This makes me SICK; Boxerdoodle, $1200...

1. I met a woman recently with a really cool looking dog who my dog happens to love!  It was a german doodle and it was a very good dog.  Very big and had the strangest eyes I have ever seen before.  Anyway she said that she googled german doodle and found the puppy.  She was surprised also but had to have one.  And it turned out to be a great dog for her.

I think we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one.  To tell the truth, I think that continuing to breed dogs from lines that have proven genetic weaknesses (which most purebreds do) is more irresponsible than breeding healthy crosses. I have a dog breed book with a "health" section for each breed and almost every single breed out there is prone to at least one disease if not more.  At what point do you say the breed is no longer viable as is and you need to cross out to make the dogs healthier?  I think many breeds are already past that point. It baffles me that for example 10% of Dalmatians are deaf but no one thinks that's a reason to cross out to help get rid of the unwanted gene(s).

But I realize no one will agree with me about that so this is the last I'll mention it. 

Cross breeding two different breeds, makes A MIX. It does NOT make a purebred dog. It creates the potential to pick up the health issues from BOTH breeds, not just the one. It creates an unknown temperment. WHY do this on purpose? Why add to the horrible overpopulation that already exists?

I have a mutt. He's not a corgell, not a terrgi. He's a corgi/terrier/jack MUTT. The sooner people start to realize that they are paying thounsdands of dollars for a MUTT the sooner people will begin to get smarter. There are SO MANY dogs in shelters - just take a walk in one. You'll see your "desinger" breeds. Right there. With no desiner lable on them. Just "mix". That's what they are - and there is nothing wrong with that.

We're talking about two totally different concepts here, though.  You're right that certain breeds have SO many problems its ridiculous...but that's mostly because of people who have bred dogs the should NOT have been bred in the first place.  When people just breed random dogs together because they are the same breed, they really screw things up.  Then, ooops, that dog has hip dysplasia and we just bred her to this dog who died of heart disease a year later.  Well, guess what happens to the puppies?  And, of course, those puppies were probably not spayed or neutered because the breeder didn't really care if they were bred or not.  So then those puppies are bred to other puppies, thus spreading those disorders further and further down the lines, making more and more dogs with those disorders. 

But thats not all.  The one reason I really don't approve of AKC conformation showing is that its as bad about "fads" as the people with their designer dogs.  A good working German shepherd would probably never win an AKC conformation show because the show dogs are bred for a different purpose.  In my eyes, that's not the way it should be.  It's the same with several other breeds.  I see Dobermans that compete in Schutzhund work, then I see Dobes that compete in the show ring.  BIG difference.  And because there's the split in breeds it makes the gene pools even smaller. 

 Technically, I'd have no problem with outcrossing if you could ever find another breed healthy enough to outcross to.  I don't really know if that's possible, though.  What would you cross with a Dalmatian to get rid of deafness?  I'm assuming you'd want to outcross just to get more bloodlines into the Dal lines, but still have the Dal look like a Dal, right? 

 I'm not trying to bash you or say "you're wrong, I'm right," I'm just giving you my honest opinion on the topic.  :)

I'd be fine with it if breeders weren't obviously breeding for money and actually cared about the wellbeing of the dog. My mother has just declared to me that she doesn't want to get another purebred because all her crossbreds have been healthy, lovely dogs, whereas her current purebred is riddled with health problems. There were warning signs when we she was selecting the puppy, but it was a convoluted story and she wasn't originally going for a purebred. The breeder obviously loved dogs and was heavily involved in rescue and helped her out when the first pup she got from her turned out to be unsuitable. However, she was still breeding indiscriminately and she has pups advertised right now on what I consider one of the largest collections of reputable breeders available to the public over here. You've just got to be careful no matter what.

However, on the other hand, Aussie Bulldogs are now up for official recognition, although I think it'll be a few more generations yet before they get it. The Aussie Bulldog came about because some bulldog breeders decided they wanted a bulldog that was healthy and would stay that way. They certainly didn't just cross 2 breeds and call it done. Nor did they stick to the same mix of 2 breeds. They crossed out and then inbred again, then crossed out again and in again and so on and so on until they had what they wanted. I understand most of the puppies that weren't used in the breeding programs were kept by the breeders or practically given away to loving homes. The breed now enjoys a large fan base and is readily available. If you're interested, google it and somewhere there's quite a lot of detail on how they did it.

This isn't a matter of crossbreeds versus purebreeds. It's a matter of reputable breeders, or lack thereof. 

I apologize because I can't "agree to disagree" yet on this point, because I don't think this particular angle has quite been addressed?

Let's use my breed because it's relatively healthy and the problems are very well known because Border Collies are run hard even in companion homes and soundness issues show up fast.  Let's talk about CEA, an issue where the inheritance pattern is known and there is a test for it in our breed.

What is more responsible, breeding to lines within the breed that are known to be sound - or doing a cross out to another breed, which may carry genes for eye issues that are currently unknown in the Border Collie (PRA?).

Joint issues.  Luxated patellas are practically unknown - I've only heard of them from puppy mill dogs, in fact.  Elbow dysplasia is so rare that the breed club finds no need to OFA elbows.  There are a couple of suspicious lines in this respect, but good, knowlegeable breeders know about them.

What's better, to continue to breed sound line, to sound line, continuing patterns that are known to produce sound puppies 90% of the time, or to cross out to another breed, which may carry a higher rate of genes for elbow, spine, and knee problems?

Soundness in any line of breeding is produced by careful record keeping and culling.  Doesn't matter whether we are talking about crosses or  purebreds.  The thing about the populations of dogs we call "purebreds" is that the gene pool is more stable and predictable.  Adding a new influx into that gene pool doesn't "add healthy genes,"  it adds everything that dog carries, healthy and harmful alike - and in a random way that means one has to start all over again recording and culling to create a stable, healthy gene pool again.

That's assuming one is breeding for health and not something like a particular shade of a recessive dilute color, or head shape, or coat type.
 

I apologize because I have not read this entire thread. I just want to make a couple comments. First of all why would anyone mix a boxer and a poodle? Do you want a dog that is capable of jumping off the ceiling? All the boxers and poodles I know are HIGH energy dogs so why combine them. Just my opinion.

The other thing that I learned recently is you can not breed a "doodle" back to a "doodle" (ex: labradoodle to a labradoodle) and get what you are looking for. I did not know that, and I was told that is why it will never be recognized. So why don't they just call it a "cross" or mutt.
 

Workingdoglover

But thats not all.  The one reason I really don't approve of AKC conformation showing is that its as bad about "fads" as the people with their designer dogs.  A good working German shepherd would probably never win an AKC conformation show because the show dogs are bred for a different purpose.  In my eyes, that's not the way it should be.  It's the same with several other breeds.  I see Dobermans that compete in Schutzhund work, then I see Dobes that compete in the show ring.  BIG difference.  And because there's the split in breeds it makes the gene pools even smaller.

I totally agree! I've been involved with horses and there's a huge difference between the ones that are used for performance and the ones that are bred for halter showing (in which they don't get ridden). The halter horses tend to have health issues that a breeder who breeds for work could never get away with allowing his horses to have.

I think some people are misunderstanding here... When I say outcross a breed I mean adding the blood of a different breed for a few generations and then breeding back to the same breed to produce purebreds again.  Yes it will change the breed a little but in many cases those changes are needed.  Although Dalmatians might have been a bad example because their deafness might be related to their color, the same way white boxers are deaf.