Whats with all the _______doodles?

[BudgetsDad]

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.

I can agree with what you say. My problem is lots of people seem to have the fixation on "mixed breeds" rather than unethical breeders. and when you call them on it, they backpeddle to a more liberal sounding position.

 

[JennSLK]

Saying you dont like mixed breeds and saying you dont like people breeding them are totally different.

But if you choose to suport puppy mills and kill shelters then be my guest!

 

[JennSLK]

I can agree with what you say. My problem is lots of people seem to have the fixation on "mixed breeds" rather than unethical breeders. and when you call them on it, they backpeddle to a more liberal sounding position.

True.
I do not suport mixed breed breeders because they are BYB. I do not suport BYB that breed purebreds either

 

[BudgetsDad]

Saying you dont like mixed breeds and saying you dont like people breeding them are totally different.

But if you choose to suport puppy mills and kill shelters then be my guest!

It really is the same thing, because in your statement mixed breeds are considered inferior. And frankly, the shelters are full of pitbull mixes (another issue). I don't see any labridoodles in the shelters.

And BTW, there is only one purebred dog. It's called a wolf.

 

[JennSLK]

Personaly I LOVE mixes.

But I also love dog shows and am training agility with the head coach for the Canadian agility team. Neither of these alows muts, so yes I have purebreds.

I foster mixes.

I, however HATE people who purposly breed mixed dogs.

The purpose of breeding a purebred is for the show ring, yes not all of them make it, but they have a purpose.

BYB are in it for $$$

 

[BudgetsDad]

Personaly I LOVE mixes.

But I also love dog shows and am training agility with the head coach for the Canadian agility team. Neither of these alows muts, so yes I have purebreds.

I foster mixes.

I, however HATE people who purposly breed mixed dogs.

The purpose of breeding a purebred is for the show ring, yes not all of them make it, but they have a purpose.

BYB are in it for $$$

The overwhelming purpose of breeding a dog (purebred or mix) is for companionship. Purebreds and mixes are equally good for that.

 

[BudgetsDad]

Personaly I LOVE mixes.

But I also love dog shows and am training agility with the head coach for the Canadian agility team. Neither of these alows muts, so yes I have purebreds.

I foster mixes.

I, however HATE people who purposly breed mixed dogs.

The purpose of breeding a purebred is for the show ring, yes not all of them make it, but they have a purpose.

BYB are in it for $$$

When I open up the Penny Saver, the VAST MAJORITY of the $200 dogs I see are advertised as purebreds. And these people are not BYBs?

 

[FoxyWench]

It really is the same thing, because in your statement mixed breeds are considered inferior. And frankly, the shelters are full of pitbull mixes (another issue). I don't see any labridoodles in the shelters.


in the shelter just down from me there are currently 6 labridoodles, all of which ended up in the shelter when thier $2000+ hypoalergenci dog wasnt quite so hypoalergenic (that is actually the story of 5of the 6 labridoodles in the shelterall from different people and all from different "breeders"

theres also 4 cockerpoos, a goldendoodle, 2 chidoodles and 6 other poodle mixes...
and only 1 pit and 1 pit mix...

and yes most of those advertised in pennysaver ARE BYB's and there are bky's of purbred dogs out there noones debating that fact, what is the fact is ive NEVER (beyond the people who origionally created the breed in australia as a hypoalergenic seeing eye dog (which has already stated fell through when it turned out 50% shed as bad as their lab halves) met a responsible doodle breeder...all the adds ive seen are misleading stating all their pups are hypoalergenic, and al the pups will have all the GOOD points of their parents and ALL the pups are anything from $1000-$5000 *YES those numbers are correct!) when infact they cant guarrentee anything...there making money of their "desighner" dogs, lying to thier customers and their brood bitches just produce and produce, theres at least 2 that advertise they have 2 females and have at least 4 litters availabel throughout the year (this means those poorgirls are being bred EVERY heat...why? becuase people who dont know any better are willing to spend thousands of dollars to purchase a dog thats VERY falsley advertised...
and BELIVE me I HATE purebred BYB's too...but thats an entirely different evenings rant...at least with Pedigree dogs, there are ethical breedersout there trying to do whats right. doodle breeders arein it for the money...
i mean think about it $5000 for a puppy, SOMEONES making a profit on that one.

i also disagree with people breeding "teacup" chihuauas and charginf thousands, and people breeding "Teacup" yorkies and charging thousands and people breeding ANYTHING for the sheer desire to make money...

i breed chihuahuas because i love the breed and want to help keep the standard true and correct, i want to etter the breed AND produce wonderfull chihuahuas that the world can enjoy that are true to type and prime examples of the breed...i have yet to meet an ethical breeder of ANY breed who makes aprofit on the puppies theyve sold...money should NEVER be the focus of ANY breeder. and from everything ive seen of doodles....good and bad (dont get me wrong they make great pets for the right people and if rescued from a shelter or adopted from an accidental litter for a minimal fee.) but all ive ever seen of those that breed them...all they see is those shiney dollar sighns...

 

[JennSLK]

When I open up the Penny Saver, the VAST MAJORITY of the $200 dogs I see are advertised as purebreds. And these people are not BYBs?

They are BYB. With the occasional exception for different reasons, a RESPONSIBLE purebred breeder has a waiting list, and all puppies are sold before they are born.

Never once did I say there wasnt purebred BYB

 

[Fran27]

I can agree with what you say. My problem is lots of people seem to have the fixation on "mixed breeds" rather than unethical breeders. and when you call them on it, they backpeddle to a more liberal sounding position.

You really haven't read the thread have you?

It really is the same thing, because in your statement mixed breeds are considered inferior. And frankly, the shelters are full of pitbull mixes (another issue). I don't see any labridoodles in the shelters.

And BTW, there is only one purebred dog. It's called a wolf.

Again, learn to read.

And there are tons of poodle mixes and all other kind of mixes in shelters. www.petfinder.com is your friend.



Frankly, I don't know why I'm wasting my time, people just never get it no matter how many dozens of time we try to explain

 

[B33CPE]

I can agree with what you say. My problem is lots of people seem to have the fixation on "mixed breeds" rather than unethical breeders. and when you call them on it, they backpeddle to a more liberal sounding position.

You dont make sense, everyone on this thread is against the breeders, not the animals. You obvoiusly dont pay attention becuase almost everyone on here says they love mutts and some even have them. There is nothing liberal about it. Every breeder that purposely makes mutts is unethnical, in my opinion. BTW im not going to stop saying mutt because some crazy people think that it is racist or whatever.

All the people on this thread that are pro-doodle breeding cant just give in to the fact that other people can have opposite opinions on it. I love my mutt to death. I never realized what a stong fan base the mix breeders had. no wondering they keep breeding and selling these dogs so expensive.

 

[bubbatd]

I agree e.g. placing ads....my waiting list was always longer than my # of pups.

 

[FoxyWench]

yup i too agree any good breeder has owners lined up for the puppies before their even born...

my female chis not even due to come into heat untill may and even then being her first breeding it might not be sucessfull and yet ive already got a waiting list of 20 people all wanting puppies, all of which already screaned, references checked ect...

 

[BudgetsDad]

Every breeder that purposely makes mutts is unethnical, in my opinion.

Bold (and pretty prejudicial) statement. Can you back that up?

 

[BudgetsDad]

You really haven't read the thread have you?



Again, learn to read.

And there are tons of poodle mixes and all other kind of mixes in shelters. www.petfinder.com is your friend.



Frankly, I don't know why I'm wasting my time, people just never get it no matter how many dozens of time we try to explain

I haven't resorted to insulting you.

 

[BudgetsDad]

You really haven't read the thread have you?



Again, learn to read.

And there are tons of poodle mixes and all other kind of mixes in shelters. www.petfinder.com is your friend.



Frankly, I don't know why I'm wasting my time, people just never get it no matter how many dozens of time we try to explain

I did look on petfinder. Can't find many Labradoodles. I don't know any breeders of Labradoodles, so I can't comment on whether they are ethical or not, but it shoots holes in your theory. There are just as many purbred Labs on petfinder as mixes.

The point is ... there is no consensus in the scientific community on the issue. Many will tell you mixed is good. Maybe they are wrong, maybe they are right. But the current ideology now is apparently that you should not mix. And those who do are evil incarnate. It's a mob mentality that doesn't allow for dissent. I personally find it extremely arbitrary. In the end, it doesn't matter what the current fashion is, rather hard scientific data and repeated studies by many researchers.

 

[Fran27]

Bold (and pretty prejudicial) statement. Can you back that up?

Yep. Read the thread.

I did look on petfinder. Can't find many Labradoodles. I don't know any breeders of Labradoodles, so I can't comment on whether they are ethical or not, but it shoots holes in your theory. There are just as many purbred Labs on petfinder as mixes.

What theory? You said you couldn't find any labradoodle on petfinder, and I said there are some. That's not a theory, it's a statement. Nobody claimed that there are no purebreds on petfinder.

http://search.petfinder.com/petnote/displaypet.cgi?petid=5885740
http://search.petfinder.com/petnote/displaypet.cgi?petid=5918720
http://search.petfinder.com/petnote/displaypet.cgi?petid=5923816
http://search.petfinder.com/petnote/displaypet.cgi?petid=5904671

And that's only a few.

The thing is, it's not about science here. It's about the fact that millions or dogs get killed every year and that as such adding more dogs to the population is downright cruel. Breeds were made for a purpose, and to keep that purpose it's ok to breed purebreds, but *only* when it's done to improve the breed (which is maybe 5% of breeders frankly). It's never been a debate about mutt vs purebred. Both are killed equally in shelters by lack of homes. The only difference is that purebreds are bred for a purpose, while mutts are bred just to make money, which is why it's unethical and selfish to breed them in the current conditions.

But again it's been said probably 10 times in the thread already.

 

[BudgetsDad]

Yep. Read the thread.




What theory? You said you couldn't find any labradoodle on petfinder, and I said there are some. That's not a theory, it's a statement. Nobody claimed that there are no purebreds on petfinder.

http://search.petfinder.com/petnote/displaypet.cgi?petid=5885740
http://search.petfinder.com/petnote/displaypet.cgi?petid=5918720
http://search.petfinder.com/petnote/displaypet.cgi?petid=5923816
http://search.petfinder.com/petnote/displaypet.cgi?petid=5904671

And that's only a few.

The thing is, it's not about science here. It's about the fact that millions or dogs get killed every year and that as such adding more dogs to the population is downright cruel. Breeds were made for a purpose, and to keep that purpose it's ok to breed purebreds, but *only* when it's done to improve the breed (which is maybe 5% of breeders frankly). It's never been a debate about mutt vs purebred. Both are killed equally in shelters by lack of homes. The only difference is that purebreds are bred for a purpose, while mutts are bred just to make money, which is why it's unethical and selfish to breed them in the current conditions.

But again it's been said probably 10 times in the thread already.

Read what? I read it, there is no proof that all people who breed mixes are bad people. Just your opinion that I am supposed to accept as proof. And if I don't accept it as word of God, I am not reading.

 

[BudgetsDad]

Yep. Read the thread.




What theory? You said you couldn't find any labradoodle on petfinder, and I said there are some. That's not a theory, it's a statement. Nobody claimed that there are no purebreds on petfinder.

http://search.petfinder.com/petnote/displaypet.cgi?petid=5885740
http://search.petfinder.com/petnote/displaypet.cgi?petid=5918720
http://search.petfinder.com/petnote/displaypet.cgi?petid=5923816
http://search.petfinder.com/petnote/displaypet.cgi?petid=5904671

And that's only a few.

The thing is, it's not about science here. It's about the fact that millions or dogs get killed every year and that as such adding more dogs to the population is downright cruel. Breeds were made for a purpose, and to keep that purpose it's ok to breed purebreds, but *only* when it's done to improve the breed (which is maybe 5% of breeders frankly). It's never been a debate about mutt vs purebred. Both are killed equally in shelters by lack of homes. The only difference is that purebreds are bred for a purpose, while mutts are bred just to make money, which is why it's unethical and selfish to breed them in the current conditions.

But again it's been said probably 10 times in the thread already.

You say it's not about mixed versus purebred. Yet you also say all people who breed mixed as bad people.

How am I supposed to understand what you are saying, if you don't?

 

[JennSLK]

People who breed mixes are bad people, in MY OPINION.

Show me more than 10 mixed breeders who do the apropteate health testing on their breeding dogs. ANY mix.