Bloody Bourke!!!

[imported_Cassie]

Here is an interesting article - written by biologists who actually really study genetics.

Where did this idea come from that in the beginning all dogs were purebreds and everything else since then that is not pure is a mutt? it is highly unlikely that the dog evolved from wolves into one of our modern purebreds and then later degenerated into a mongrel....purebreds are not seperate species...Sexual isolation from the greater population of dogs leads almost inevitably to dire consequences for those dogs that get trapped in a pure breed, another severe problem with locking dogs up reproductively is the problem of inbreeding.
By not getting a purebred your chances of getting a healthy dog are greatly increased. ...crossbreeding ensures health and energy that are known as hybrid vigor...

Many dog breeders have poduced a contrary effect in trying to preserve breeds. They treat breeds as if they were a species, and sexually isolate small populations of them in an attempt to preserve their historic, ideal phenotype. Sexual isolation from the greater population of dogs leads almost inevitably to dire consequences for those dogs that get trapped in a purebred. Indeed, the idea of trying to modify a breed's behavior into a more tractable type of pet, while holding its form constant, seems not to work very well. Holding the size and shape constant while changing the behavior might well be one of those developmental constraints that don't work, like trying to get ocular overlap and robust drooling in the same animal.
Another severe problem with locking dogs up reproductively is the problem of inbreeding. Once the stud book is closed on a breed, it is unbelievable how fast thay become inbred. I was sitting in a review session at The Seeing Eye in New Jersey one afternoon with John Pollak, a geneticist from Cornell, and I asked how fast inbreeding will occur once a population is isolated. A true teacher, he led me through a little exercise.
How many founding sires do you start with? if you have just one, than all the first generation will be siblings or half-siblings. By the second generation, all breedings are inbreedings. If there are two founding sires (unrelated), then the third generation is inbred. So he developed a formula for me to go home and practice with. If I started with five hundred unrelated founding males when I closed the stud book, then by the tenth generation I will start inbreeding. That could be only fifteen years after the stud book was closed.
If I created a breed of dogs in 1900 (that is, closed the stud book) with 500 males, currently that breed would have been inbreeding for eighty-five years. They are caught in a genetic trap. And what can possibly be done about it? open the stud book.
The pure breed story is worse than that. Starting with five hundred males, I get ten good breeding years if I use all the males equally. If the members of the breed club begin to breed only to the champions, then the inbreeding is accelerated. If the stud book closed on five hundred males but every female is bred to this year's grand champion, then inbreeding starts next year. Is it such a wonder, then, that our purebred dogs have so many breed-specific diseases, increasing all the time? Consider the advice of the experts who counsel breeders to eliminate from their breeding programs those dogs that exhibit retinal atrophy or hip dysplasia. The inbreeding coefficient increases more rapidly. The breed is in big trouble.
The old-fashioned breeders who continue to create dogs by cross-breeding for specific, specialized tasks, like the lurcher breeders of Europe or the sled dog drivers, are, by and large, disdained by pure breeders. I have been chastised many times by newcomers to the world of the uncommon guardian breeds. How could I possibly crossbreed the pure white Maremmano-Abruzzese with those gray and black Sarplaninac? Well, I say, in the first place, my understanding of the transhumance leads me to believe that the Maremmano-Abruzzese and the Sarplaninac are not pure breeds at all. And in the second place, improvement of plants and animals, when performance is the goal, relies on crossbreeding and hybridization. The ability of agriculture to produce the quantity and quality of animals and plants it does depends heavily on crossbreeding and hybridization. The successful techniques of cross-breeders of working dogs are practically unheard of outside of their fields. What purebred breeders forget is that golden retrievers and every other modern breed are poducts, originally, of crossbreeding. That is why they have been good dogs....at least in the beginning, they had the health and energy that are known as hybrid vigor.
Surely we owe dogs more than tightly restricted lives and distorted body shapes. Surely we can give up the eugenics of the pure, the perfect dog, and create instead a population of well-adapted, healthy pet dogs. In my wildest dream, I imagine people who have given up the "What kind of dog should I get?" question and gone to "I would like to make a dog for this task"
During the past one hundred years, hobby breeders have taken the working-sporting breeds and bred them specifically for the household market. I understand that throughout history breeders have bred miniature and gargantuan forms of dogs simply for display: the bonsai-garden type of breeding. But few of our modern household breeds are much older than a hundred years. The "perfection" of breeds is coincidental with the interest in expositions in which owners or trainers submit their dogs to judges who decide which which dogs are superior in looks. Over the past hundred years, the hobby breeding program has succeeded quite well in isolating subpopulations of working-sporting breeds from their greater populations for the specific purpose of public display and sales to the household market. This is an important concept to understand. The modern hobby breeder specializes in a breed. A breed is a population of dogs that is mechanically isolated from all other dogs.
It also points up a very different process than the one producing pet or show dogs. A dog purchased from inbred stock (closed stud book), untested in the field for many generations, is the product of a breeding program (maybe) that has little to do with its working behavior. The expectation of the new owner is that the dog will be good because it is a purebred golden retriever."What kind of dog should I get?" "Get a golden retriever because they have a friendly nature and disposition, athletic ability, love of water, and natural instinct for hunting and retrieving".
That sounds ridiculous to a working-dog person, or to a population geneticist. Friendly disposition is genetic? Love of water is genetic? Athletic ability has something to do with golden color? Is the implication that all goldens have this same set of genes, and all these traits? Is there no variation in golden retrievers? Lord Tweedmouth (founding father of Golden's) had good dogs because he had a good breeding program that included a high percentage of crossbreeding and because he hired people to work those dogs from their youngest days and develop the best dogs. He liked to hunt, he liked to have the best hunting dogs, and he was proud of his eye for working dogs. And he culled the bad ones.
Increasingly, the modern household dog becomes a genetic prisoner trapped in an isolated population. With each succeeding generation the behavioral and physical misfits get eliminated from the gene pool while breeders try to hold on tho the ancestral form. But in each new generation we see a host of new genetic problems. Lists of breed-specific genetic diseases are now part of the professional and popular literature. And it is worse than that. Breeders and owners forget what the historical dog looked like. They select for the exagggerated form. They select for the longest face. They select for the really big ones. They select for the flattest face. The breeds end up with weird conformations. Each breed takes on an unnatural shape, becoming a freak of nature. They are loved the way the hunchback Quasimodo was loved-a dichotomy between the grotesque form and the honorable personality...As the decades go by, every part of the household dog's life is increasingly manipulated for the human host's benefit. The dog is capriciously manipulated for human pleasure. The more bizarre and exaggerated the animal is the more benefit it seems to confer. This recent breeding fad for the purebred dog is badly out of control. It appears that selection for the exotic is the goal, We are producing unhealthy freaks to satisfy human whims. This is terribly unfair to dogs.
The same reduction in gene diversity takes place when a breed club tries to select against hip dysplasia, retinal atrophy, and some other so-called genetic disease. Every time an animal is culled for genetic problem, the genetic variation in the closed population is further reduced. It's not just the bad genes that are affected, it is all the animal's genes. Any time there is selection for or against single characters, ie, "tame" or "hip dysplasia," then one must be prepared for the appearance of new or altered characters because of what Darwin called "the mysterious laws of correlation" Today the phenomenon is called pleiotropy, or saltation-the fact that more than one characteristic can be controlled by a single gene, and selection can result in unintended and unpredictable changes.
Many breeds are living to pay a terrible price for the temporal increase in population or the luxury of expensive food and care. It is not simply that the dogs have access to the kind of medical care that is given to humans, but that they have been bred so they need such care to survive. Breeds like the English bulldog are in a dead-end trap. There probably is not enough variation left to get them out of their genetic pickle. Unless the breed clubs open their stud books and and allow outside breedings, Bulldogs and the other breeds caught in these eugenic breeding practices are headed for extinction. The problem here is that unlike the wild counterpart becoming extinct because of habitat loss, these purebred individuals will increasingly suffer ill health. What is troublesome is that modern society seems to have little realization of what it is doing to dogs..owners don't seem to be disturbed about deformation....

[Aroura]

Ha, just found this in another forum!!!

Well, this weeks trading post was another eye opener again! Whilst browsing through, I noticed a couple of ads, well I should say I noticed the 'breeds'!! The ads have been taken directly from the trading post site www.tradingpost.com.au
Maltaliers (Maltese cross Cavaliers), as same on Burkes Backyard, micro-chipped, wormed and vaccinated, ready to go, late September, $650 CASTLE HILL
Pugaliers (Pug cross Cavalier), delightful temperament, microchipped, wormed, vaccinated, $650 CASTLE HILL
Cavoodles (Cavalier cross Poodle), microchipped, wormed, vaccinated, as seen on Burkes Backyard, $650 CASTLE HILL
Seems like the Cavalier has been busy!! these ads are all from the same person.
There is also another ad, their description? Maltese designer dogs.....
Just thought I would share.....

Pfft, what good is this guy bringing to the world? A bunch of millers breeding mutts and making $650 a pop for 'em!!! :o :evil:

Apparently the trading post (where these dogs were advertised) has banned ads selling Pit Bulls for no good reason, yet they allow these puppy millers to make a fortune through them by unscroupulous breedings and silly breeds that don't even exist!!! :evil: :evil: :evil:

[Aroura]

Good post Cassie, although I don't agree 100% with every thing it has said it raised some good points.
There are plenty of cross breeds in pounds in need of homes, the thing I disagree with is people breeding mutts and trying to sell them for massivly exaggerrated prices and pretending they will grow into some thing that in all likely hood they will not, and the people who make tv programmes promoting this nasty practice. Mutts play a good part in this world, I should know that, we have three mutts!!! But why encourage people to breed these mutts? There are enough mutts around already, if some one wants to know what their dog will grow in to they should buy a pure bred, if they want unpredictability and hybrid vigor, they should buy a normal mutt from a shelter at a reasonable price. A lot of these designer breeds are no healthier than pure breds anyway, you need to chuck in three or four breeds before you can actually see the change in hybrid vigor. Puddles (a so called ChiPoo who we got before I even knew about designer dogs!) is a good example of that. Hybrid vigor? Well if thats what her breeders were after they went very wrong some where down the track! Our pedigree boxer Lily is a lot healthier and has a lot less problems than our "ChiPoo", which supposevely is supposed to be energetic, non shedding and friendly... yes, and full of hybrid vigor!!! You really want hybrid vigor, by a proper mutt, go to the shelter and pick yourself up with too many breeds to count and you'll see hybrid vigor! Tessas an example of that... Kelpie, Blue Heeler, Pit Bull, Bull Terrier... god only knows what else!!! She is the healthiest kind of dog you can find, and she only cost $20!!! Plus we knew we were saving her life. None of this $700 bullshit you get when buying a crossbred mutt with a label.

[Guest Anonymous]

The problem I have with Don Bourke and his ilk (I have probably said this before) is that he, as a high profile media "personality" (gardener? puppy miller? ha!), has a RESPONSIBILITY to promote ethical breeding practices so as to educate the general public a little better. There is nothing ethical in producing puppies left right and centre, breeding bitches back to back, selling puppies who in all likelihood have probably not been tested for any health or personality problems, and selling them to the first person who opens their wallets. There is also nothing to be gained by making enemies of bodies such as the NSW Kennel Council- thus alienating the people who could get onto the show and maybe make an impact on the consequences of bad breeding and the benefits of good breeding. The other problem is that some people who watch Bourke on TV will not really do their own research- they will take his word for it that all blue heelers are nasty dogs who will bite at any given moment, all purebred dogs are genetically unstable, that all mutts are fantastic dogs and every family needs one (insert cross promotion for cockapoo, cavoodle etc here). I understand he can't be responsible for the actions of every idiot who watches his show and takes his advice seriously without considering another source of information, but it seriously gives me the sh*ts to see what he is doing. :roll:

[imported_Cassie]

Aroura,

[quote]You really want hybrid vigor, by a proper mutt, go to the shelter and pick yourself up with too many breeds to count and you'll see hybrid vigor! Tessas an example of that... Kelpie, Blue Heeler, Pit Bull, Bull Terrier... god only knows what else!!! She is the healthiest kind of dog you can find, and she only cost $20!!! Plus we knew we were saving her life. None of this $700 bullshit you get when buying a crossbred mutt with a label

Yes, I agree that there are too many dogs in this world period...I think being man we should clean up the messes we have made first before breeding more dogs...including reputable breeders....I also am in complete agreement....Mutts are wonderful.

A really good example of hybrid vigor is our horses...when I ask some one at the barn what kind of horse they have you'll usually hear some thing like 'Oh, hes a Morgan, quarter, appalosa...all cross breds or if you'd like to call them Mutts....horses are pretty healthy and you can show any cross you have...it doesnt matter! I am starting to see problems in the horse world where the "purebred" image is staring to over lap...the warm bloods I see are skitsy, nervous...do not make good trail horses, spook 10 times easier...hopefully the "purebred" image is not going to snake its way into the horse world like it has the dog world....

[Guest Anonymous]

:P Well what do you know! some one else with an education.
All of you purebred (questionable) dimwitts should go back to school and learn how to read. Then open a book and read. You might even learn something about breeding quality dogs.
It is obvious you only know what suits your needs. Keep breeding your pure bred MUTS. But you are going to loose out in the long run. Because most dog owners care about the well being of the dog and not the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$s or the name!
Betta get used to it! This is only the beginning!

It is very difficult to get a perfect purebred mut to breed with, because they dont exist. So stop kidding youeselves :P

[Aroura]

Luv me do, I suggest you take some of your own advice and then come back here and say what you need to say, because I'm sure once you do you will have an entirely different oppinion on things.

[StarFox]

Luv Me Do Kennals napisał(a):

:P Well what do you know! some one else with an education.
All of you purebred (questionable) dimwitts should go back to school and learn how to read. Then open a book and read. You might even learn something about breeding quality dogs.
It is obvious you only know what suits your needs. Keep breeding your pure bred MUTS. But you are going to loose out in the long run. Because most dog owners care about the well being of the dog and not the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$s or the name!
Betta get used to it! This is only the beginning!

It is very difficult to get a perfect purebred mut to breed with, because they dont exist. So stop kidding youeselves :P

To be honest Luv Me Do Kennals I have no clue what you are trying to prove in your post. Are you trying to say that MUTTS (by the way it's MUTTS with 2 T's) are better then pure Breeds? Are you trying to say that mutts are the new wave of things to come?

Well can you please explain to me why you are so against pure breeds? You come here with guns blazing calling people dimwitts and expect what?

I am adamantly against these so called "new' breeds (i.e. labradoodles, yorkie-poo or whatever un-imaganative name that people come up with). I don't think we need these "new" breeds for any reason except for the way they look. There is no use for them..I mean we use german shepherds for...herding, police work, scent work and many other things. We use Retrivers for ...retriving items like foul and other game bird. And we use Labradoodles for...umm hmm..uhh...err....shoot NOTHING!

These new mixes have the same problems as pure breeds do...so why do people still breed them? They are not trying to come up with some new wonderful breed of dog that can do all. If you want a mutt then go to the pound and get one..don't breed two dogs together just because you can. Now don't get me wrong, I love mix breeds in fact I have one...he also has server Hip Dysplacia. I also love pure breeds but they can come with there fair share of problems too.

I do not think that people breeding labradors and poodels together are trying to breed dogs with better temperments or health problems. Because lets think about this...lets say that a very well meaning person decided to breed a pure German shepherd and a pure golden together..wouldn't they have the same helth problems as there parents? I would much rather get a pure breed german shepherd from a great breeder that knows the past history of the dogs liniage (sp?) then some new labradoodle breeder.

I love mutts..I always will. I will most likely always have mutts as my dogs but I will always get my mutts from the pound. Never will I get one from a breeder.

But your right..it is hard to get the perfect "Mutt" to breed. So why don't you stop kidding YOURSELF and stop promoting something that is unnecissary.

[Aroura]

Well said StarFox!!!
I'm going down in less than two weeks to buy a pure bred dog for $400, he is not show quality, but he has good lines, has been health tested and is on a desexing contract. People who really care about breeding do it for the betterment of the breed, you can't do that when you are randomly breeding dogs to produce "new" breeds, as there is no breed to make better! I'm buying a pure bred Papillon because I want a pure bred Papillon - always have. If I just wanted a companion and didn't care much for a particular temprement or look, I would have gone to the pound and would save myself a few 100 dollars and had the satisfaction of saving a life.
Just because purebreds all started out as mutts doesn't mean that thats what they still are, they have been selectivly breed for 100s of years, designer breeds have not and are no different in predictability than those dogs in the pound who's heratige is not known.
Have some compassion Luv me do, stop breeding these mutts so that these poor dogs at the pound have a greater chance at life.

[Aonir]

Please don't let these guys correcting your english to be insulting. My sis does it to me all the time :roll:

I like Mutts. BUT I don't believe in breeding mutts on purpose. The Cockapoo and Labradoodle is just people trying to get $ and make a breed that probably shouldn't exist. They may be cute, but isn't there enough dog breeds out there?

[courtnek]

Ok just my take.....

The statement that "all dogs did not start out as purebred" is basically
incorrect. Genetically, all dogs started out as wolves....Purebred wolves...
they mated only with each other, and carried on the same genetic lines
from generation to generation. They did not mate for a certain look, or
size, or ease of coat care. They mated for strength, speed, intelligence and
pack allegiance. Harshly said, but the ones who didnt cut it, died. period.
and the lower ranks are not allowed to mate at all. Only the alpha, and
occasionally beta, couples were allowed to mate. This is natural genetics;
based on "survival of the fittest". Yet it is what man originally based
his genetic tampering on. Take the best traits of one dog and mate it to the best traits of the other, and try to come up with a litter of as close to perfect dogs, suited to their purpose, as they could.

Purebred dogs originally were bred that way for a reason. It was much less looks back then than it was a job that needed to be done.
Labrador Retrievers were not originally from Labrador. They were from
Newfoundland, and are a cross of Newfies and possibly(?) another water
dog from Labrador. No one knows for certain. Their purpose? To swim
out to the fishing boats and retrieve the fish nets, then swim them to shore where a team was waiting for them to collect the fish. So I guess this was a form of retrieving, yes, but they did not start out as bird dogs.
Because of the work they had to perform, the were bred with short, oily coats to protect them from the cold water, thick massive heads and chests, so that the heavy fishing nets could be attached to their chests
and be dragged through the water and the thick neck to protect it from
being damaged by the weight. Originally, the kept their dew claws
(for climbing up on shore) and had slightly webbed feet to assist in swimming. This is just ONE dog, but you'll find that all of the original
purebred's had a purpose, a job to do.

Over time, man kept breeding and rebreeding, trying to perfect the breeds
and they formed all of the societies known to day to keep the dog true to
form. However, with few exceptions, most of the dogs no longer do the work they were originally intended for (there are exceptions, of course. Labs are still bred for hunting and field trials in some places). So we are
keeping them purebred for different reasons, now perhaps for temperament, or guarding capabilities. After all GSD's originally guarded
sheep from wolves, not police from criminals....

My point here is that I have no problem with someone trying to "create" a dog to serve a purpose (I am a big fan of the Golden Lab, for Assistance work) and if someone wants a "cavoodle" for temperament and coat, that's fine. HOWEVER!!!! A dog is not truly "purebred" until it has multiple
generations of litters behind it. Like 60 years or so. I think it is wrong to
cross breed these dogs, call them purebreds, and sell them at outrageous prices, when the gene pool has not even begun to be sorted out yet.

Justs my take. I have to agree with the others who believe that these so-called "breeders" are not just in it for the quick dollar.
Genetically, these dogs are not yet "purebred" and wont be for many many years.

[Guest Mutts4Me]

I agree with Courtnek. As I mentioned in a previous post, I don't think that the practice of cross breeding is a new thing. Our purebreds today are descended from mutts, mixed breeds bred for specific characteristics (and I agree that, frankly, most are no longer used for their original purpose anymore). Ideally, this is what the breeders we're discussing here would be trying to do as well. They're trying to create a "breed" of dog that suits certain situations, certain people, certain areas. In a basic sense, I don't think that this is wrong.

What I do think is wrong is the fact that, as Courtnek said, it would take many generations and many years of breeding and selecting the best dogs to create a pure strain of these dogs. But what happens to the thousands of puppies that are not selected to carry on the line? They're mutts, and they're either going to be sent to the pound, or they're going to be pawned off as ideal dogs, as is the case with these Cavdoodles, when they're nowhere near perfected. The people purchasing these Cavdoodles are in essence getting experimental puppies, and not even the best ones! (As the best puppies would, in an ideal breeding program, be kept to be bred)

And even if, years in the future, good, decent breeders have perfected a line of "pure" Cavdoodles (or whatever), are they going to be recognized as a breed by the kennel clubs? If not, then there's going to be no way of proving parentage. So (and I know I said this previously) there'd be nothing stopping some BYB from taking a cavalier and a poodle, breeding them, and cashing in, charging just as much as someone who'd dedicated their life to perfecting the line, and actually had quality dogs.

My main concern, though, are the mutts. The discarded ones sent to a shelter because they don't meet standards. The mutts already in the shelter who have even less of a chance of gettnig a home for every other puppy sent in, especially a "fad" type puppy, like a Cockapoo or (in the future) a Cavadoodle.

I guess there's no easy answer.

[Aroura]

If Luv Me Do Kennels is still reading this post, which I doubt, I would like to point out the following:

(1) It is against forum rules to name call. Please refrain from doing so in the future.
(2) Dimwit is spelled with one t, 'mutt' is spelled with two t's, and the word is 'lose' not 'loose.' I find it highly ironic that you suggest we read. Perhaps you should read some yourself, or at least get spellcheck, before you call names.
(3) Review the forum rules before posting again. And be polite. We don't tolerate excessive rudeness here.
(4) Have fun.

Haha, great post Mei Mei!!! :D
So straight to the point, you tell 'em girl :wink:

[courtnek]

What I do think is wrong is the fact that, as Courtnek said, it would take many generations and many years of breeding and selecting the best dogs to create a pure strain of these dogs. But what happens to the thousands of puppies that are not selected to carry on the line? They're mutts, and they're either going to be sent to the pound, or they're going to be pawned off as ideal dogs

THANK YOU!! This NEEDED to be said...

A GOOD breeder will realize that these animals are not "breed standard"
(not capable of prolonging the traits in the breed they want to encourage)
and would be sold as pets. As pets, they should not be bred, and not encouraged to create more puppies like them. The problem is the definition of "good".... some breeders just dont care....
A GOOD breeder will require neutering of these pets, so that they dont procreate....to keep the line pure...in a perfect world...
there are to manu BYB's to make this a perfect world/setup, unfortunately....

[Ickle]

Last time I heard of labradoodles in the UK they were being bred for guide dogs for the blind for people who were allergic to dog hair
don't if it came to anything
Ickle

[bk_blue]

Yes you're right Ickle they bred labradoodles here in Aust for the same thing... but they seem to be more popular as "designer" dogs now (my auntie has one, Lulu, and she is GORGEOUS :angel: ).

[Ickle]

It seemed like a good idea at the time I saw two of them and as you say BK they were lovely dogs which were bred for a specific purpose.
Ickle

[courtnek]

They breed them here in the states too, for the same reason. Like I said, I have no problem with that. GOOD breeders look for dogs that dont have
a large quantity of animal dander, which causes allergies. There is some way to test for that, but I dont know what it is. I can completely understand the use for that (although the name LABRADOODLE just makes me cringe.....find a decent name please!!! even Labodle would be better!!! how about Nodandrador???? lol)

I understand, especially with Assistance dogs, the need to make the dog
as compatible with it's owner as possible. Alergies would definitely be an issue, so I cant say Labradoodles (I HATE that name!!!) are a bad thing.
This is a dog being bred for a specific purpose, and I wont fight that, or say it's bad. But it's still not a purebred. Not yet.

[Aroura]

My main problem with Labradoodles is that although there are some breeding programmes out there where people are breeding dogs to a set standard (temprement, hypo allergenic) and have had an ongoing breeding programme for years, most Labradoodles are simply a Labrador and a Poodle chucked together, simply with the assumption that all the BEST qualitys will come through in the pup. IT JUST MAKES ME SO ANGRY!!! :evil: :evil: :evil:
The first labradoodle i saw was a rescue dog, it was fat, brown and had a curly coat - probably what labradoodles are supposed to be, but still at the pound all the same. Since then I have seen a variety of labradoodles, from dogs with labrador hair, that shed every where, hyper active, tall... all sorts of mixes, so how can you breed these dogs and pretend that you know what they will turn out like?
Although Labradoodles are the ONLY designer breed that I see a valid future in, I believe that 99% of their breeders have no clue what they are doing, nor do they really care :evil:

[courtnek]

The first labradoodle i saw was a rescue dog, it was fat, brown and had a curly coat - probably what labradoodles are supposed to be, but still at the pound all the same. Since then I have seen a variety of labradoodles, from dogs with labrador hair, that shed every where, hyper active, tall... all sorts of mixes, so how can you breed these dogs and pretend that you know what they will turn out like?
Although Labradoodles are the ONLY designer breed that I see a valid future in, I believe that 99% of their breeders have no clue what they are doing, nor do they really care

and I agree with all of that. It comes down to the breeder, always, in the end. But in defense of Labradoodle Breeders, the GOOD ones, they are trying to create a dog that can work with the disabled without issues.
And, unfortunately, there are bad breeders of every breed in the world.....
even the AKC and BCK recognized ones. I am a diabetic. At some point in my life, I could very well go blind. My father did. If that happened , I would want an Assistance Dog. Canes dont suit me, I could easily trust a
dog to guide me around. I would want a Golden Lab. The gentle, even disposition of the Golden, with the short hair of a lab. Less shedding,
less grooming (difficult for the blind) yet just as strong as a lab and just as gentle as a Golden. I owned one. Alex convinced me that this would be a good breed for the disabled. He was strong, thick chested (to pull a wheelchair if necessary)intelligent, friendly, gentle and calm. And he had been abused by his previous owners, it took a little time to make him trust me, but once he did he was as loyal as the sun rises every day...

so my original contention remains in place. If crossbreeding a dog for a specific purpose, then go for it. However, dont call it a purebred until IT IS...and that means passing the test of time.

[Horsefeathers!]

Ugh! This just made me remember some people I know (and despise) locally who saw some broadcast somewhere that said that people are paying $1500 for Labradoodles. These people are already breeding VERY poor Labs (white blazes on chests and feet, one extremely aggressive before being hit by a car, the rest are nervous as pregnant nuns), and were breeding very poor, mangy Cockers (one of them also killed by a car), but the lady made the statement that she was planning to get a Standard Poodle for Christmas for the sole purpose of cashing in on the Labradoodle craze. All they see is dollar signs. If they think anyone in this podunk town is going to pay $1500 for ANY dog, they're crazier than they look. I didn't hear one word about researching Standard Poodles, any attributes about them they like... no, just that they can get rich quick breeding these freaking mutts.

I have no problem with a well thought out breeding program, but people like this make me want to just slam my head on the ground repeatedly.

[Ickle]

As I understand it the people over here who breed these special dogs are closely connected with the Guide Dog for the Blind Charity & are well monitored to ensure that they are for breeding good temperament & correct allergy free coat.
I pray this is being done properly and that the money grabbing puppy farmers do not get in on this programme
Ickle

[courtnek]

I worked for a breeder/trainer many many years ago. He bred Golden Retrievers, and one of his assignments was for the Seeing Eye. Goldens were very popular guide dogs back then, the only problem being the
continual grooming necessary. The Seeing Eye (and Hearing Ear, etc)
contract with certain breeders to produce puppies for them. They have first pick of all the litters. I met a lady there (named Judy) who told me all about the Seeing Eye and how it works. They carefully check out all the credentials of the breeder, the dog records and how many of their puppies reach complete potential for the breed. Labs, Goldens and
certain Shepherds were the preferred breeds for Guide Dogs back then.

The dog has to be strong, healthy, intelligent and eager to please.

The problems were grooming, allergies, and basic fear of dogs, which the blind person had to deal with. Now, the Seeing Eye is trying to "develop" dogs (and they DONT call them pruebreds) so that the person needing the dog is both comfortable, and able to care for it. They were one of the
first to develop the "Golden Lab" because grooming is easier, and the dog has the physical strength of the lab, and the gentle personality of the Golden. They look for dogs that specifically meet those charateristics.
Same with the Labradoodle. That one is being bred specifically for allergy issues. The intelligence of both the lab and the poodle, the physical strength of the lab, and the hypo-allergenic coat of the poodle.

I dont think the BYB labradoodles will ever make it to the Seeing Eye, they are very critical and particular on which dogs they purchase. However, they are becoming a $$$$$$ for unscrupulous breeders, as everyone has said.

I still think we should change the name of the Labradoodle to Nodandrador
(no dander Labrador).

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[Lucky Chaos]

I still think we should change the name of the Labradoodle to Nodandrador
(no dander Labrador).

:lol: I agree the names they have now for labradoodles and others are horrible!

[courtnek]

Y'know, the owner could have ALOT of fun with that.....

"What kind of dog is that?" "Oh, HIM? he's a Nodandrador (noDANdrador).
He's a relatively select breed, bred specifically to be hypo allergenic,
and both intelligent and strong....he's my eyes y'know.....he SEES for me..."

People would be searching for "nodandradors" in no time....


8) 8) 8) 8)

I'm SOOOOOOO bad.....

:evilbat: