Quote:
Originally Posted by BamaFan121s  Every time this topic is brought up, people try to justify it by stating that "all breeds today started as cross breeds."  While that is true, that excuse is not applicable with the 'designer breeds' being bred now. Yorkies and other dogs were developed as breeds for a reason. They were specifically bred to perform specific tasks. The results of the breedings were carefully observed, health issues were identified and a coordinated group of breeders worked together to combine carefully kept records and results and achieve the same goal. Eventually a standard was set that the dogs were bred to.
That is not the case with this mixed dogs being bred today. They are being bred willy nilly to meet the demand that comes with the current fad. There is no set standard, no guidelines for what health tests need to be done, no comparison of records and results amongst multiple breeders to determine any issues coming up and no need to even start off breeding quality dogs.
There is no valid reason that can be given as to WHY are these dogs being created. The only realistic answer that can be offered is 'because there are people willing to pay for them,' and that, IMO, is not reason enough to breed them and play around taking a chance on what problems one may be creating. |
Maybe I'm just bored, or want to play devil's advocate, but, for the sake of debate I'll take issue with some of this.
While all dogs were, at some time, created for a purpose, that is not entirely true in all cases. In the case of the Yorkshire, it was bred from ratters but quickly lost its purpose and became a companion dog. There was certainly no 'need' for the Yorkshire Terrier. The British Isles was the home of the ratting terrier and there were enough terriers already to fill any need. I have to wonder how a single mouse has managed to survive there, but they have LOL.
What the Yorkshire Terrier did was to supplant the Clydesdale/Paisley Terrier as the most beautiful terrier. The Clydesdale/Paisley, a variation of the Skye, was the first British terrier I have seen referenced that was bred mainly for looks (the silky coat). Old Terriermen of the day bemoaned this dog for its uselessness as a terrier (due to the silky coat) and grumbled about its winning the ribbons over their Skyes. Fact is, a silky coat was not desirable in a terrier and the best justification for them was mainly for looks. The Yorkshire merely replaced the Clydesdale/Paisley so it can be said that a Yorkshire was bred for looks and was never bred for its ancestors' true purpose.
Which begs the question....why breed a dog just for looks? Maybe because it is fashionable and there is a market for them? The Yorkshire was bred by miners and weavers but quickly became lap dogs for aristocrats. Does anyone really think they would have become so popular at the beginning had there not been a demand (i.e. money to be made) for a beautiful lap dog?
As to how carefully Yorkshire were bred, it is widely stated that the early breeders were mostly illiterate. That's not to say they didn't know what they were doing, but careful records were not kept. As for breeding for health, I have seen references in early books on the Yorkshire stating that the average lifespan was only 4 to 5 years.
I don't think there's a lot of difference in the hows and whys of the creation of the Yorkshire and the mixed breeds of today. The differences came about through adhering to a standard and dedicated breeders breeding for the betterment of the breed. Who's to say that couldn't happen with some breeders of mixed breeds today? As mentioned earlier, there are Cockapoo and Labradoodle clubs, so obviously some of these breeders are serious about their breedings. They will never get AKC recognition due to the rule of any new breed needing to be made up of at least 3 breeds. This change was made the year after the Silky Terrier was recognized by the AKC. The Silky, a mix of an Australian Terrier and a Yorkshire Terrier, is a designer dog by today's definition that had the good fortune of getting AKC recognition. Under today's AKC requirements, the Silky would not be recognized as anything more than a designer dog.
As to the health of the designer dogs, any breeding, be it pure bred or cross bred, has unknowns until the pups are born. A happy combination of genes can bring great results and an unlucky pairing, even with well bred healthy dogs, can bring disappointment and unexpected issues.
I do think that, statistically speaking, mixed breeds are healthier than pure breds. I remember the University of Tennessee study from a few years ago on liver shunt. All pure breeds had a higher incidence than the mixed breeds studied. Of course, a statistic is meaningless when applied to an individual, but it is telling in some ways.
All that being said, I don't advocate for mixed breedings and feel that it's true that most of those breeding 'designer' dogs don't have a clue about what they are doing. The same could be said for many breeding pure breds, however, so one has to be careful, no matter what. And it is very true that shelters are full of mixed breeds, which is probably the biggest reason not to support 'designer' breeders. There are too many of these dogs that already are in need of a home and I think getting one of these dogs would be a great choice for someone looking for a cute mixed breed.