[SoCalyorkiLvr]

I do not DISCRINATE between a purebred and a "mix" or "All American".

To me a dog is a dog is a dog...every one is to be valued and loved the same (just like children in my book)... and if you make the argument that you shouldn't mix breeds because there are dogs needing homes in shelters, then you shouldn't breed purebreds either. There is no other logical argument in my opinion. I do not happen to agree with this line of reasoning about the shelter dogs because that would be like saying since there are so many children in the world needing to be adopted, no one should have their own!

I am very sad when I see people write that any dog, mixed, all american, whatever, is only worth $300 or even less, but they place a higher value on a dog that some arbitrary hobbyists in a CLUB says is BETTER because it has papers. Or, they wouldn't pay more than $_____ for a certain "TYPE" or kind of dog. I don't see how thay can be dog lovers and think this way. To me they are just "PURBRED DOG LOVERS" which is a different thing altogether. JMO.

I give very little weight to registration papers. To me they should only be important to those who show their dogs. To me a dog with papers is no more valuable than one without. Children, kids, babies, dogs, whatever, do not have to be from champions or royalty to have value. They are equal in my book.

I have also heard from several vets that purebred dogs, overall (there are exceptions), have more health problems in general then mixed breeds due to the tight line breeding and sometimes inbreeding that goes on.

I would buy a mixed breed in a heartbeat if it was what I was looking for. There are many dogs owned by people on this board that are so cute and unique looking and have wonderful personalities. I like unique, not "designer" and not the latest fad or trend. It is easy to get on the bandwagon and criticize breeders who mix purebreds by saying they are creating "designer dogs" with a snear. Anyone could complain about the breeder who breeds PUREBREDS too by calling them "snobs". I do not do either. It is belittling and no one wins. Labelling and name calling in any debate causes the person doing the labelling or name calling to lose credibility with the audience in my opinion.

I think it is fine to want to "better the breed" if it doesn't just mean making the dog more perfect in the show ring which is primarily based on appearance, but that is what that phrase means to most, unfortunately. It should mean improving the health and temperament first and then the outward appearance second. It is only in the last 100 years or less that "improving the breed" meant anything other than making a particular breed of dog better at it's "job" whehter that is "ratting", hunting or herding.

I also have a problem with people who criticize breeders if they make money on breeding dogs. I don't get this? If a person is able to take his love of dogs and decides to spend his life producing wonderful pets for all of us to enjoy, and he does it with the best interests of the dog always first, why is that bad???? To me it should be applauded and we should be more than willing to
compensate the person who gives us this "family member" who brings the joy that a family pet does.