Designer Dogs

and your reference to preserving the breed being a crock really doesn't hold true.

 
i clearly stated it is my opinion, not a fact, and i stand by my opinion.
 
alot of the breeding done in victorian times was for status, all dogs are bred with some type of purpose in mind, some just more respectable than others. if someone wants a dog that doesnt shed that is their perogative.

one cannot tell me they are all still producing so many of them to preserve the breed

 
I am sure that there are many individuals that have no intentions of breed preservation.  Just as there are many individuals that have every intention of breed preservation. 
 
No matter what venue you look at or into, there will be those who perservere for only monetary gain, and there will be those that perservere for love and respect of that particular venue.  I only wish that there were more of the latter and less of the former.

if someone wants a dog that doesnt shed that is their perogative.

 
Then get a poodle or a bichon, a dog which CAN be (basically) guaranteed not to shed, not something that you cross with something else that sheds...totally counter productive.

Well see we are on two differnt wave lenghts. Soem of us are arguing opinions and soem of us are arguing actual facts!

i really shouldn't keep on keeping on, but the OP asked for opinions, so i gave mine.

ORIGINAL: gaylemarie

i really shouldn't keep on keeping on, but the OP asked for opinions, so i gave mine.

 
No no, thats fine. I just thought I'd point it out so we didnt keep arguing.
Its one's "opinion" that dogs are no longer bred for a specific purpose but the actual "fact" is the complete opposite.
One is arguing the original intention could have been for companion purposes but the "fact" is that they were needed in the fields to heard, on the boats to guard, in the woods for hunting, or in the cities for killing varmen. Its fine to have your own opinions and state them, thats what we are all here for but I preffer to go off history and texts versus one's opinion that has know foundation.  

The argument isn't about which is more worthy of life, a purebred or a mixed breed. It's about the practices that go in to breeding either. I have a mixed and a pure (both rescued) and they are both equally wonderful and equally deserving of a good quality of life, now that they're here. But I don't like the circumstances under which either came to me.

I think that if you really love mixed breed dogs, you should be against the intentional breeding of them until we can get our pet overpopulation problem under control. If every single pet in this country had a loving home, I'd be a lot less het up about this issue. If that were the case, okay, some kooky person wants to cross a this and a that and see what happens, whatever. I'd still sort of wonder what's wrong with the breeds already available, but I wouldn't be so irate. But right now, in my book, anyone intentionally breeding mixes is automatically hurting dogs. It doesn't matter how lovely their facility is--if they are breeding mixes on purpose, they are keeping all the wonderful mixed breed dogs currently awaiting homes from getting them.

Purebred dogs can also be ridiculously ill-bred by horrible unscrupulous breeders. And those people are hurting dogs, and hurting their breeds, as well.

ORIGINAL: houndlove

But right now, in my book, anyone intentionally breeding mixes is automatically hurting dogs. It doesn't matter how lovely their facility is--if they are breeding mixes on purpose, they are keeping all the wonderful mixed breed dogs currently awaiting homes from getting them.

All dogs from breeders, purebreds or mixes, responsibly or irresponsibly bred, keep dogs from being adopted, assuming that people who buy from breeders would adopt if they could not buy. Do you disagree with all breeding?

unfortunatly most of the people willing to pay the designer breed prices are the least likely to adopt from a shelter []

ORIGINAL: gaylemarie

unfortunatly most of the people willing to pay the designer breed prices are the least likely to adopt from a shelter []

I'm not quite sure why you believe that. Deliberately bred mixes aren't all expensive and I know many people with these mixes who have ALSO adopted, foster, donate time and money to animal welfare organizations, etc. I think talking about responsible breeding is extremely important, but I don't think making huge assumptions about people who own these dogs is helpful. I also think a lot of people might choose one of these mixes as their first dog and after people actually have a dog, they're probably more likely to become passionate about animal welfare - because of the love they have for their dog, becoming more aware of dog issues and because they see that they actually are capable of training, understanding behaviour, interacting with all kinds of other dogs, etc.

ORIGINAL: inne

ORIGINAL: gaylemarie

unfortunatly most of the people willing to pay the designer breed prices are the least likely to adopt from a shelter []

I'm not quite sure why you believe that. Deliberately bred mixes aren't all expensive and I know many people with these mixes who have ALSO adopted, foster, donate time and money to animal welfare organizations, etc. I think talking about responsible breeding is extremely important, but I don't think making huge assumptions about people who own these dogs is helpful. I also think a lot of people might choose one of these mixes as their first dog and after people actually have a dog, they're probably more likely to become passionate about animal welfare - because of the love they have for their dog, becoming more aware of dog issues and because they see that they actually are capable of training, understanding behaviour, interacting with all kinds of other dogs, etc.

 
I think her rationalization is that people who would even want to buy a designer dog are buying it as a commodity versus being true dog people. Its the same concept as number of us would not buy designer dog from a breeder but if we saw that same dog labeled as a mix in a shelter we would be more apt to adopt.
Basically people who dont realize a mutt and a designer dog are the same thing will assume if you label it a "desigenr dog" it is of higher quality of a mutt. Does that make sense or did I just cofuse things more? ha ha, sorry!

Did I say anything about people who own deliberate crossbreeds? I'm talking about the people who breed them. And yes, with the situation we have right now in this country I am against most breeding. There are people who have special circumstances that really demand they buy a purebred dog from a reputible breeder, and I understand that.  Breeds need to be preserved, breeding programs need to be maintained. 
 
But purposefully breeding more mixed breeds when we already have a tragic number who don't have homes I feel is immoral.

ORIGINAL: houndlove

Did I say anything about people who own deliberate crossbreeds? I'm talking about the people who breed them. And yes, with the situation we have right now in this country I am against most breeding. There are people who have special circumstances that really demand they buy a purebred dog from a reputible breeder, and I understand that.  Breeds need to be preserved, breeding programs need to be maintained. 

But purposefully breeding more mixed breeds when we already have a tragic number who don't have homes I feel is immoral.

 
I couldnt have worded it better myself. Chiuahas for example do NOT need to be bred as much as they are especially mixed, there are just too many. Pit bulls should be limited to extreme shows or game dogs because that is a whole topic that I could write a book about. English, french bulldogs and bostons should be cleansed to fix that soft palette. Rotties should be cleansed to fix all the health problems they have, I could go on for days. Why are we going to keep making new breeds when the ones we have need attention.
Its selfish and does not have any canines best interest in mind. But that is human nature, I only with half the people I knew had as much pride and loyalty as a dog

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.  Cockapoos aren't like most designer breeds, they've been around a LONG time and have a group of people that actively breed multi generations (not just f1s like most designer breeders) and do health testing just like any other responsible breeder would.  The problem is this is a very small group of people in proportion to the massive amounts of breeders that have jumped on the fadwagon to make money.  I will not support a breeder that is irresponsible, however I do not feel that a person who breeds cockapoos or labradoodles and does so responsibly should be condemned by me.  I don't see the point in crossbreeding right now, there's tons of breeds to fill the needs of just about anyone.  However, if they crossbreed responsibly, I cannot fault them.

I mainly have problems with most people's breeding ethics. 
 
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. 

ORIGINAL: sheprano

Basically people who dont realize a mutt and a designer dog are the same thing will assume if you label it a "desigenr dog" it is of higher quality of a mutt. Does that make sense or did I just cofuse things more? ha ha, sorry!

That does makes sense, thanks for clarifying!