Designer Breeds

DBB

john t wrote: »

Once dog is cared for the by owner and dog is happpy there should be no problem....

I'm afraid it's not quite as simple as this. It's all very well that your designer xbreed is well-cared by you. It's all very well that someone else has bought a designer x-breed and gives them a great life.
But to boil it down to it's basics, it's not what happens to the pup once he's been bought. It's what happens to his parents. It's what your money from your pup is going to support. It's the raison d'etre that anyone who is purposely producing westiechons, cavachons. boxadors, whatever-doodles, puggles, pugaliers, yorkiechons, jackachis, chirussells, oh the list goes on... not one of these breeders has offered one single acceptable reason for producing such fanficully named mongrels... other than making nice money from them.
We've got to look at this problem beyond what the buyer can give the resultant puppies. It's the production of these pups from conception of the idea to conception of the pups that's the problem: it's a cynical, profiteering exercise. Unless a producer of such cutely-named, overpriced mongrels can come on here and convince me otherwise?
There is a much bigger picture here: what happens to the pups is one thing. What happens to their parents is quite another. Let's not fool ourselves any longer here: anyone producing "designer xbreeds" wants your money. End of. Until a breeder of said pups convinces me otherwise. It'll be a long wait!

lrushe

nudag wrote: »

I would prefer to have my labradoodle than some poor inbred pedigree like a bulldog.

I spent 6 months looking for a "breeder" who hip, eye and elbow scored her dogs. I waited another 4 months til there was a pup available. I was in weekly contact with the "breeder" who was just great and answered every question I had.

A Lab/Poodle mix or any other cross isn't necessarily less inbred than a pedigree especially if it's an F1 cross, it could just as easily come from an inbred Labrador and inbred Poodle.
Do you know the hip score of the parents off hand? Are you going to get your guys hips scored, I'm just curious more than anything else as there isn't much precedent on crosses, what is consider a good hip score for a Lab/Poodle cross if 14-15 to good for a Poodle and 10-11 is good for a Lab, what considered good for their cross, thanks.

getz

nudag wrote: »

I would prefer to have my labradoodle than some poor inbred pedigree like a bulldog.

I spent 6 months looking for a "breeder" who hip, eye and elbow scored her dogs. I waited another 4 months til there was a pup available. I was in weekly contact with the "breeder" who was just great and answered every question I had.

I agree there are a lot of people out there trying to make a quick buck, but they continue to exist cause of people lack of cop on and not doing any research! A friend got a king Charles about a year ago. I told him I was looking for a labradoodle but was waiting to find the right dog who's parents were tested for hip, eye and elbows. He hadn't a clue what I was talking about!

This government need to crack down on byb big time

i have had bulldogs for 30 years,and have not had problems,i do not know about what kind of breeders you have in ireland, but in the UK, the kennel club is very efficient on making sure there is no inbreeding on their KC reg bullies,i got my last one from a accredited breeder,and i get regular contact from both the KC and the breeder,no dog of any breed or cross breed is problem free,but neither are people.

nudag

She is a 6th gen Australian Labradoodle. I dont have them here with me now, but remember looking at the vets report and saying to myself they were very low to the max allowed.

Sorry getz I didnt mean to offend. I got my dog in Scotland, there were a few people in Ireland I contacted but wasnt happy with any of them. The UK seems light years ahead with the way they treat animals and also how they deal with people who take advantage of animals.

getz

nudag wrote: »

She is a 6th gen Australian Labradoodle. I dont have them here with me now, but remember looking at the vets report and saying to myself they were very low to the max allowed.

Sorry getz I didnt mean to offend. I got my dog in Scotland, there were a few people in Ireland I contacted but wasnt happy with any of them. The UK seems light years ahead with the way they treat animals and also how they deal with people who take advantage of animals.

no its me i get over protective about bullies,and i still find it strange to see my TJ with a tail on him,

pokertalk

Evac105 wrote: »

Not entirely sure you're interested in dialogue rather then berating people with that comment
.

my comment is not directed at anyone in this thread .
why breed a cross when there are so many in need of rescue and im sure if someone would like a cross of two certin dogs there is one in rescue somewhere its just a matter of doing some research.people need to do their homework when buying a dog and if they are buying one from a byb or puppy farmer then they deffo have not done any homework. dont get me wrong there is some of dodgy breeders breeding pure bred dogs out there but its up to us when buying a dog to look for tell tale signs of bad breeders.there are loads of good breeders out there we just have to research it more;)

TOOYOUNGTODIE

I have no issue at all with a mongrel. i dont think money should be paid for any dog( differnt topic different day) but if all you want is a pet, well then go ahead.
but if you want a dog for a specific purpose then you need a pure bred dog as its proven with the right training it will do xyz. eg sheepdog, gun dog, guard dog etc.
I hate the superior attitute pure bred owners have, all dogs are great characters regardless of what they do ro dont do.

I have two pets a mongrel terrier type and a patterdale(some say not a recognised breed). the fecking patterdale is stone mad, i know what he is bred for and i'd say he would be great at that, totally fearless and full of beans. I have a full time job on my hands to try tire the little fecker out. who ever invented canicross, i owe them. i was pulled around by both dogs for 8k on saturday afternoon, it calmed them down for about half an hour.:D

pokertalk

TOOYOUNGTODIE wrote: »

I have no issue at all with a mongrel. i dont think money should be paid for any dog( differnt topic different day) but if all you want is a pet, well then go ahead.
but if you want a dog for a specific purpose then you need a pure bred dog as its proven with the right training it will do xyz. eg sheepdog, gun dog, guard dog etc.
I hate the superior attitute pure bred owners have, all dogs are great characters regardless of what they do ro dont do.

I have two pets a mongrel terrier type and a patterdale(some say not a recognised breed). the fecking patterdale is stone mad, i know what he is bred for and i'd say he would be great at that, totally fearless and full of beans. I have a full time job on my hands to try tire the little fecker out. who ever invented canicross, i owe them. i was pulled around by both dogs for 8k on saturday afternoon, it calmed them down for about half an hour.:D

i dont think anyone here is having a go at x breed dogs in fact im sure of it:D

ISDW

john t wrote: »

We purchase our dog/ family pet because the pup or our kids click on sight. Designer breeds do not exist in real world only when people compliment on a persons dog as a designer breed, we shoud let people own their dog without passing comment... Once dog is cared for the by owner and dog is happpy there should be no problem....

I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean by that. Look at any of the buy and sell sites, and you will see designer dogs in their droves.

TOOYOUNGTODIE wrote: »

I hate the superior attitute pure bred owners have, all dogs are great characters regardless of what they do ro dont do.

I have a full time job on my hands to try tire the little fecker out. who ever invented canicross, i owe them. i was pulled around by both dogs for 8k on saturday afternoon, it calmed them down for about half an hour.:D

I have pure breds and I don't have a superior attitude about my dogs at all, I also own crossbreeds.

Canicross is a great sport, hopefully it will continue to grow here. I've been to a couple of sled dog rallies in the UK and they have canicross classes, great to see smaller, terrier type dogs taking part, you see all shapes and sizes competing - people as well as their dogs:D

Not backseat modding (I hope it won't be seen as that) but it seems that a lot of people don't actually read what is written, but rather see what they want to. Cross breeds and Designer 'breeds' are different things. Most people on this forum advise people who want to buy a pedigree dog to only go to reputable breeders who do health testing etc. So hopefully anybody buying a pb dog is buying a healthy one. I can't see where anyone has said only buy a pb dog, and not go to a reputable breeder, we all know there are far too many bad breeders out there. But, if someone is deliberately crossing dogs and selling them on Donedeal, Buy and sell etc etc, then they are a bad, non reputable breeder. I don't see how anybody can argue with that.

If someone has an accidental litter, fair enough, it happens. But to deliberately cross two breeds, stick a fancy name on them and an even fancier price tag - that is irresponsible and wrong. The breeding stock won't have been health tested, so of course there will be more health problems with those dogs than if the pups were pb from a reputable breeder.

I've mentioned before that I had a Rottie cross, he died very, very young of lymphoma, a disease that is prevelant in Rotties. The fact that he also had labrador or whatever else in there didn't stop him developing this. So I don't understand this theory that crossbreeds are healthier. Yes, I realise that there is a larger gene pool with crosses, but again, it comes down to reputable, responsible breeders who look to expand the gene pool of their breed by going abroad for new blood lines.

If anybody wants a crossbreed, great, but please don't go and spend hundreds of euros on one that is given a made up name and ensures that its parents live a life of squalor and pain because you want a designer dog.

andreac

I own pure breds, rottweilers and we have owned mongrels in the past and i certainly dont have a superior attitude.

I think you are missing the point of this thread.;)

What we have a problem with is people deliberately crossing 2 breeds, getting a mongrel, then putting a fancy, ridiculous name on it and charging a fortune for it, thats what we have a problem with.:rolleyes:

irisheddie85

This is probably off topic but i dont know as ive never had a purebred dog.
If a reputable breeder crossed a health checked dog with another breed and then took the pups that still resembled breed standard and were healthly could these be registered as the original type of dog?
If this was done with a few bitches and dogs and then the pups were interbred to make sure they still held to a standard would this bring in a larger gene pool without Getting a new breed?
Or would all the puppies be mongrels from then on in the eyes of the KC because of the cross

andreac

irisheddie85 wrote: »

This is probably off topic but i dont know as ive never had a purebred dog.
If a reputable breeder crossed a health checked dog with another breed and then took the pups that still resembled breed standard and were healthly could these be registered as the original type of dog?
If this was done with a few bitches and dogs and then the pups were interbred to make sure they still held to a standard would this bring in a larger gene pool without Getting a new breed?
Or would all the puppies be mongrels from then on in the eyes of the KC because of the cross

No, they couldnt, sure how could they be registered as the original type of dog when it isnt??

How would it resemble breed standard if its 2 different breeds?

Its against the Kennel Club rules to cross two different breeds also.

ISDW

irisheddie85 wrote: »

This is probably off topic but i dont know as ive never had a purebred dog.
If a reputable breeder crossed a health checked dog with another breed and then took the pups that still resembled breed standard and were healthly could these be registered as the original type of dog?
If this was done with a few bitches and dogs and then the pups were interbred to make sure they still held to a standard would this bring in a larger gene pool without Getting a new breed?
Or would all the puppies be mongrels from then on in the eyes of the KC because of the cross

Well now, what a can of worms that one is:D

A programme like that was done in Canada (or America) I think, with dalmatians, they crossed a pointer in to help eradicate a particular health issue with dallies. One of these progeny from this crossing was at Crufts this year or last year, can't remember which now.

Link to the website about the outcrossing project

http://www.luadalmatians.com/

There is a line of Siberian Huskies, the zero line that came from the US and a few were imported into the UK, and there was much discussion - still raging to this day about whether they were pb sibes or whether the breeder had put alaskan husky in there - as he had alaskans in his kennels. So much controversy about this, the dogs were all KC registered as pb sibes, but one racing organisation in the UK won't allow any zero lines in their breeding up to 5 generations ago to run with them.

irisheddie85

andreac wrote: »

No, they couldnt, sure how could they be registered as the original type of dog when it isnt??

How would it resemble breed standard if its 2 different breeds?

Its against the Kennel Club rules to cross two different breeds also.

Ok so it wouldnt be able to be registered because of kennel club rules.
There is some variation in every breed of dog, some are completely different colours but still the same breed an size can vary slightly so there is a chance a cross of 2 similar looking breeds would give a pup out of a litter that would fit one breed standard on looks, or close enough that being bred back with other purebreeds would give you a standard look.
But not by KC rules

andreac

irisheddie85 wrote: »

Ok so it wouldnt be able to be registered because of kennel club rules.
There is some variation in every breed of dog, some are completely different colours but still the same breed an size can vary slightly so there is a chance a cross of 2 similar looking breeds would give a pup out of a litter that would fit one breed standard on looks, or close enough that being bred back with other purebreeds would give you a standard look.
But not by KC rules

No they arent. In some breeds there are acceptable colours as per breed standard, eg Great Dane.
In Rottweilers for example, Black and Tan are the only colours allowed, you dont get variations of this at all so what you are posting doesnt apply and is untrue.

Zapperzy

irisheddie85 wrote: »

Ok so it wouldnt be able to be registered because of kennel club rules.
There is some variation in every breed of dog, some are completely different colours but still the same breed an size can vary slightly so there is a chance a cross of 2 similar looking breeds would give a pup out of a litter that would fit one breed standard on looks, or close enough that being bred back with other purebreeds would give you a standard look.
But not by KC rules

Yes and no, the breed standard is a little more complicated than 'dog must be x height and be black with a brown muzzle', it involves every last detail in a dog down to what way the tail and ears should be carried, so for example say you bred a rottie with a poodle the chances of getting a pup out of that litter that looked exactly like a rottie or a poodle according to the breed standard is pretty much impossible.
Now what happened with the dalmations is slightly different, as far as I know pointers were originally one of the breeds that made up dalmations and after introducing a pointer and then breeding back to dalmations after a few generations there is absolutely no difference compared to the original dalmation except that it is healthier. And I think there was a lot of controversy over getting the 'new' dalmations to be recognised by the KC.

In my opinion this needs to be done with a lot more breeds but must be done with bucket loads of careful consideration with health in mind and also keeping the breeds as close to the original standard as possible (where the standard is not conflicting with health).

star-pants

andreac wrote: »

What we have a problem with is people deliberately crossing 2 breeds, getting a mongrel, then putting a fancy, ridiculous name on it and charging a fortune for it, thats what we have a problem with.

I think that's the best explanation of the issues surrounding 'designer breeds'.

I own two pure bred dogs, I don't think I'm better than any other dog owner and I love all dogs to be honest, 3 legs, 1 eye, whatever.
We have the specific breed for a reason, and whilst one was more of a rehoming, the second one was looked into before buying because she was a pup and we wanted to be careful etc.

Obviously some breeds did come from somewhere, some might be from cross breeding in previous times but to just decide to cross two random pure bred dogs is not always the best idea. You can get the best or the worst of both and you don't know what type of health issues you can be creating.

With pure breeds, some of them have been sooo pure bred that they have now issues they might not have had in the past, which is why it's even more dangerous now to mix dogs (other than by accident which does happen) and fashion them as a 'new breed'.

I think 'designer breeds' on one hand have possibly some good intentions in the sense of trying to breed out health problems. But for the most part it is probably not done for that reason. If a certain breed becomes 'fashionable' everyone wants one. Like with ''miniature'' yorkies and huskeys and other 'in' dogs.
It's much like the idea of a puppy for Christmas, sounds great, everyone wants one but in reality might not be the best idea.

Nothing against anyone wanting a specific type of dog, but I just feel that we don't have strict enough regulations enforced on breeding anyway, so it means that cross breeding has even less regulations because they're not even remotely monitored.

(waffling now, and may not have made any sense! lol)

irisheddie85

andreac wrote: »

No they arent. In some breeds there are acceptable colours as per breed standard, eg Great Dane.
In Rottweilers for example, Black and Tan are the only colours allowed, you dont get variations of this at all so what you are posting doesnt apply and is untrue.

Sorry what i said was just based on anecdotal evidence of what breeds people say their dog is while I'm out walking my mongrel, so the examples probably aren't as purebred as the owner likes to think and making there seem to be more variation than there actually is.
Out of interest since you mentioned Rottweilers Now that they are no longer being docked how does the breed standard say a tail should look or was that always in the rules for the breed

andreac

irisheddie85 wrote: »

Sorry what i said was just based on anecdotal evidence of what breeds people say their dog is while I'm out walking my mongrel, so the examples probably aren't as purebred as the owner likes to think and making there seem to be more variation than there actually is.
Out of interest since you mentioned Rottweilers Now that they are no longer being docked how does the breed standard say a tail should look or was that always in the rules for the breed

Docking is still legal in Ireland so people are still docking them.

I think the standard has just been set according to the Rottweiler Club in the UK it goes as follows:

Whilst a Rottweiler tail may be carried in a half-moon or sabre fashion, it should NOT curl right over the dogs back in a double curl, nor should it touch the back or be carried to one side of the dogs back. The base of the tail should NOT come away from the spine at a vertical angle. Also kinks along the tail should be penalised as they are a genetic defect.

ISDW

irisheddie85 wrote: »

Sorry what i said was just based on anecdotal evidence of what breeds people say their dog is while I'm out walking my mongrel, so the examples probably aren't as purebred as the owner likes to think and making there seem to be more variation than there actually is.
Out of interest since you mentioned Rottweilers Now that they are no longer being docked how does the breed standard say a tail should look or was that always in the rules for the breed

The problem, as it always is:rolleyes: are disreputable, irresponsible breeders. People who have more than one breed on their property and so sometimes can't be sure who the sire of the pups is. But, if they own a sire of the same breed, they can put that dog's details down on the paperwork, there are no checks. So yes, I think there probably are an awful lot of supposedly pedigree dogs out there that aren't pedigree.

Always comes down to doing your homework and only going to a reputable, responsible breeder.

nudag

Docking, a horrible practice.

john t

dbb who said i own a mythical designer breed.isdw i have looked at many charts/ lists of dog breeds and designer breed does not exict... D IS DALMNATION, DOBERMAN ETC DINGO BUT NO DESIGNER BREED SO IT NOT KNOWN/ RECOGNISED..It is a term used by people who feel free or have autority too judge...

Shanao

We all know that designer breeds dont exist, this is what these so-called breeders are calling them and selling them as. For example:

http://www.donedeal.ie/for-sale/dogs/2339655

http://www.donedeal.ie/for-sale/dogs/2327051

http://www.donedeal.ie/for-sale/dogs/2275367

http://www.donedeal.ie/for-sale/dogs/2307743

http://www.donedeal.ie/for-sale/dogs/2297324

http://www.donedeal.ie/for-sale/dogs/2271846

These are just a few examples. This is why we use the term 'designer breed' because that is what these BYBs and Puppy farmers are calling them. It is not a term used by us because we're 'judging' as you put it.

Evac105

Two very separate points to address here.

Firstly, the distinction between my Boxer/Lab and a Boxer/Lab described as a Boxador (which, being fair, my wife sometimes does, to my irritation) is what exactly? Either they're both mongrels or they're both 'designer breeds'. Genetically they're identical(ish). Labels am bad okay? (or at least Labels which are open to multiple interpretations am bad okay?)

What you've said yourselves, fellow pet lovers, is that it's the breeders not the dogs that you have issues with so perhaps retitling this thread from Designer Breeds to 'Uneithical puppy farmers with dubious practices' would be a more accurate description? It's not the dogs themselves that people have a problem with but the motivation for their production surely so why are we debating the dogs rather then the sources?

Secondly, while I appreciate that folks want to protect dogs and prevent needless incidents of puppies/dogs being PTS, it's also disingenuous to suggest that every prospective owner is going to find their newest friend in a rescue. All of the rescues have restrictions which, while obviously intended to protect their charges, can cause issues in adopting a new pet. Because myself and my wife both work full time we're automatically excluded from adopting dogs from some rescues - explaining that we intended to have the new dog join our current pet in 'doggie daycare' had no effect.

Similarly the dogs available in a given period of time from a rescue may not be suitable for the owner, or the circumstances of the owner. Two brief examples - the adorable 3 yr old Rottie in Dogs Trust and the collie/lurcher cross in DSPCA. The Rottie in Dogs Trust is a wonderful, energetic, loving dog with good basic obedience and a great nature - unfortunately, living in Dublin itself and not driving, we would never have the opportunity to leave that dog run free, even to play fetch outside our garden would be impossible due to the RB requirements. Yes, I know many folk ignore them, but I'm the sort of person who obeys the laws, even when I think they're stupid. The Rottie has a better life in Dogs Trust then I can give him, since there, at least, there are areas where he can play fetch and run to his hearts content - I can't provide that. The collie/lurcher in DSPCA has been there since being 3 months old and is now 10 months old. Both myself and my wife felt that he had no interest in engaging with humans, not even with the DSPCA staff who knew him. I realise that this is to be expected with a dog in care for so long but it makes it difficult to feel like you've made any kind of attachment with the dog - sorry if this makes anyone upset but for me, making that connection is an important part of deciding to adopt a pet from a care centre because, unlike a 12 week old puppy, many rescue dogs have history which colour their temperament and future behaviour. I felt I needed to have some sort of interaction with a dog beyond it regarding me as an inconvenient weight at the end of it's lead. Some hope that a friendship could be forged.

I kind of trailed off at this point as the memories of visiting the various rescue centres we went to still affects me - as a generous friend who had given us a lift up to Ashtown remarked "Sure you'd take them all home with you if you could". It is distressing that we couldn't/can't for one reason or another (many dogs we looked at were not suitable in the rescue centre staffs opinions as they would have been the second dog in our home) and if my circumstances change and that we're looking for a new pet in the future I'll visit the rescue centres first (as we did on this occasion) but sometimes, unfortunately, things don't 'fit' for the various types of reasons I've described. While I'm happy to agree that the rescue centres should be the first stop for folks looking for a new buddy, I also feel that not everyone will find the buddy they're looking for in there - or even if they do feel that they have, that the staff will agree (for their own, based on previous experience and probably perfectly logical, reasons).

Shanao

Evac105 wrote: »

Two very separate points to address here.
Firstly, the distinction between my Boxer/Lab and a Boxer/Lab described as a Boxador (which, being fair, my wife sometimes does, to my irritation) is what exactly? Either they're both mongrels or they're both 'designer breeds'. Genetically they're identical(ish). Labels am bad okay? (or at least Labels which are open to multiple interpretations am bad okay?)

What you've said yourselves, fellow pet lovers, is that it's the breeders not the dogs that you have issues with so perhaps retitling this thread from Designer Breeds to 'Uneithical puppy farmers with dubious practices' would be a more accurate description? It's not the dogs themselves that people have a problem with but the motivation for their production surely so why are we debating the dogs rather then the sources?

The difference being that for some bizarre reason when people hear the word mongrel (obviously those idiotic people who have a dog for social standing etc) they are put off. Giving it a name, especially when most of them actually think it is a purebred, makes people want one.

Genetically they are identical, and you are very, very lucky if that dog lives out its whole life without any of the problems associated with either labradors or boxers. With purebreds, you know what the health issues might be and can screen/test for them, in a crossbreed, the risk of health issues is somewhat doubled as the parents aren't healthtested and again, you can get genetical problems from both breeds.

I lately met someone who had gotten a mastiff crossed with a great dane. They dont know what to do with the dog; he's ten months old, has the dane height but the mastiff weight. Dane's legs were not built to take the weight of the mastiff and the dog can barely stay on his feet. In another few months, I imagine he will be pts to be put out of his misery as the dog can barely walk now

So, dogs that are being crossbred for money, with the risk of all health problems being present is what I was complaining about. I have no problem with the dogs, all dogs have a right to life, its the breeders that I detest. (And the people who proudly state, 'I have a Cockapoo', i mean seriously, how people can announce that with a straight face, i just do not know. It just shows that too many people dont do enough research)

john t

dbb wat dog breed do i own???iswd show me black n white proof ur so called designer breed excictds??????

Cherry Blossom

john t wrote: »

dbb wat dog breed do i own???iswd show me black n white proof ur so called designer breed excictds??????

John t - I'm not too sure what point you are trying to make but would appreciate it if you could get to it so I can go to bed. No one is disputing the fact that so called 'designer dogs' are not recognised breeds. It's basicly the point of the thread as far as I can see.

The Sweeper

irisheddie85 wrote: »

This is probably off topic but i dont know as ive never had a purebred dog.
If a reputable breeder crossed a health checked dog with another breed and then took the pups that still resembled breed standard and were healthly could these be registered as the original type of dog?
If this was done with a few bitches and dogs and then the pups were interbred to make sure they still held to a standard would this bring in a larger gene pool without Getting a new breed?
Or would all the puppies be mongrels from then on in the eyes of the KC because of the cross

I think one of the most important things to note about what makes a dog a particular breed is the genetic background that ensures that, when you mate two dogs of a breed, the pups are true to type.

That means that whatever list of rules and regulations govern the acceptable limits for colour, weight, height, body shape and temperament for a breed, the puppies in any given litter will fit within those regulations.

To use the labradoodle as an oft-used example of a designer dog - most labradoodle matings don't throw 'true' pups. When you cross a labrador and a poodle, the progeny are inconsistent in appearance. Colours vary - which is acceptable within many breeds - but size and weight also varies, coat length and texture varies and body shape varies.

Breeders who are attempting to have the breed formally recognised are working with dogs many lines in - breeding labradoodle to labradoodle, not introducing any pure poodles or labs back into the mix, to try and get the most standardised dog - because that's what a recognised 'breed' is.

This genetic variation is why designer dogs aren't a breed. They're a mongrel. A cross between two dogs is a mongrel, whatever way they shove the names together.

Hybrid vigour, an oft-cited validation for breeding mongrels, is not an automatic factor of cross breeding. You don't get hybrid vigour automatically when you cross two dogs. When you cross two dogs and a particular pup is proven to be more healthy then either parent, that's what they call hybrid vigour. It's terminology - it's a name for something that happens when it happens, it's not a guarantee that comes out of cross breeding.

Deliberately breeding mongrels for money is what this boils down to, and there is a massive problem with people deliberately breeding mongrels for money.

It's not that I think your cavalier king charles spaniel/bichon frise cross breed, or cavachon as it's been sold to you, is an evil animal or some sort of sub species. It's not that I have a snobbery where it's not pure bred and therefore I think it's a horrible dog.

The problem I have is that your dog is a mongrel, who has been deliberately bred in a world full of mongrels, and who has had a false monetary value placed upon it that does not reflect any of the things that go into making up the value of a pedigree dog. There is no vet work, no genetic testing, no breed registration fees. There is no import costs on bringing in a varied bloodline from another country to strengthen the gene pool. There may not even be worming, vaccinating, flea treating or a voucher for desexing to ensure that there are no more deliberately bred mongrels brought into a world already overpopulated with deliberately bred mongrels.

I don't have a problem with your dog. Your dog is probably very cute, and if it's sweet natured then all the better.

I have a problem with you, designer-dog-owner.

I have a problem with your lack of understanding of the problem you've contributed to. I have a problem with the money you handed over to someone to facilitate them continuing this practice. I have a problem with the sheer and unbelievable waste of life in our pounds and shelters every year and yes, yes you have contributed to it by sustaining the market for mongrels.

Evac105

The Sweeper wrote: »

I have a problem with you, designer-dog-owner.

I have a problem with your lack of understanding of the problem you've contributed to. I have a problem with the money you handed over to someone to facilitate them continuing this practice. I have a problem with the sheer and unbelievable waste of life in our pounds and shelters every year and yes, yes you have contributed to it by sustaining the market for mongrels.

Once again, while I get where you're coming form this type of language is only going to raise the hackles of the people that you're, supposedly, trying to educate. What you're expressing, in a very emotive and aggressive way, is that there's a level of ignorance contributing to dogs being PTS in Ireland.

A corollary - I work with State run institutions, specifically IT for schools. 25 years ago 2000 odd administrative staff in Ireland's secondary schools were given computers and told to continue doing their jobs, but using the computers now. We're still dealing with the effects of that today as no training or in-school support was provided to those staff, the vast majority of whom had never used a computer before. Here's my point - I can blame the users or I can blame the people who caused the situation (in this case a government who wanted to be seen as a 'modern' European education system but didn't think through how to achieve that).

Unless you provide the possibility for education you can't blame people for ignorance. It would be like me complaining that my customers don't know how to perform basic operations on computers, when they've never been given any training on using them. Your ire would be more appropriately (imo obviously) directed at the people producing the pups and the legislators who take no measures to prevent this situation. Being unhappy with the 'end-user' achieves nothing and, in fact, can alienate some of the people you need on your side to actually get something done.

ohmfg

Evac105 wrote: »

Once again, while I get where you're coming form this type of language is only going to raise the hackles of the people that you're, supposedly, trying to educate. What you're expressing, in a very emotive and aggressive way, is that there's a level of ignorance contributing to dogs being PTS in Ireland.

A corollary - I work with State run institutions, specifically IT for schools. 25 years ago 2000 odd administrative staff in Ireland's secondary schools were given computers and told to continue doing their jobs, but using the computers now. We're still dealing with the effects of that today as no training or in-school support was provided to those staff, the vast majority of whom had never used a computer before. Here's my point - I can blame the users or I can blame the people who caused the situation (in this case a government who wanted to be seen as a 'modern' European education system but didn't think through how to achieve that).

Unless you provide the possibility for education you can't blame people for ignorance. It would be like me complaining that my customers don't know how to perform basic operations on computers, when they've never been given any training on using them. Your ire would be more appropriately (imo obviously) directed at the people producing the pups and the legislators who take no measures to prevent this situation. Being unhappy with the 'end-user' achieves nothing and, in fact, can alienate some of the people you need on your side to actually get something done.

Gosh, Evac, I don't really buy that.

I think at this point, that if some home truths raise the hackles on a few ignorant backs, well so be it. It's a cop out - used ad nauseum by people who want their awful decisions validated - to bleat on about how they didn't know any better and it wasn't their fault they bought the badly bred pup for small fortune.
All forms of media are awash with articles advising and educating.
People - in the main - just often can't be bothered to inform themselves. Information and education make it much more difficult to do the right thing, consciences then have to be listened to. Cynical as it may sound, I often think people remain as unaware as they appear, deliberately.
It's so much easier.