Are all designer dog breeders "irresponsible"?

My friend with working cattle dogs (Border Collies who work cattle, not ACDs) had a Walker bitch - or rather her son did. A moment of indiscretion on their part produced a single Border Collie/Walker pup. Too bad she was too responsible to get on board with the designer dog craze - she could have advertised him as a RARE BoCoWa Treeing Hound and could have gotten about $2500 for him. [8|]

I believe that any designer dog that can provide a purpose is indeed a true breed. For example, there are three setters, Irish, English and Gordon. Each bred for a different terrain style of bird hunting. Their breed standard discribes a body type for each terrain.
 
What is the purpose of a Goldendoodle? Are they bred for a purpose, or for looks? Can you say---my Golden doodle differs from a Golden Retriever because---? Like I can say my Gordon's differ from the Irish Setter or English Setter because they hunt in a different way. A good judge can tell the diffence in breed purpose between the Irish, English and Gordon Setters.
Can ANY judge tell a purpose of a designer breed?

I believe that any designer dog that can provide a purpose is indeed a true breed.

Nope, a breed by definition has to breed "true".  In other words, if you breed two dogs of the same breed, the pups will all look and act like dogs of that breed.  Designer dogs don't do that without lots of work and many generations of dogs.

In the very beginning of creating a new breed, do you think two breeders of two different breeds would sell someone two quality puppies of different breed to began with?  

First the original post said absolutely nothing about creating a new breed.  It specifically said that all pups were to be neutered.

Yes, I think that one person can wind up with two high quality pups of different breeds.   Fast talkers and money are just two of the ways.

I highly doubt because they have a rigious contract that they are not allowed to mate with other breeds.   Many breed clubs have their own code of ethics and they do not allow any reputables breeders to breed with other breeds EVER!   If they did, then they are unethical period. 

A "rigious" (sic) contract with whom that says a breeder can't sell to someone who is going to breed "designer dogs"?  A breed club may consider a breeder "unethical" if they breed "designer dogs", but that is just their opinion.  Besides, "unethical" as defined by a breed club is not the same as acting responsibly toward your pups and their buyers.

They could always breed their dogs despite the contract.

Hijack!

Folks, can we please take the creation of breeds to a different thread??  That is not the purpose of my original post.  []
 
ETA:  Note that the original post specifically said that all puppies were to be neutered.  Biologically that means no new breed can be created - unless I completely misunderstand reproduction.  [sm=joker.gif]

No I really dont think we can, I think these two go hand in hand, everytime a desighner breed is brought up the origens of every purebred gets brought up, and they need to be explained.  The way they are being bred is not the only thing that constitutes responsible breeding, the reason for producing the pups has to be part of it.  And breeding just to supply pets is not responsible, a good breeder breeds to better the breed, and without a standard you are breeding for no reason other than money.  If the people producing these dogs had said from the begining my goal is _______ and set forth to fulfill that goal, and did all the things that were listed then yes they could be responsible.  There was one breeder that was trying to create the "Carlin Pinscher" they had a goal in mind, to create a dog that looked like a mini boxer and a mini rotty, they sell all of their dogs for pets already altered, so they are concerned with their pups, and I believe they sell them $300, hardly the ransom of alot of mutts.  One could argue the Alaskan Klee Kia as well.

No I really dont think we can, I think these two go hand in hand, everytime a desighner breed is brought up the origens of every purebred gets brought up, and they need to be explained.

We don't need to discuss the creation of a breed to the exclusion of the original question. 

The way they are being bred is not the only thing that constitutes responsible breeding, the reason for producing the pups has to be part of it.  And breeding just to supply pets is not responsible, a good breeder breeds to better the breed, and without a standard you are breeding for no reason other than money.

 
So breeding Goldendoodles and training selected pups to be guide dogs for allergic, blind people is not responsible unless you are also working to produce a new breed? 

Actually the breeder that started that endevour stopped becasue it didnt work.  The precentage of the crosses that were non-shedding about 25%, and the precentage of them that actually made it through training was under 10%, of the 25% that were left, so of 100 bred maybe 2 made it to be guide dogs.  And where do the mini doodle crosses come in?  The one person breeding them in Australia now breed around 500 a year, how is that responsible?  That is her business, she has barns full of them, and ships worldwide, she breeds for pets only, no service dogs at all, unless by fluke.  Had the plan to breed for non shedding service dogs actually worked then it maybe acceptable, but I know breeders of purebreds that dont breed 100 puppies in the entire time they breed, let alone 500.  And I know no good breeder that only produces 2 dogs out of 100 that are high show quality or work quality, that is alot of wasteful breeding.  The doodle puggle mutt cross breeding is for vanity and money only, they have no direction what so ever,  The guy that produced puggles originally, at least purposly, said that you do not breed 2 puggles together, the pups do not look like puggles, these dogs are not bred to be bred, they are bred as pets only, where is the direction, other than his pocket?  This is the same man that is breeding the mini St. Bernard.  The sales pitches alone that they use to sell them is enough to tell me they are irresponsible, like a 15lb puggle poops less than its parents, how is that exactly?

Hmmmmmm, this thread seems to be getting a little heated.....
 
Did I see JAN posting???  Our own JAN come back from the lost realms of cyberspace????
 
I dunno, Janet Rose, I'm still thinking that ANY one who breeds simply to create pet quality pups is doing the dog world an injustice.  Pure or mixed.

ORIGINAL: glenmar

Hmmmmmm, this thread seems to be getting a little heated.....

Did I see JAN posting???  Our own JAN come back from the lost realms of cyberspace????

I dunno, Janet Rose, I'm still thinking that ANY one who breeds simply to create pet quality pups is doing the dog world an injustice.  Pure or mixed.

 
I agree. There are millions of pet quality dogs sitting in shelters and rescues all across this country so there's no shortage of pet quality dogs that would justify breeding strictly for them.
 
The way I feel is if a breeder has a goal in mind, gets together with other like minded folks and they come up with a standard in which they use the best dogs possible, utilize health testing, spay/neuter dogs that don't fit what they have in mind, and are doing all of this with the intentions of creating a new breed that will be recognized by a reputable kennel club then I don't have a problem with people trying to create a new breed. I would also say that those who are striving to responsibly create a new breed are in the minority like those who responsibly breed purebreed dogs.  That's not to say that there aren't people who aren't serious about creating a new breed because after all, we have the American Eskimo Dog, Black Russian Terrier and we have people working on breeds such as the [linkhttp://www.silkenwindhounds.org/index.html]Silken Windhound[/link] and the [linkhttp://www.internationalmikiregstry.homestead.com/Home.html]Mi-Ki[/link] which have been breeding true for many years now. The interesting thing is a lot of people really haven't heard about the last two as you do the Labradoodle and Cockapoo. Why is that? *I* believe it's because the Silken Windhound and Mi-Ki people are more concerned with actually creating a new breed instead of trying to make a buck. The reality is the majority who are breeding "designer dogs" aren't doing so because they want to create a new breed. If people are willing to pay upwards of $5000 for an F1 cross that comes from pet quality parents who have mediocre pedigrees, no health testing done, given a worthless health guarantee(if given one) why should these breeders strive to breed for better dogs or to create a new breed? There's no incentive in it. Take the Cockapoo for example. It's been around since the 1950's-1960's and it's not remotely close to becoming a recognized breed. I mean, if the Boston Terrier could become a recognized breed in 30 years then what's the excuse for the Cockapoo not breeding true and being an actual breed by now? Quite honestly, I believe it has to do with the sincerity and dedication of the people involved. There are folks who are sincere and dedicated to the breed and there are folks who are sincere and dedicated to their bank accounts.