Reputable cross breeder?

[Ringo1]

Originally Posted by QuickSilver

I'm not 100% sure that Thor is full yorkie, and I do wonder sometimes because he is SO light. But I adopted him from someone else, and as far as I'm concerned, he is perfect. I think "mutt" has some negative connotations, so I won't call a cross breed a mutt. But then again, I encourage everyone to consider rescue, not just those looking for cross breeds. If you do go to a breeder, you want one who is not only willing to take the dog back, but insists on it if the dog is surrendered. A reputable breeder should never let one of their dogs end up in a shelter.

I think Thor is adorable. I love his picture in your avatar.

[Britster]

Originally Posted by 2Morkies

I disagree with all of you who say that "no reputable breeder" will cross breed. Long ago...your little "pure bred" Yorkies were much bigger because they were used to catch mice and rats on boats and farms.

Yorkies were never bred with Maltese, as far as I know? Huddersfeld Ben was the original sire dog or "Father of the breed" for the Yorkie as we know it today. He was bigger at 9-12 lbs himself but he often produced smaller puppies. As far as I know, the Skye Terrier, the Paisley Terrier, and a few other small terriers were used in originally creating the Yorkie. And a Yorkie and an Australian Terrier were together to make the Silky Terrier. Either way, all that stuff confuses me, but back then they were doing it for more of a purpose I would think. Today it's just people mixing all these different breeds simply to produce cute puppies and what the public wants.

I have absolutely nothing against mixed breeds and would own one myself. I don't prefer the standard Yorkies, I like mine bigger, and out of standard! So I do truly wish they would up the size limit but today's world just wants tiny, tiny, tiny and tinier.

Oh and I totally agree there are a TON of purebred breeders who are not responsible or ethical either. It really sucks there's not a better way to regulate things, otherwise puppy mills would be out of business.

But I do understand why you must keep reputable purebreds going strong... I mean, there are breeds that are MADE for certain things. Some people look for friendliness, kid friendly, family dogs who are active and love to play, so they go for the Goldens and Labs. Some want a companion dog so they go for the Maltese. Some want a good working dog, they go for a GSD. There are reputable breeders who strive to better their breed and if we did not have those anymore, well, that would suck. People look for certain qualities in each breed when looking for a dog and the problem with mixing breeds just for the hell of it is that is lost. They could end up with the shedding of a Golden but the hair of a Poodle. Could end up like ANYTHING really. There is no set standard and that would just be weird if a GSD was no longer a GSD or a Golden was no longer a Golden. Ya gotta keep purebreds alive. Although I will say I think it's absolutely terrible what some have done to certain breeds like the bulldog, etc. That's a whole 'nother topic. Oh and the way the GSD has that back slouch... simply for show. So uncool.

There are many many GREAT mixed breeds out there. And I don't think people are terrible people for breeding them necessarily. Like you said, your Morkie breeder has been following up and sending pics, etc. That is GREAT! Atleast she is involved. I think people just get frustrated because it's become such a designer trend. People come in to the dog park and I ask what kind of dog and I get a response like "he's a chi-weenie" and I just wanna laugh! That is NOT a "breed!"

[manina]

U get what u pay for !!!!
Pure Yorkie don't came cheap ......
When u cross breed , u also cross breed their health problem ....
I have alway brought my furbabies fr breeder and byb , alway been happy with what I have gotten.
I will never , never buy fr a pet store , first the owner of the pet store don't care how or what the puppies were breed from. U don't know what health issue u will get later on in their life 10-14 years .... And the cost of tests and meds. What u don't pay in front, you will pay in the end .
If u have a good and healthly furbaby fr a pet store count your luckily star, not everyone can said that.
bark@ulater !!!
manina,mileymax

[pawever Yorkie]

Originally Posted by lexipoo

Well, I guess I am one of the lucky ones...Lexi is a Yorkie Poo in which we did purchase from "YES" a breeder. She has been absolutely wonderful and I would purchase one from her again. Lexi will be 2 in November and she calls and emails to check on her and see how she is doing. She asks for pictures to watch her grow and has always been apart of our life. It is hard to get upset at people who are as wonderful as she is giving people what they want...even if it does upset people but people do like mixed breeds for different reasons. I agree there are so many dogs and puppies in the pound that need loving homes and people get dogs without realizing the responsiblity that comes with them...."Mutts" or "Pure Breeds" they all can end up in the pound...just sad. Yes...breeding the designer dogs just for money can be upsetting but there are breeders breeding purebreed dogs for the same reason. Wish we could take all the dogs that need a loving home in and wish we could better educate people...but I have to say in the long run.....I am so happy the lady we meet gave us Lexi we couldn't be happier....Hugs...Cheryl & Lexi

Your baby is really cute.
I'm glad that you found very nice breeder.
The breeder like your's was the breeder I was asking about. If a person made up her mind on cross breed and won't change it, I rather help the person to find nice enough breeder than watch her going to the pet store. It's just my opinon....

[pawever Yorkie]

Originally Posted by Britster

Yorkies were never bred with Maltese, as far as I know? Huddersfeld Ben was the original sire dog or "Father of the breed" for the Yorkie as we know it today. He was bigger at 9-12 lbs himself but he often produced smaller puppies. As far as I know, the Skye Terrier, the Paisley Terrier, and a few other small terriers were used in originally creating the Yorkie. And a Yorkie and an Australian Terrier were together to make the Silky Terrier. Either way, all that stuff confuses me, but back then they were doing it for more of a purpose I would think. Today it's just people mixing all these different breeds simply to produce cute puppies and what the public wants.

I have absolutely nothing against mixed breeds and would own one myself. I don't prefer the standard Yorkies, I like mine bigger, and out of standard! So I do truly wish they would up the size limit but today's world just wants tiny, tiny, tiny and tinier.

Oh and I totally agree there are a TON of purebred breeders who are not responsible or ethical either. It really sucks there's not a better way to regulate things, otherwise puppy mills would be out of business.

But I do understand why you must keep reputable purebreds going strong... I mean, there are breeds that are MADE for certain things. Some people look for friendliness, kid friendly, family dogs who are active and love to play, so they go for the Goldens and Labs. Some want a companion dog so they go for the Maltese. Some want a good working dog, they go for a GSD. There are reputable breeders who strive to better their breed and if we did not have those anymore, well, that would suck. People look for certain qualities in each breed when looking for a dog and the problem with mixing breeds just for the hell of it is that is lost. They could end up with the shedding of a Golden but the hair of a Poodle. Could end up like ANYTHING really. There is no set standard and that would just be weird if a GSD was no longer a GSD or a Golden was no longer a Golden. Ya gotta keep purebreds alive. Although I will say I think it's absolutely terrible what some have done to certain breeds like the bulldog, etc. That's a whole 'nother topic. Oh and the way the GSD has that back slouch... simply for show. So uncool.

There are many many GREAT mixed breeds out there. And I don't think people are terrible people for breeding them necessarily. Like you said, your Morkie breeder has been following up and sending pics, etc. That is GREAT! Atleast she is involved. I think people just get frustrated because it's become such a designer trend. People come in to the dog park and I ask what kind of dog and I get a response like "he's a chi-weenie" and I just wanna laugh! That is NOT a "breed!"

I was going to write the same thing...
I don't support cross breeder unless one's purpose is to create certain breed(which takes yrs and yrs of study)which I have yet to find one. There are just too many cross breeds(some are mixed up to 3~4 = dingo???)for $$$. Sometimes I don't even know what to call them, because I can't recognize specific features of certain breed. In a way, cross breeding is stepping back from what so many reputable breeders have achieved. however, If I fail to change person's mind on getting cross breed, I rather recommend person a breeder like "2morkies"' 's breeder than let him or her head to the pet store.... as my last resort. BTW. whenever I read your thread, it makes me feel like Brister's talking to me with this calm voice... He looks like a wise man

[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.

[pawever Yorkie]

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.

[Beamers Mom]

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.

[Rhetts_mama]

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.

Excellent post.

[Ladymom]

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.

Great post, Misty!

[Woogie Man]

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.

[Mardelin]

Originally Posted by Woogie Man

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.

There is validity in what you say. However, the Yorkshire Terrier became a recognized breed by recognized kennel clubs before their true function was lost in the jumble of progress. They may never get back to their orginal purpose, but they will be able to competite in AKC Earth Dog Events. An even that requires their full terrier attitude and temperament.

[lexipoo]

Originally Posted by Ringo1

She IS a darling girl; I must say!

Thanks for the sweet comment. She is the love of our life

[jrsygal37]

Originally Posted by Ladymom

Reputable breeders strive to produce the healthiest and best representation of their chosen breed as possible. They carefully follow the breed standard and follow the guidelines of the breed club.

Breeders who choose to mix breeds have no standard to follow, no breed club. They produce puppies for profit. Some are better than others, but none fit the definition of a reputable breeder.

If a newbie asks for a recommendation for someone who intentionally breeds mixes, the best thing we can do help them choose which breed they prefer and encourage them to get a puppy from a responsible breeder.

Or ADOPT the mix they are interested in from a reputable rescue or shelter. Pet adoption: Want a dog or cat? Adopt a pet on Petfinder.

[lexipoo]

Originally Posted by pawever Yorkie

Your baby is really cute.
I'm glad that you found very nice breeder.
The breeder like your's was the breeder I was asking about. If a person made up her mind on cross breed and won't change it, I rather help the person to find nice enough breeder than watch her going to the pet store. It's just my opinon....

Thanks...Lexi is so amazing to us I agree with your thoughts in all of this. You know when someone makes up there mind it is hard to change that. There are all kinds of breeders out there and they are in it for all kinds of reasons. Some good and some bad...I count my blessings for being as so many say "the lucky one" but I have friends who have "Pure" breed Yorkies who have health issues. I think we just need to keep in mind that we are not all the same and because someone wants a mixed breed dog isn't a "BAD" thing. Yes there are so many dogs in pounds needing homes and I do understand the frustration in that but it's not just because of "ALL" the mixed breed dogs being born. I work for the county and I know there are "MANY" pure breed dogs in the shelter too. It seems as if we are saying hmmmmm, ok you want a "Pure" breed dog ok look for a reputiable breeder. You want a mixed breed dog "Mutt" as so many like to call them....well, go to the pound....just my opion. Please don't jump all over me for this but some people really want to raise a "puppy" I know we got Lexi as a puppy and have enjoyed watching her grow up.
I really do understand where everyone is coming from I guess I just think we need to be a little more understanding too.....they are "ALL" wonderful little creatures and should be loved and cared for regardless of how they got here