Pet Star/Mix-Breeds

[Nookie]

Now younger generations are with this mix nonsense.This girl about 8 or 9yrs. old called her dog a speagle.A spaniel/beagle mix :x I understand she loves her dog,and she's very responsible,but with all these breeds cockapoo,ect no wonder she's even in the game of naming mix-breeds.

[gunn akitadane]

I don't think their is anything wrong with someone wanting to give their mix-breed dog a cut name for the cross. As long as the person is not crossing these dogs for the financial gain, those people are the ones with problems, not someone who owns a mix-breed and calls it a mixture of the two breed names.

[Taurus and Jada]

To be perfectly honest, I do not agree with mixing breeds, but who am I to judge? My parents have a golden-doodle. Yhey love that dog more then mosty people love their kids! :o
Isn't that what it's really about when it comes right down to it? I know that there are lots of dogs in shelters that they could have rescued, but the same could be said about people who buy purebreds from breeders. Why didn't they rescue a dog?
Personally, I would never own a doodle of any kind, just as my mother would never own a pit or a presa which is what I have. But, they make each other happy, they love each other, and who are we to frown upon that?

[__crazy_canine__]

I dont think there was anything wrong with calling it a speagle but agreeing with that dog being mixed, if it was breed that way on purpose, then shame on her! Breeding anything other than purebreds, and not breeding responsibly of course, is just wrong. Dog overpopulation problems right now are getting out of control! I love mixed breeds but not purposely bred ones, only the ones born as strays or dumped.

[imported_Cassie]

To be perfectly honest, I do not agree with mixing breeds

I find this hilarious...where do you think our "purebreds' come from??? they were orginally crossbreeds or mixed breeds them selves...the only difference is our Purebreds are man made and have been sexully isolated from the greater population of dogs which causes a reduction in gene diversity which leads to genetic diseases.

[courtnek]

I just want a more dignified name than "Labradoodle...."

or Goldiedoodle....Retrieverpoo is definitely OUT.....

:o

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[Malamum]

Quote:
To be perfectly honest, I do not agree with mixing breeds


I find this hilarious...where do you think our "purebreds' come from??? they were orginally crossbreeds or mixed breeds them selves...the only difference is our Purebreds are man made and have been sexully isolated from the greater population of dogs which causes a reduction in gene diversity which leads to genetic diseases.

I can't speak for the person that posted but I don't agree with breeding crossbreeds either. Not because I think that crossbreeds are in anyway inferior, but it's the people's motives for breeding them that I don't agree with.

I know not all purebreed breeders are responsible but I believe that there is a gross lack of responsibility in most people who are breeding crossbreeds.

I understand that the concept of purebreeds is a human one but I think we have done enough - there is no need to be creating more breeds.

[imported_Cassie]

I can't speak for the person that posted but I don't agree with breeding crossbreeds either. Not because I think that crossbreeds are in anyway inferior, but it's the people's motives for breeding them that I don't agree with.

Of course crossbreeds are not inferior...actually it is healthy genetics to crossbreed...as for peoples motives for breeding...I often think the same thing every time I am at a dog show (which I have to attend them ALOT) when I see disabled GSD's hobbling around the rings with such angulated rear ends which actually deforms the dogs...I ask myself this, these dogs are being bred on purpose???? :o and they are being sold for a profit??? I couldn't imagine purchasing a deformed dog. I look around the show's at the different dogs and I am not impressed...kennel clubs are ruining dogs...they are breeding for freakish looks and deformed bodies, too much coat etc.

Our purebred dogs WERE good dogs at one time as they were constantly crossbred for working purposes. Alot of people who still work with their dogs (real work, not just field trials) will crossbred to keep a good working dog. I could go on, but, it would just bore every one.
IMO, no dog or pup should be sold for a profit. If people want to show their dogs etc. then so be it...show your dogs...but, just because your dog won a beauty pagent does not mean you should be allowed to sell the pups for a profit.

[Taurus and Jada]

Quote:
To be perfectly honest, I do not agree with mixing breeds


I find this hilarious...where do you think our "purebreds' come from??? they were orginally crossbreeds or mixed breeds them selves...the only difference is our Purebreds are man made and have been sexully isolated from the greater population of dogs which causes a reduction in gene diversity which leads to genetic diseases.

of course I realize that all purebred dogs are the product of crossbreeding all I was saying is that I don't necessarily think all the 'designer' breeds they are creating are neccessary, but as I stated in my original post, who am I to judge? If someone loves their dog what ever it is... I think thats all that matters.

[Malamum]

LOL Cassie, you only quoted the part of my post that you could pick apart and argue with. You seem to have left off that I did note that not ALL people who breed purebreeds are responsible - I am fully aware of that and I am also aware of the breed standards for some breeds being distorted to prefer looks over purpose, however I still fully believe that the percentage of responsible purebreed breeders far outweighs the number of responsible people crossing breeds.

We don't live in a perfect world, there are always going to be people who do what we consider the wrong thing. However just because you think that some purebreed breeders are doing something less than desirable, it doesn't mean that it should be ok for Billy-Bob to breed his ooodle to Betty-Jo's doodle just so they can get in on the latest craze of designer dogs.

[imported_Cassie]

Cassie can I ask....

Why do you even have pedigree dogs? You constantly criticise show breeders and dogs, infact I've never seen you type anything positive at all about them. Does your breeder even know you feel this way? I'm not trying to be nasty, it's something that has had me genuinely stumped for a while

.

Kiwi, I have been involved with purebred dogs for ALONG time over 30 years...this is why I am so bitter towards them, I have seen too much over the years. My work revolves around purebred dogs and all of my friends are so called reputable breeders. I do talk to them about the mess they are making with these dogs. I have mentioned to them that crossbreeding should be done to create better genetic health for these dogs. I didn't ask for the dogs that I have (the 4 Newfoundland dogs) my friend who breeds them placed them with me. I do not pay for food, vet bills, etc. they live with me for free. I was very upset when I found my starved dobie mix and all my breeder friends came down hard on me and stated I should have just left it where I found "it" :evil: if its not their breed then the dog should just be left to starve to death.
I do not look up to any of my breeder friends for what they are doing. Yes, they do genetic testing on all dogs up for breeding...does this stop unwanted genetic diseases...no. I have freinds who breed GSD's...it is a crime to see the dogs disabled and barely able to run and genetically fearful...and pups which are down on their pasturns and hopping around like bunny rabbits. Friends who are breeding fearful Golden Retrievers...actually in my line of work...I have been working directly with dogs for over 20 years, I have watched our Golden's go from nice stable dogs to horrible fearful dogs which act as though they have been beaten since puppyhood. I shudder when I see dogs with punched in faces barely able to breath properly.
My breeder friends know how I feel about what they are doing. They also know how I feel about dog shows and how stupid they are...they are judging for conformation...but, without having the behavior conformation included which is helping purebreds fall apart. In my circle of friends which include dog people they all know how I feel, my friends who deal with pets and breeds on a medical basis completely agree with me and how wrong purebred breeding programs are. My friends who breed are blinded to every thing I may say...they only care about winning in the next show...they are breeding for whats "hot" this year, they are not necessarily breeding for a well put together dog which could do its orginal job properly...I could only shudder to think of one of my friends Shepherds actually herding...it wouldn't be able to do it.
I used to feel just as every one else did and thought purebred breeders were doing the right thing...but, over the years I have seen TOO much and my eyes are wide open now. I have also done lots of research which confirmed my fears about purebreds.
I own 4 Newfoundland dogs, one has a genetic degenerate spinal disease-she is a champion in 2 countries and finished very quickly...of course you never know about this disease until later in life. I also own a male which has elbow displasia which is not a known genetic disease with Newf's...he is a champion in Canada, USA and Bermuda...and he is being campained this year :roll: my other male has problems with his rear...
So don't worry Kiwi, :wink: all my friends who are breeders know how I feel...I have even stated at the Newf speciality that they should throw a Lab into the Newf breeding program to help the breed.
Genetic diseases are basically man made in purebred breeding programs...you cannot keep a dog in a certain shape for too lone (especially a strange shape) without a genetic disorder popping up...and trying to get rid of that genetic problem will lead to other genetic problems.
Just because you don't agree with what your friends do...this does not mean they still cannot be your friends. Actually a few of my breeder friends are starting to actually listen to me and are agreeing with me. When you are kennel blind it takes a little longer to open your eyes.

[Guest Anonymous]

Here is an article to read about purebreds:

Genetic Disaster
Here is a quote from an article by one George Padgett in Dog World Magazine:


In my 33 years as a veterinarian, I talked to thousands of purebred dog breeders, and I have yet to find one whose goal is to produce blind or crippled dogs. Dogs, however, like people, are biological organisms and as such accumulate mutations over time that, for the most part, are negative. Unlike people, they also have matadors that is, dogs that are used extensively as studs producing hundreds and not so rarely, thousands of offspring in their lifetime. In some of the less populous breeds such as Sealyham and Dandie Dinmont Terriers registering 70 and 90 puppies per year, a single stud producing a hundred or so puppies in a lifetime could account for 5 to 10 percent the genetic makeup of the entire breed. What this means is that mutations not only occur in dogs as they do in people, but they readily spread across a breed.
The end result is that in dogs, unlike in people, genetic disease is common. A disease such as hip dysplasia, a degenerative disease of the hip joint occurs in more than 100 breeds with a frequency of 20 percent to 50 percent or higher in some of them. Progressive retinal atrophy, a degenerative retinal disease that develops at 2 to 5 years of age and leads to inexorable blindness, occurs in more than 50 breeds with a frequency of 5 percent or higher in many breeds. A dozen more diseases like this easily could be named. That is the situation as it exists in purebred dogs today, and it is the situation that purebred dogs, their breeders and their parent clubs face.

A quote from one Dr. Jeffrey Bragg:


Many breeds we used to think of as natural, hardy types - even tough Arctic animals like Samoyeds, Siberian Huskies and Alaskan Malamutes - are now routinely screened for four or five different genetically related problems. These include deep-seated, serious disorders: central-nervous-system problems such as epilepsy, and immune-system malfunctions such as autoimmune thyroiditis. In addition to hip dysplasia, we now worry about osteochondritis, elbow and patella dysplasia, half a dozen distinct eye problems, and more.



Purebreds Degrade with Each Generation
Furthermore, this problem of genetic degradation becomes worse and worse over time. The more generations a purebred line is kept purebred, i.e. the longer it is deprived of genetic diversity, the more the genetic defects accumulate. Purebreds are genetic genocide.




Why even breed purebreds in the first place? What is the advantage?
Purebred breeders claim that the advantage of purebreds is predictability -- being able to get a dog with the characteristics that you want because all dogs of that breed are very similar, i.e. you know what you are getting. However, this argument holds little weight because, for example, if you desire a small dog, then there is nothing stopping you from getting a small "mongrel" dog -- yes, mongrels come in small and large sizes and different colors etc as do humans. (By the way, humans are mostly mongrels, except for royal families.)

In fact, mongrels give you an even GREATER chance of getting a dog with the characteristics that you want because they have greater genetic diversity (they are more varied). The whole argument for purebreds is nonsensical -- if people want different choices in order to satisfy their various desires for what they want in a dog, then why are you making a breed where all the dogs are the same?? That is LIMITING the choice! Someone needs to turn the light on inside the brains of purebred breeders.

The REAL reason why purebreds exist is because in our past, aristocrats promoted racist notions that purity was superior. Ofcourse modern science makes a mockery of this notion.

I think that we should force purebred breeders to breed with their own family and cousins for several generations and then see how much they like it. And then when they start getting diseases like hip dysplasia, osteochondritis, autoimmune thyroiditis, etc etc, then they will know what it feels like to be a purebred.




Purebreds are Genetically Inferior
Previously, it was thought that purebred lines (whether in dogs, horses, or humans) were superior and desirable. However, there is now a wealth of scientific evidence to prove that not only is this notion wrong, but the opposite is true. Here is a quote from one Dr. Jeffrey Bragg:


The idea of the superior strain was that by "breeding the best to the best," employing sustained inbreeding and selection for "superior" qualities, one would develop a bloodline superior in every way to the unrefined, base stock which was the best that nature could produce. Naturally the purified line must then be preserved from dilution and debasement by base-born stock. There is no support for this kind of racism in the findings of modern genetics -- in fact, quite the opposite: population groups that are numerically limited and closed to new genetic inflow are now thought practically certain to be genetically inferior. Certainly towards the close of the nineteenth century it became embarrassingly obvious that the human aristocracies of Europe were degenerating rapidly under their own version of the "closed studbook."



Are cross-breeds healthier than purebreds?
Maybe, but the problem is that if you, for example, breed a purebred Maltese with a purebred Shih Tzu, the result is a cross-breed puppy, but that puppy is STILL the direct product of purebreds. The cross-bred puppy may inherit genetic problems from the purebred parents.

If you randomly selected 10,000 purebred dogs of different types of purebreds, and set them loose in a continent dedicated to them, and you allowed them to freely breed, the genetic diversity would slowly increase, and on average the sick and less healthy dogs would be less successful at breeding, and so via a combination of the processes of mixing genes (avoiding "purity") and natural selection, over time the genetic health of the population of dogs would improve. After 200 years, these multi-generation cross-breeds / mongrels would definitely be substantially healthier on average than the original purebreds.

So what I am saying is that simply cross-breeding a purebred with a different type of purebred is not sufficient to eliminate the genetic problems. However, if cross-breeding continues through the generations, over time the further you get away from the purebreds, the more the health increases.




Should I buy a cross-breed / mongrel?
Yes, my opinion is that people should buy cross-breeds or mongrels, and avoid purebreds. Although a first-generation cross-breed is not necessarily greatly more healthy than a purebred, the point is that you are sending a message to the purebred breeders that people want cross-breeds because ultimately they are more humane and ethical.




The Solution
It is simple: Stop breeding purebreds. Increase genetic diversity with inter-breeding between different breeds and avoid in-breeding. The problem won't go away overnight or in 1 generation, but over time the many years of damage caused by purebreds can be undone.




Summary
Purebreds have little or no advantages. Any minor advantages they might have are outweighed by their ever-increasing genetic defects. Breeding purebreds is inhumane and unethical because of the serious health problems. Ofcourse, this probably will not stop most purebred breeders because they are apparently more interested in profits and satisfying themselves than improving the health of their dogs/pets.

[courtnek]

while I agree with a lot of what Dr. Bragg has said, I also disagree with a lot of it.

Genetically, he is correct. "Closing the studbook", for people or animals, is an accident waiting for a place to happen. Genetic diversity is what makes mixes somewhat stronger. People and animals. However, natural selection no longer has its place in the decision...in the wild, genetically inferior animals, and usually their offspring, would die. Therfore, no more inferior offspring. Survival of the fittest is nature's Law. A wolf with hip dysplacia would be left to die, or killed outright by the pack. This insured that only the genetically strong would survive, and mate.

However, when man first started breeding dogs, it was for a specific purpose. That purpose was NOT to stand at Crufts and collect a BOB cup!
Herders had stamina, strength, fur that could withstand the weather, the "Stare" that Bordie Collies are so famous for....they bred these animals to do a task....If the Tri-tone-coloring wasnt perfect, they didnt care. The dog had to work. Lab's were bred crossing Newf's with (they think) another water dog from Labrador. The purpose was to design a smaller, more compact, less furry dog who's coat could withstand the cold newfoundland water, who's neck and chest was strong enough to drag fish nets to shore, and who's coat would dry out quickly. they were ALL black...
When the dog was moved to England for breeding, every once in a while a bitch would throw a yellow...so some recessive gene for yellow coloring was there. They started breeding for it. But the dogs were still working - their purpose was to retrieve waterfowl after the hunter shot them.

Nowadays, very few of our working dogs "work", herding dogs dont "herd",
retrievers arent out in the fields bringing back goose and duck....the majority of Alaskan Malamutes and Siberian Huskies will never run the Iditarod, or even pull a sled...

yet the fanciers wanted to keep them pure. At some point, the dog show was invented, and in my opinion, that's when it all went to hell....
Breeders are now breeding for "conformation"...not for "trial"...and heres
the best example I can give you. My Foxhound is "field bred", not "show
bred"...The breed has been split into two different categories!!!! She could run circles around, leap over, and leave a show Foxhound in the dust....
but she's not "pretty"....Her heads not "wide enough", her tail doesnt spin out perfectly (it's kinked, from hunting), she has her dewclaws still...

not conformation, no good in a show. Their original purpose is no longer being bred for. They are doing genetic plastic surgery on these dogs, to make them "show-worthy", even if they cant do what they were bred for anymore....

[Malamum]

The concept of wider genetic diversity sounds ok in theory but I don't think in our current society it would make dogs any healthier.

Like Courtnek said it would be a different story if all dogs were in the wild and natural selection was allowed to occur. However with man meddling and choosing which dogs to breed then I don't think breeding crosses is going to magicially improve overall health. Floating around terms like hybrid vigour only encourages an average pet owner to breed their lab to their next door neighbours beagle just because they can.

However, I am all for dogs being able to perform the job for which they were originally bred. I belong to a malamute forum and all the breeders there work their dogs in a harnes in one form or another as well as competing in confirmation shows. No they don't compete in the Iditarod, as that is the extreme end of dog sledding but they do compete in plenty of other sledding activities which prove that their dogs can perform as they are supposed do. I'm only refering to malamutes here as that is the only breed I am really familiar enough with but in my opinion I consider the breed standard to encompass all points that would enable the dogs to perform as originally intended and to me it does seem based on purpose not athsetics. So with that in mind I don't consider confirmation shows a beauty pagent.

So if people were to start breeding crosses instead of purebreeds, what set of critera should be used?

[imported_Cassie]

Yes, I wish Hobbit was here as well. Hobbit agreed with every thing I mentioned. We had many discussions about this topic.
Just off the record, I just wanted to make sure people understood that ALL of our dogs started out as mongrels which adapted to their natural surroundings...they were considered to be "races" of dogs not purebreds. Natural selection still takes place today with many dogs in many countries, Africa, South America etc. local people can take these pups and make them into wonderful herding dogs, hounds etc. they are multie purposed dogs.
Kiwi, the article you posted regarding "The Myth of Hybrid Vigor in Dogs"...most of this has been explained in the article by Dr. Bragg...of course you are not going to "fix" genetic problems just by crossbreeding...we as humans have gone to far with our purebreed breeding programs to fix it this way....I would probably be better off going to a third world country and adopting a mongrel pup (mongrels are not a degenerate form of a purebred dog) and raise this pup, during the critical period since it still maintains all its ancestral motor patterns I could teach it to do just about any thing...and since it has no man created hypertrophied motor patterns it wouldn't just be "good" at one motor pattern. Studies have shown that dogs evolved by natural selection...smaller type dogs nearest the equator and bigger type dogs further north.

The breeders you have mentioned do not sound reputable at all You've brought up people breeding dodgy temperamented dogs (are these dogs even allowed in the ring in the US?), your newf with elbow dyplasia still being showed, horribly deformed GSDs.

Kiwi, I think you are living with wool pulled over your eyes :lol: :wink: you come to a show here in Canada or the USA and I can assure you...you will find alot of genetic problems with champion dogs; this can be seen at the national specialties, westminster, krufts etc...even the pekingese which won crufts one year had gone through major facial surgery for a bite problem ( I do realize this was taken back from the winner). I will explain to you as well, Newf's are not known to have elbow dysplasia...and actually these breeders are very well known breeders who spend alot of time and money on their dogs....THEY think they are doing the right thing. As for the GSD's here in Canada and States the dogs have to be angulated in the rear...that is what the judges are looking for...the more angulated the better...I don't know how long you have been showing kiwi...but, unless you become kennel blind you will notice the wrong the dog shows and kennel clubs are doing for our dogs.

Anyone breeding or showing those dogs is what I classify as an unethical breeder or BYB

Actually kiwi, these are very well known highly respected breeders in their feild. They have mentors who look up to them and at the dog shows all the people in their breed club idolize them...they spend the money on the dogs...and all BREED SPECIFIC genetic problems are tested for. These breeders spend BIG bucks and do not spare a dime. But, they are still doing it all wrong...you cannot just do a genetic screen and just because it is free of disease does not mean the dog is not going to produce a genetic problem. This is the point I am trying to make...WE AS MAN ARE CREATING GENETIC DISEASES BY CLOSING THE STUD BOOKS ON A SMALL POPULATION OF DOGS (known as purebreds)

Courtnek, hit the nail on the head as well...when you keep breeding for a "working look" but, no longer have a dog which can do its job...you are looking at problems...

[courtnek]

I agree with you Malamum, and I am glad to see that at least some people are trying to keep the breed going for it's original intention. I know most snow dogs will never compete in the Iditarod...I was just making a point....

:D

And I wasnt talking about crossbreeding, per se, but rather trying to get away from line breeding, by introducing dogs outside the genetic circle for mating. Put some "fresh blood" into the mix, as it were. Line breeding tends to guarante the look of the dog, but not always the health. Unfortunately, when yo bring in fresh blood there are no guarantees.
And I stand by my post that you cant play with genetics....the smaller the pool gets, the more problems you will have. That's why there are laws in most places preventing people from marrying their sisters, and first cousins and such. Because the genetics get ugly...

I dont know that I either agree, or disagree, with hybrid vigor. But I do know for a fact that you can only rein in the gene pool so far before you
end up with nasty genetic problems...