pockets of irresponsible breeders of purebreds is bothersome..today there is no such thing as reputable breeders of mixes so the only ethical place to get a mix from is the shelter.

Noone has ever denied that there were irresponsible breeders of purebreds.

The whole concept of mixed breeds being healthier than purebreds is hype based upon "hybrid vigor" the problem with this is a mixed breed dog is not a hybrid.

Ever heard of Dr George A. Padgett? He is world renowed as the leading authority on canine genetics..and his views on mixed breeds being healthier disagree with what your vet will tell you.

If you are getting that from these posts then you are misreading, nobody has frowned down or said anything bad about mixed breeds, aside from breeding them being irresponsible.

If being against irresponsible breeders (both mixed breeds and purebreds) makes me an elitist then I will wear that title with pride and honor.

The only breeders I have any tolerance or respect for are reputable, responsible, ethical breeders..since there is no such thing as a reputable, responsible, ethical breeder of mixes I have no tolerance for anyone who breeds mixed breeds.

If someone wants a mix I will be happy to point them to a shelter to save a life, and I will be happy for them and wish them well..but please do not ask or expect me to applaud anyone getting a dog from an irresponsible breeder because the only hope I will have is that the poor animal does not suffer due to inherited genetic or temperamental disorders..The only hope I will have is that the animal does not end up homeless because the misconceptions used to push the sale of designer mixes came to light and were revealed as false.

shepluvr · Mar 9, 2006

well said Serena....Well said.

motherofmany · Mar 9, 2006

I have nothing against mixed breed dogs. I do, however, have a great deal of antipathy (how's that for finding a nice way to say it?) for human beings who are so irresponsible that they allow them to be bred, or worse, deliberately create them!

Millions of dogs a year, mostly mixed breeds, killed. Yet there are people who will not spay or neuter or even carefully monitor their pets.

Puppymills, BYBers, irresponsible owners... three legs of the "Axis of Evil" when it comes to dogs.

Yes, there are people who say "mutt" in a perjorative way. Doubt you'll find any of them here, however. In fact, where you are most likely to hear the term is not from ethical breeders, owners and exhibitors of purebred dogs, but from the "Axis of Evil" types who think $ is the be all end all.

"Hybrid vigour" btw, is a myth. No such a thing as a "hybrid dog." All dogs are the same species. Heterosis is the theory, and in dogs it has proven to be false. In theory, mixing breeds (heterosis) will result in progeny that retains the best traits of both parents/breeds. In reality, that is not often the case as regression is much more likely than progression. (ask any ethical breeder of purebred dogs how amazingly difficult it is to improve and then retain improvement in a breed)

The healthiest dogs come from carefully screened breedings done by ethical breeders who know their pedigrees backwards, forwards and inside out carefully screening for genetic health issues.

The "doodle" craze, as well as many other "designer dog" crazes, is a money driven fad with the best interests of the pocketbook, not the dogs, in mind.

B33CPE · Mar 9, 2006

BudgetsDad said:

I have used the word mutt alot in this thread because mutt means a dog consisting of two or more breeds, So explain why that is pejorative. i have a mutt and i love her. We arent against the designer mutts that are being made, we are against the people who are making them. And i cant believe that a person would pay so much for a mutt, Sorry i mean "mixed breed", seeing as every "mixed breed" i have ever had was free and was accidentaly created. This thread is getting crazy, I started it because i was angry with the people who are intentionally bringing more "mixed breed" dogs into the world just because they can make so much money from them. It had nothing to do with comparing shelter dogs to foster kids, or being pejorative to mutts, or trying to create new breeds. These Breeders who make mixed breeds on purpose are greedy, money hungry people. And i feel that it is wrong to purposely make mixed breeds, sorry if you dont agree, but oh well.

B33CPE · Mar 9, 2006

Serena said:

I seen this and had to quote it because i totally agree. I respect people who responsibly breed pure breeds because we need these breeders to keep the standard and health of pure breeds. (some people on here dont agree with any breeding, and thats cool)

RedyreRottweilers · Mar 9, 2006

AMEN from the choir

Mordy · Mar 9, 2006

I know the word "mutt" has a bad connotation for some people, but that's just personal perception.

I love my mutt and think it's cute. We even have a big event here in L.A. every year called "Nuts for Mutts".

http://www.nutsformutts.com/
(Any California people reading this - I'll be there with a group of folks. Wanna meet up??

)

jess2416 · Mar 9, 2006

Mordy said:

I am looking at that website now.. I wish we had things like that here, its looks like it would be so much fun to be at

tempura tantrum · Mar 10, 2006

I'd like to add my two cents to this discussion as well.

First of all- in regards to the word "mutt," I don't find it offensive either- I just see it as a definition. I adore mixed-breed dogs, and I definitely like the word "mutt" a LOT better than "labradoodle," "schnoodle," "cockapoo," or whatever cutesy new flavor-of-the-week name irresponsible breeders come up with next.

Like most people here, I'm not a huge fan of the purposeful mixing of breeds. Most of the time, it's done for all the wrong reasons, with little or no thought toward why said lines are being used (besides how much money the pups can be sold for). That being said, there are some cases where I *do* feel that it can be acceptable to either breed mixes or "create" a new breed:

For example, serious mushers looking for both speed and endurance in their dogs breed Alaskan Huskies. These aren't purebred dogs by any means, but a mix of Sibe, and several other breeds added for increased speed (I've heard of everything from Border Collies to Salukis). If you watch the Iditarod ALL the dogs are Alaskan Huskies- no one *really* serious about winning mushes with purebred Siberians. These dogs are being bred for a *purpose.* They are serious working animals, and their breeders put a TON of thought into the matches they make- crappy temperaments and crappier structure will quickly break down a racing dog. Furthermore, dogs with temperaments or conformation unsuitable for racing are put into pet homes after thorough interviewing of the applicants, just like any responsible purebred breeder would do. To my mind, there is a huge difference between someone like this, and someone breeding "maltipoos."

Anyone saying that purebred owners or those of us involved in the dog show world (as I am), are just "snobby and elitist" has never talked to any of us when we wax poetic on the virtues of the Alaskan Husky. It's not that we don't like mixed breeding- it's that we don't like seeing it done poorly, and unfortunately, the majority of it (the majority of purebred breeding as well), is.

I'd also like to bring up the point that I, and many people involved in the fancy, have nothing against the creation of a new breed either. I feel if people can find a niche that hasn't been filled, and feel that they can do so responsibly, that this is perfectly acceptable. Look at the Silken Windhound. This is a VERY new breed, yet the breeders are doing everything right. It is a medium-sized, long-coated sighthound (a niche which was previously unfilled). They have a studbook, a breed club, they're ALREADY holding specialty shows, and their dogs are ALREADY breeding true. They're incredibly typey animals, and I look forward to seeing them gain a bit of popularity.

This breed is *far* younger than the "Labradoodle," yet they've already managed to accomplish what the the "doodle" people can't. And why is that? Because most of the Labradoodle people realize that if they stop breeding F1s, their main selling point the (nonexistant) hybrid vigor, is straight out the window. Most of them don't *want* Labradoodles to really become a breed. You can tell they aren't serious about it just by the way these animals are named. Look at the difference in naming: the cutesy "oodle" combo name, versus "Silken Windhound." It's obvious the people in Silkens wanted the breed to be evaluated on its own merits, not seen as a reminder of what it's ancestors were. Otherwise I'm sure it would've been the "Affy-wip" or something equally ridiculous.

bubbatd · Mar 10, 2006

Maybe we could come up with a new name instead of Mutt. A Mixy ?

jess2416 · Mar 10, 2006

bubbatd said:

or mixer

fastpitchchic · Mar 10, 2006

How about blended?

bubbatd · Mar 10, 2006

I like that !!

bubbatd · Mar 10, 2006

..... made me think ... Roux ?!

BudgetsDad · Mar 10, 2006

Serena said:

I really can't beleive you don't see the contradiction. Inherant in this statement is a disdain for mix-breeds and/or a prejudicial committment to an idea that is not based in clear science. You point to one researcher. But there is nothing like a consensis on this issue.

Whats with all the _______doodles?

Walks into Mordor

Active Member

Moderator

Active Member

F150 and a .30-06

New Member

New Member

Clicker Extremist

New Member

New Member

RedyreRottweilers

Guest

Quigleyfied

Who woulda thought

Shiba Inu Slave

Moderator

Who woulda thought

fastpitchchic

Guest

Moderator

Moderator

New Member