Designer Dogs

[chachi]

Originally Posted by elliebear

I didn't buy her as a designer dog i bought her as a cross breed of my two favorite breeds and i wanted the best i could get and that's exactly what i got !
Her parents are beautiful pedigree dogs and are owned by the same lady as family pets, not just some object that you use for a few years then give away. she did very well with her pups and Lola is very gentle and well behaved.
however you are entitled to your opinion but there was no need to quote me into it !

I didnt realize I quoted you IM sorry. Mine was just a general opinion not directed at you or anyone else

[ARCHIE]

My son has a Cava-poo. King Charles Spaniel and miniature poodle combo.
He paid $1,200.00 for him. Dumb, dumb and dummier! IMO
The KCS is a beautiful dog to begin with why mess with it? I am not a fan
of poodles. This dog is cute, that's about it. Nothing to brag about and looks
like any dog you would have gotten from a pound. The dog was breed in
No.Carolina and they found the "Breeder" on line. They drove down to get him. The mix was suppose to give you a shed free pup, since poodles
don't shed. Yea right. He sheds like any other dog with fur. LOL
What a rip off. I love him, he's my grandpup but not worth the $ or
trouble of breeding this mix.

[voodoochyl]

Originally Posted by cj125

I'm not sure what your comment about having the runt of the litter and it not being the breeder's choice is all about - could you please explain that? ...I'm giving my opinion on your post about "designer breeds".

I just meant that I got the little runt of the litter, and when he got bigger, he didn't exhibit all the recognized standards for the breed. We wanted to breed him so we could have another one, but I learned that breeding can be a touchy subject. We decided not to, as we didn't want to pass on his characteristics...even though we want a 2nd one really badly.

As far as the other statement, that is why I posted the topic. I figured it would be a good conversation starter. Also, I just saw a thing on Dogs 101...and they were talking about a few mixed breeds including the Chorkie.

[normarae63]

Great discussion!
I don't have much input other than to agree that it's rediculous that some people are getting exhorbant amounts of money for these so called designer dogs.

I myself have a Yorkie who I was told was AKC but found he was really not; doesn't mean we love him less, just shows how deceitful people can be. We did some research before getting him but I soon found out it was clearly not enough to steer us away from what turned out to be a group of byb's. We've already decided there will be another in our lives added to Tuffy but next time will be much differant thanks to all the knowledge gained here at YT. I'm a firm believer in the old saying that knowledge is power; with so much shared knowledge, YT is awesome!

TC all
Sherry

[aqeuous18]

I see a lot of these mixes in my line of work. I have the say the majority of these "designer" dogs end up being from puppy millers. Sometimes the dogs look nothing like the two breeds they were supposedly crossed with. They end up with terrible genetic defects especially dental and skin issues!

It's always the toys too that suffer! At least Goldendoodles and Labradoodles are normally bred from breed standard Goldens and Poodles. I've seen few problems with these pups.

[elliebear]

Originally Posted by chachi

I didnt realize I quoted you IM sorry. Mine was just a general opinion not directed at you or anyone else

thats ok

[stingraylady]

I certainly don't agree with "designing" puppies, to me it's as bad as people who want to 'design' their unborn children. I do think some of the appeal of the "teacups" and "toys" are that they always look like puppies, and isn't that what attracts people in the first place.
Just my two cents!!LOL

Cathy

[QuickSilver]

I honestly think this topic is kind of a red herring. The real issue is the irresponsible, mass production of dogs, purebred or mixed. Puppy mills are the largest producers of purebred dogs in this country.

At my rescue, most of the animals are mixed, though we do get a sizable majority of purebred chis. We almost never get a "designer" mix. I'm not sure where people are getting the idea that if you want a morkie, you just pop down to your local shelter.

I don't believe that dogs have any inherent monetary value, so dogs cost what they cost. If the public decides that they are willing to pay more for a shih tzu than a yorkie, than shih tzus are more "valuable", or simply more expensive. If people want to pay a lot for chorkies, than chorkies will be expensive. Value is in the eye of the beholder.

That being said, I do believe in responsible breeding, which means screening out health problems and making sure all your pups will go to good homes. From what I can see, someone who goes to the effort of breeding responsibly will want to breed pure breds, rather than cross two breeds, since that would likely just be a shot in the dark.

I don't know, I've seen some really great cockapoos. They're gorgeous, and they're much smarter than the cocker spaniel, which is one of the dumbest breeds out there. That's always turned me off about cockers, so to me, a cockapoo might be a good idea.

[Britster]

Originally Posted by QuickSilver

I honestly think this topic is kind of a red herring. The real issue is the irresponsible, mass production of dogs, purebred or mixed. Puppy mills are the largest producers of purebred dogs in this country.

At my rescue, most of the animals are mixed, though we do get a sizable majority of purebred chis. We almost never get a "designer" mix. I'm not sure where people are getting the idea that if you want a morkie, you just pop down to your local shelter.

I don't believe that dogs have any inherent monetary value, so dogs cost what they cost. If the public decides that they are willing to pay more for a shih tzu than a yorkie, than shih tzus are more "valuable", or simply more expensive. If people want to pay a lot for chorkies, than chorkies will be expensive. Value is in the eye of the beholder.

That being said, I do believe in responsible breeding, which means screening out health problems and making sure all your pups will go to good homes. From what I can see, someone who goes to the effort of breeding responsibly will want to breed pure breds, rather than cross two breeds, since that would likely just be a shot in the dark.

I don't know, I've seen some really great cockapoos. They're gorgeous, and they're much smarter than the cocker spaniel, which is one of the dumbest breeds out there. That's always turned me off about cockers, so to me, a cockapoo might be a good idea.

Boy, I've missed your posts around here.

Totally agree.

I think there ARE some responsible, respectable breeders out there who are not puppy mills or BYB and really want what's best. Cockapoo's have been around since the late 1940's (or early 1950's) and they've been trying to get accepted into the AKC for years. They're great dogs. My mom had one, she was smart as can be. Golden Retrievers weren't accepted for a LONG time either. They were a mix of some hound and something else, I believe. All dogs come from mixes somewhere and as long as your doing it responsibility, I don't see anything wrong with it. Some people LOVE the Labrador breed but don't like shedding or have allergy issues; hence the Labradoodle... which I believe is a true breed in the UK.

Now if you're just the average joe that says "Hmm... my pug would look cute with this Yorkie!" that's just dumb.

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by Britster

Some people LOVE the Labrador breed but don't like shedding or have allergy issues; hence the Labradoodle... which I believe is a true breed in the UK.

I see this type of explanation a lot, but it's a contradiction in itself. How can one satisfy their desire for one breed if they are getting something else altogether? It's like saying you love Yorkies, but don't like what color they are, so you get a Maltese instead.
First off, allergies are mostly aggravated by pet dander, not the shed hair. A dog that is a non shedding breed still has pet dander. I find the whole "hypoallergenic" label that is given to some breeds or used as justification for making mutts to be a complete load of crap. Secondly, it's not a sure bet that a mix of the two breeds will even result in a non shedding dog--there is a good chance that the dogs will inherit the Lab coat type and shed anyway. So if that is the reason for breeding "Labradoodles", then what does that make the pups that didn't inherit the desired traits? Worthless?

[rosey442]

Before adding my 2 cents worth; I'd like to begin by saying that I love all animals and that my family has had it's fair share of cross-bred dogs as well as purebreds through the years. In our case, the one cross-bred dog, while such a sweet baby, had a multitude of health issues and ended up having to be put down as the quality of his life was so severely impacted upon.
My personal opinion is that these so called designer dogs are nothing more than cross-bred dogs being bred simply to make a quick buck with little regard as to the dog's health and well-being. I feel that people are being duped into thinking that these cross mixes are an actual breed and end up paying far more than they should as it becomes a crap shoot as to the dog's temperament and health .
As others on here who have already stated; dogs should be bred for the proper breed standard, and not simply for money. They should be properly mentored as to the proper way to test and use their breeding dogs. As I am not a breeder, I have nothing else to add on the subject.
For those who do own a mixed breed dog; please understand that these are just my personal opinions and not a personal attack on anyone as I know that these dogs can be just as healthy, cute and sweet as a purebred.

[MaddiesMommie]

I have a full Yorkie and a rescued maltese/shih tzu mix. I love them both so much and never really think about whose bloodline is what.

When I read the post about mutts being healthier than full blooded, it reminded me of my grandpa. He always said this. He would swear the best dogs had owned were strays and mutts. LOL He would flip if he knew I payed for Maddie. His beliefs are explained by Darwin's "survival of the fittest". The strongest and healthiest traits were able to survive to be passed on.

I do not think this is the case when some gets two cute puppies, raises them, and breeds them because they make adorable puppies. I believe it takes years and years and even more years for weak or unhealthy traits to be bred out of a line if ever. Not something that can be done by inexperiened breeder just looking to make a quick buck.

[Keion]

I have a "yorkiepoo" and he is my baby. I didn't exactly buy him as a designer dog though, when I bought him he was an "accidental" litter I guess, and his parents are now spayed and neutered.



Now I don't agree with the "designer dog" craze. But I do like Crossbreeding. All theses "-oodle mixes" drive me crazy but I do like people who crossbreed, when there is a purpose that is. I know plenty of great breeders who crossbreed for a purpose and have fantastic dogs. And crossbreeding has produced some amazing dog breeds "the Mi-Ki" and the "Tamaskan" and plenty of others. Any why not? To me it avoids line-breeding which I hate with a passion and if you have a purpose and need to crossbreed to get the job done, why not!

That is what the labradoodle was suppose to provide (although it is that "designer" breeders that gave it it's "oodle name"). It was suppose to provide a hypoallerginic replacement for a guide dog. Is that so bad? No.

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by Keion

That is what the labradoodle was suppose to provide (although it is that "designer" breeders that gave it it's "oodle name"). It was suppose to provide a hypoallerginic replacement for a guide dog. Is that so bad? No.

But that's just the point--the whole "hypoallergenic" spill is hogwash. Detergent is hypoallergenic. Shampoos are hypoallergenic. Dogs are NOT. The most one could hope for with a "Labradoodle" would be to inherit the non-shedding factor from the poodle, but it doesn't make the dog "hypoallergenic." If people want a non-shedding dog, there are plenty of existing breeds out there already to choose from...why crossbreed?

I agree with you, if it is being done for a purpose, and it's a long term goal with coordinated efforts on behalf of many breeders, doing extensive medical tests and recording and comparing the outcomes, that's one thing...but the reality is, that is not what is happening with most of the "designer dogs" being produced and sold these days.

[QuickSilver]

I don't know if a shedding labradoodle would be "worthless" unless an off-color pure bred yorkie is "worthless". The dog doesn't embody the desired traits, which are often arbitrary. Yellow labs used to be culled, now they are more popular than black labs.

I don't see how "hypoallergenic" is BS, because of course, one of the benefits of a yorkie is the non-shedding coat. If a labradoodle is a true breed in the UK, why should we dismiss it out of hand in the US? I don't think it's enough to say, "we have enough breeds already." Why not say "breeds are good enough as they are, and don't need improvement"? The key is responsibility, I think.

I think part of the reason for all the "oodles" is that the poodle is horribly inbred, but it has many wonderful traits. Personally, the labradoodles I've seen look like more like yaks than dogs, but hey, to each their own.