The Desginer Breed Issue

I don't think you'll find too many breeders of champion lines getting together with others from another breed to create an "ultimate" -oodle dog.  Mostly because these breeders are dedicated entirely to the one breed, also because the breed specific clubs have regulations that prohibit breeding specifically between "non-champions."

Any responsible lab or poodle breeder isnt going to encourage the crossing of the two breeds. They are there to improve their breed, not mix the two. Neither the lab or poodle has been perfected, so until that happens the answer is no.

My only problem with it is there are lots of "doodles" in the shelter. We had a goldendoodle euthanized earlier this year and a labradoodle who barely escaped death (had it not been for his "guardian angel" who fought to find him a home he would have been PTS).

If you want a mixed breed go to the shelter. Until the shelters are completly empty I will be against mixed breeding of dogs.

The whole thing about breeding is you are trying to perfect a standard. There is NO standard for a labradoodle or chug or goldendoodle or anything like that, and none of the "breeders" are working toward one. They are just throwing a oodle (any poodle) in with a labrador (any labrador) to make money. They are just breeding to make $. I have yet to see one doodle or chug or designer breeder actually health test their dogs or guarentee them or make new owners sign spay/neuter contracts or do anything else a responsible breeder does.

I think the main reason I am against it is because people are mixing two dogs, calling it a designer dog but in reality its a mutt. Just because it is intentional dosnt make them better then mixes at the pound.

I just don't think there's a purpose that there isn't already a dog for.

ORIGINAL: sooner

I just don't think there's a purpose that there isn't already a dog for.

 
I guess that is what my realy issue is...  If there were a good reason, I would have no problem with dedicated people doing their research, starting up a breed club for a new breed and then creating a breed with a standard and petitioning for the breed's recognition by the AKC etc. (I am unfamiliar with the politics of this - but you get my drift) - the problem is that this is just not even close to what is going on...  and from what you guys are saying, the above is not going to happen, so it is the reality that BYB's are irresponsibly breeding mutts, for no reason other than money, and just perpetuating the existing overpopulation problem by calling the mutts, "designer breeds"... 
 
That is sort of what I meant to say originally, that for me, the problem is not the theory (in theory, it could be done the right way), the problem is that in reality it is just not being done the right way...  so the only choice for many is to come out very adamantly in opposition to these "breeds" when the problem isn't the theory behind trying to create a new breed - the problem is the way it is being done. 

OK, I said I was done with this and going to move on but I it burns me to the point that I just can't let it go. Maybe it's that both scheide and I are form the Boston area that we are open minded - I don't know.
 
FIRTS: There is obviously conflict between the same sides here because as Xerxes said: two breeders of separate breeds wont get together to "to create an "ultimate" -oodle dog" but then mmthomsan said responsible breeders are trying “to improve their breed and” and that "Neither the lab or poodle has been PERFECTED, so until that happens the answer is no."
 
So which is it - Are they trying to create the perfect breed or not? Or the better question is why is it ok in your opinion to try to perfect Labs, Poodles, GSD, or whichever "pure Breeds" and not my miniature bulldog? Or to use your own words why is ok to "perfect" the breed of yours and not mine? Why is yours better then mine? Because whether you realize it not, that#%92s exactly what you#%92re saying.
 
Why if I buy a Puggle instead of a Lab, Golden retriever or GSD in the opinion that so many have written on this forum does that means there will be one more dog in a shelter but that if a breeder of a pure bred has another littler, or someone buys a pure breed it does not? It#%92s just not logical. The problem is over population of dogs, that simple, Doesn#%92t matter whether it#%92s pure breeds or mix#%92s.
 
The answer is neuter or spay your dogs people! If the owners and breeders of pure breeds have one less litter or rescue a dog at a shelter instead, that would help as much as me rescuing a dog or my breeder has one less litter, correct? Now that#%92s logical!
 
Why are breeders trying to create the perfect race, I mean breed anyway? What do we gain from that? Why aren#%92t we doing the same thing for Ferrets, Parrots, Wombats or what have you? The whole concept of trying to perfect a breed is a little too "Arian" for me not to mention the complete opposite of the values that America was built on. What happened to "bring us your tired, your poor, your huddle masses..." Why not take that same approach and look at dogs individually and on their own merit – it doesn#%92t matter whether they are the "perfected" or "Ultimate" breed, just as long as they are well behaved members of our family and community.
 
With ALLLLLLL that said, I will re-emphasize my point and what we should really care about – whether the dog is healthy and has good behavior (which brings happiness for both dog and human) not if it is “perfect”.
 
As for as the point of the Puppy mills and BYB that inbreed and do everything else (that I too don't understand cause I'm not a breeder) that cause#%92s dogs or any animal pain and discomfort,  it's simply unacceptable and worthy of the worst punishment in my opinion. But just because the dog is a Chug, Puggle or a Miniature Bulldog like my Presley doesn#%92t mean it came from a puppy mill or BYB and to say so is generalizing in the broadest of terms not to mention simply narrow minded.

I'm hoping that I'm not reading that comment about breeding between "non-champions" the way you meant it.. Are you talking about between breeds?? If not, I'm at a loss cuz I've never heard of any breed that enacted any kind of regulations regarding breeding one non-champion to another and some of the best show dogs I've seen came from parents that were not finished for one reason or another at the time of breeding...

There are a number of things wrong with designer "breeds", not the least of which is that these "breeds" are not started on anything like a sound foundation.
A reputable breeder of Labs, for instance, is not going to use his best bitch to breed to a Poodle for the same reason a responsible breeder of Poodles is not going to allow his top stud to breed a Lab. We're dedicated to producing the best example of our own breed possible, creating mixes has no place in that plan. 
Consequently, the breeding stock that you do have is second rate, BYB-bred foundation stock that is carrying genes for who knows what genetic defects. Okay, the first generation is going to look pretty good - chalk that up to hybrid vigor - but the second gen. is going to crash and burn as all those ugly recessives for breed specific defects find a match in the crossbred they're mated with.
 
Now, the early breeders like Louis Dobermann knew what they were doing and weren't afraid to make the hard decisions - which ultimately meant that a huge percentage of the pups they produced were culled and only the pups who met rigid standards went on to breed. I sincerely doubt that today's $$-hungry designer "breeders" have either the knowledge or the desire to do the work that's necessary to really create a new breed (for those few who do the testing, evaluating and culling necessary to establish a consistant, predictable breed, my appologies, but I have run into far too many that are looking only at the fact that they will get twice what I ask for my purebred puppies for their randomly bred Puggle puppies, simply because some celebrity bought one). These crossbreeds have nothing in common with others of the same ancestry - not even their littermates... What makes a breed a breed is consistancy of temperament and structure. Finding 2 "Puggle" puppies in the same litter that look even remotely alike is nearly impossible. Add to that the probability that they will have totally different temperaments and where's the difference between them and the litter produced by the local stray?
 
As for Presley's "miniature bulldog", before I accepted that this is actually a new breed in its infancy, I'd want to see the pups from several litters, the standard that the breeders are following and discuss the breeding program being utilized to produce this "breed". What did they use for the F1 & F2 generations? Have they outcrossed since F3? What testing was done on the foundation stock? There are so many questions that need to be answered and problems that have to be solved before you can really consider one of these crosses anything more than just a mixed breed.
 
I'm at a loss as to what the last part of Presley's argument has to do with anything...?? There is no "perfect breed".. Everyone has their own favorite and reputable breeders attempt to produce puppies that are as close to the ideal for their breed as possible. Why? Because the ideal is what best supports the function that that particular breed was created for... Form=function. A correct dog is a sound dog. I think that, in the case of the last few paragraphs, emotion has overridden logic and the arguments presented are just silly.

My biggest problem with it is these "breeder" doing it for the money and for no other reason than that. They don't care what characteristics they could be passing on as long as the pups sell. That's what bothers me.

ORIGINAL: Smug Pugs

I'm hoping that I'm not reading that comment about breeding between "non-champions" the way you meant it.. Are you talking about between breeds?? If not, I'm at a loss cuz I've never heard of any breed that enacted any kind of regulations regarding breeding one non-champion to another and some of the best show dogs I've seen came from parents that were not finished for one reason or another at the time of breeding...

Re-read my post I said that breed clubs have regulations about that. 

I'm at a loss as to what the last part of Presley's argument has to do with anything...?? There is no "perfect breed".. Everyone has their own favorite and reputable breeders attempt to produce puppies that are as close to the ideal for their breed as possible. Why? Because the ideal is what best supports the function that that particular breed was created for... Form=function. A correct dog is a sound dog. I think that, in the case of the last few paragraphs, emotion has overridden logic and the arguments presented are just silly.

Form does NOT equal function anymore.  Sorry.  Look at show lines of greyhounds and compare with racing lines.  The racers don't have form, they'll never win championships in the ring, nor will the show champions ever win on the track.  The best stock in greys, IMO, is a combination of form and function.

The same with working lines of BCs, GSDs, and other herding dogs, they'll never make it in the show ring and the show dogs will never make it in trials.  I could cite the same with field vs show for the sporting dogs.

The only groups that you could say form = function would be, IMO the Toys and the Non-Sporting.

In reference to Presley's "arian" races/breeds of dogs:  Poppycock!  Breeders are trying to breed to the standard-this standard itself is not typically perfect.  But breeders are trying to maintain within the breed a conformation to a standard.  This standard is put into place so that Pugs can't be mistaken for Pekes and Pointers can be taken for  Spaniels.  In the case of Pharaoh Hounds, the caretakers of the breed have an awesome responsibility: not to "improve" the breed, but to keep it the way that thousands of years have kept it-where form and function are equally important.

The only groups that you could say form = function would be, IMO the Toys and the Non-Sporting.

Sorry I just have to interced here that many of the non-sporting breeds were bred for a function other than pets, Shiba were bred for hunting, but we dont have a hunt and kill section, standard poodles were bred for retrieving in water, dalmations for coaching, the non-sporting group is kind of a catch all for breeds that dont really fit into the othr groups, but many did have a working function. 


Why is my Shiba-Inu better than your "minature bulldog", because my Shiba's are a true breed.  This means that if I breed my Shiba to another Shiba I will get pups that look like more Shibas.  If you breed 2 mutts called 'designer breeds' together you will get more mutts that look nothing like their parents.  They do not breed true, and I have only found one breeder with a plan with their breeding program.  A plan to produce a dog that looks like a mini rott, and a mini boxer.  While I may not agree with it at least these people had a standard in mind.  They did not just throw 2 dogs together and pawn the pups of as a "new breed soon to be AKC recognized" on gulible people at 1500 bucks or more because someone is too lazy to actually research breeds.

Honestly, I don't think anyone should be breeding more mixed breed non-showing non-working pet-quality dogs until we've already taken care of the ones we already have in shelters. Maybe by "taken care of" you'd advocate mass-euthanizing (I wouldn't but it takes all kinds) but that problem must be addressed somehow before we start making new ones.

ORIGINAL: Xerxes
The only groups that you could say form = function would be, IMO the Toys and the Non-Sporting.

 
Sorry but there are many working dogs who still perform their primary function today and form definately contributes to that function.