Designer Dogs

ORIGINAL: Laurelin_429

All designer breeders cannot be lumped together, just as all purebred breeders can be lumped together.  There are select few cockapoo and Australian labradoodle breeders that are truely striving to create a new and healthy breed. 
 
But why is my question? If it is for selfish, appearance reasons I just cant support that

Oh and as to breed preservation, I definitely want to see my breed preserved.  Why?  Because I love them.  Responsible breeders of their breed should be encouraged.  I get angry with people breeding papillons willy nilly and without thought as much as I get angry with people breeding papillons to whatever other little dog they can drag up.  Both are ruining the breed imo. 
 
THATS what I've been trying to tell these people, he he its about pride!

yes the mixed breeds that are stamped with a price is the same breed as the one waiting for a home in the shelter. Actually there is always a akc being given away if you look in the classifieds in your state. Mine is TN and I do alot of research on looking at these classified ads on this site--[linkhttp://www.usnpl.com/tnnews.html]http://www.usnpl.com/tnnews.html[/link] it is amazing on how many people will give away a dog that they paid for, and if they don't find a home they are sent to the pound to get killed while someone else is buying the same breed.

I can not see breeding a designer breed for the sole purpose of convenience. To me the breeding of these dogs is for the sole purpose of making money. If you want a dog that does not shed and won't make your allergies flare, then buy a stuffed dog, there is no way to determine what your going to get each time you breed. How many of these are being added into the shelter system because they were not marketable?
 
Yes I bought my boy from a breeder, bought my Babe from a breeder as well. My husband and I both toyed with the idea of a rescue or shelter baby, but in the end our hearts are with German Shepherds, we love the breed, everything about them. We did check into the rescues and I can tell you they are very strict with adoptions, I did not have a fenced in yard and I rent. The odds were against us.
 
I have no problem with mixes, some are down right adorable and usually come with less health risks then some purebreds. I agree with the poster who said we need to even cut back on purebred dogs and fix the problems they have.
 
Dawn

ORIGINAL: Eclipse

yes the mixed breeds that are stamped with a price is the same breed as the one waiting for a home in the shelter. Actually there is always a akc being given away if you look in the classifieds in your state. Mine is TN and I do alot of research on looking at these classified ads on this site--[linkhttp://www.usnpl.com/tnnews.html]http://www.usnpl.com/tnnews.html[/link] it is amazing on how many people will give away a dog that they paid for, and if they don't find a home they are sent to the pound to get killed while someone else is buying the same breed.

 
EXACTLY!! [] I rather give my money to the shelter anyday. Just because you are getting a dog from a breeder with papers dosnt actually mean it is better of a dog then the one of the same breed at the shelter.
Dontcha just wish if a dog had its papers you could be sure it was of high quality and the breeder was great? Because the UKC hands out purple ribbons like its candy. I see so many "purple ribbon pit bulls" and peopel who dont know better think they hit the jack pot and will go pay $800 for one when the same dog is in the shelter, its crazy!!!

ORIGINAL: sheprano

ORIGINAL: Laurelin_429

All designer breeders cannot be lumped together, just as all purebred breeders can be lumped together.  There are select few cockapoo and Australian labradoodle breeders that are truely striving to create a new and healthy breed. 

But why is my question? If it is for selfish, appearance reasons I just cant support that

Oh and as to breed preservation, I definitely want to see my breed preserved.  Why?  Because I love them.  Responsible breeders of their breed should be encouraged.  I get angry with people breeding papillons willy nilly and without thought as much as I get angry with people breeding papillons to whatever other little dog they can drag up.  Both are ruining the breed imo. 

THATS what I've been trying to tell these people, he he its about pride!

 
Hehe, yes, it is about pride.  I'm very proud of my boys and my paps.  They're the best breed in the world if you ask me.  (No bias here at all) 
 
As to the previous statement, I don't know what purpose other than companionship they want.  Companionship, though to me is a valid reason to create a breed.  However, I own a breed that was bred for companionship.  (Once again, possilbe bias)  As I don't hunt or own a farm or need sled dogs, companionship is most important to me.  Different needs in different situations.  That said, I wanted an intelligent and athletic companion, but herding instinct, etc was not high up on my list.  So I chose the papillon...  Originally Australian labradoodles were meant as a guide dog that was better for allergy sufferers.  They actually bred for certain coat types that were better for allergies and combined that with the easy to train lab personality.  I know many people ask why not just use poodles, and I honestly don't know.  The labradoodle was then seen as a cute dog and mass produced which totally took it down the wrong path.  Many dog breeds, not just crosses have this happen.  It's the people who get into breeding any kind of dog for the wrong reasons that I am against.  ($$$ primarily)  It just so happens right now that mutts (designers) are one of the targeted group of dogs. 
 
I said already, I think there's a breed for almost any situation and crossbreeds are generally not filling a new niche.  However, if a breeder is responsible as in does heavy screening for the prospective owners and health tests, etc, then I cannot really fault them.

Laurelin,
i think your breed WAS bred for a purpose. The europeans aristocrat ladies wanted a dog that could flush out birds and animals of prey liek their husnads dogs but  were also retty enough to be used as companions as well! Women of that time accomapnied men on fox hunts a lot!

Papillon history is highly debated.  I just googled it and found places stating as a fact that the phalenes were crossed with poms, or chis, or not at all to create the erect ear.  Most breeders and long time fanciers seem to feel that there was no cross.  You can look online and find articles saying they came from Italy, Spain, China, or somewhere else.  It's quite a mystery. 

However, to your statement, you can use them to flush and track.  Many papillons today still get tracking titles.  However, I really think they became popular as something fashionable for European aristocrats.  lol

For amusement:

The papillon originates from Spain, and may be related to the tiny Chihuahuas of Mexico.

There has been many debates on this question and as many answers.  It has been narrowed down to Asia, Latin America, Italy, Belgium, France or Spain.  More than likely, Latin America can be eliminated due to the existence of the breed even before the conquest of Mexico, as can be seen from dated tapestries existing in European courts.  So most of the speculation has centered around Italy and Asia.  The travels of Marco Polo into Asia, and opening up the overland trade routes to China, the importation of the Papillon into Italy is very  likely

the Papillon, which came into being during the late 1800's, which is the erect-earred dog that we are familiar with today.

The cross breeding of drop-ear Papillons with Pomeranians created the erect ear variety of the butterfly dog.

The most reliable imo:

There may, however, have been an occasional dog with leathers of sufficient strength for the ears to stand erect. Two 18th Century paintings suggest this.
Suddenly, toward the end of the 19th Century, the erect ear carriage with its butterfly appearance became highly fashionable. In fact, it so caught the public fancy that the new term of "Papillon" quickly became the name for the entire breed.

 
So yes, mystery dogs.  Whoa, on a tangent!  xD

 
Sorry. 

  Breeds need to be preserved

 
this is an honest question, not meant to be snide or argumentative in any way. because i honestly do not know. to me pride or love of the breed is not a factual reason, it is self serving. so..
 
why do breeds need to be preserved? should the ones known to have major health issue's be altered? what if altering required cross-breeding, would it be ok?

ORIGINAL: sheprano

EXACTLY!!  I rather give my money to the shelter anyday. Just because you are getting a dog from a breeder with papers dosnt actually mean it is better of a dog then the one of the same breed at the shelter.
Dontcha just wish if a dog had its papers you could be sure it was of high quality and the breeder was great? Because the UKC hands out purple ribbons like its candy. I see so many "purple ribbon pit bulls" and peopel who dont know better think they hit the jack pot and will go pay $800 for one when the same dog is in the shelter, its crazy!!!

Actually... I'm not sure that's true in all- or even most cases, especially when you are speaking of breeds with significant numbers of health problems. Certainly the dog from a responsible breeder (the vast majority of purebred dogs- let's only compare apples to apples here) in shelters are going to be from BYBs- firstlybecause BYBs outnumber responsible breeders, and secondly because reponsible breeders, through screening and contracts, prevent their pups from ending up in shelters down the road. (It could and does still happen sometimes, but it's far less prevelant) is going to have a much higher chance of being free of genetic health problems common to the breed.

But no, there is no difference if you're going to buy a BYB dog out of the newspaper with no prior research. In that case, save your money and get the do gfrom the pound/shelter/rescue.

PR doesn't mean anything with UKC except that the dog's pedigree is X number of generations UKC registered. Anyone who does even a little research on the UKC will find this out- it's not really anything to brag about.

Well… I#%92ll just put it this way and use an example that takes it a little over board.  You can have two extremely healthy dogs of two different breed and then to mix them you might get genetic problems beyond belief.  For example lest say you cross a Chihuahua with a Great Dane (AI or however it#%92s done)  You might get a dog with a big strong body and legs that can not support the body leading to join problems and shorten the life of that dog.  Or you could get a small dog with an abnormally large heart…the list goes on with genetic problem that may arise from crossing breeds that should never be breed together.  Or even breeding a Greyhound with a mastiff- can#%92t even imagine what mistakes can go wrong there…  By keeping a bloodline it#%92s easy to track the problems in that breed, mixing, you end up with things that are impossible to even describe where they came from.  Preserving a breed keeps that line of dogs healthy and under control. 
 
I think it#%92s necessary to breed dogs that preserve the heath of that breed while at the same time it#%92s only right to spay and neuter those who are capable of passing on traits that should not be seen in the dog world.   In some cases it may be alright to cross some breeds- herding dogs for example are closely related to one another and to breed a dog designed to work you may need to add some traits to create a certain type of dog who is designed to handle the job.  ACDs are a great example of a cross that benefited the dog world; they are very tough dogs that can handle the rugged outback where other herding dogs could not.  They are still preferred today to help herd cattle.

ORIGINAL: gaylemarie


this is an honest question, not meant to be snide or argumentative in any way. because i honestly do not know. to me pride or love of the breed is not a factual reason, it is self serving. so..

why do breeds need to be preserved? should the ones known to have major health issue's be altered? what if altering required cross-breeding, would it be ok?

You're absolutely right. I'm sure most people don't want to admit it or believe it, but breeding ANY dog is selfish. Each breed fills a different purpose for people. A retriever retrieves for people, a protection dog protects people, a lapdog is a companion for a person, and so on... I'm not saying that the dogs are being mistreated in anyway, but to deny that dogs are bred for selfish reasons (filling a need for people) is just naive.

You also have to ask yourself "what breed is the right one for me?"  Yes, that sounds selfish but it's more selfish to get a dog only to find out that it's not the right match. 
 
I want a herding dog because I just love what these breeds can do, I want a breed that not well known so I'm not caught up in the politics of owning a popular breed.  I want a dog who is very Velcro, family friendly, not aggressive, needs attention...  Ok, so these are "I want..."   Selfish...maybe but it's also better for me to choose a breed who I feel comfortable about so that the dog gets its needs filled as well.  I am prepared to take in a pure breed dog and prove that it is worthy to be alive.  To keep a dog that will uphold the health and temperament that it was bred to have.
 
At the same time I will gladly any day support a dog that is in need of a home, when I have the room I will foster, I will give back what I can.
 

Figuring out what you want (being selfish) will end up making you happier, therefore the dog is happier. A border collie, adopted by a sedate family with a three year old is not selfish, but then, how happy is that dog?

ORIGINAL: aussiegirl

Figuring out what you want (being selfish) will end up making you happier, therefore the dog is happier. A border collie, adopted by a sedate family with a three year old is not selfish, but then, how happy is that dog?

That's not my point at all.[] Matching up the existing dogs with the right people is one thing. But CREATING dogs by breeding, playing God and purposely bringing dogs into this world to fill our needs IS selfish. By selfish I mean that they're being bred because people want a dog that herds, or a dog that will sit on their lap, or a dog that looks a certain way. The very basis is that it's what people want!

My humble opinion, as a first-time dog owner, is that these new designer dogs are a ridiculous way for people to exploit animals and make money. When we were looking for a puppy last spring, we found an ad where a woman was selling maltese/pomeranian/pekingese pups for $375. Urged by the people on this board, I called and inquired further about these puppies. I found out that the woman's maltese got out one day and had a "fling" with the neighbor's peka-pom (or whatever). I said to her, "well, then the puppies are just mutts, right? No one will pay that kind of money for them!" She replied, "They're gone." It stuns me, what people will pay for.

We found our puppy Rudy at the local Humane Society. His mother, a long-haired chihuahua, had been owned by a family with 11 dogs, and when she had pups, they could not care for them. They had no idea what kind of dog the father was. We didn't care.

We adopted him, and we adore him. And everywhere we go, people want to know what kind of dog he is. When I tell them what we know about his lineage, they are always disappointed. They're looking for a cutesie designer name for him. It's sad that this is what we've turned pets into.