 |
This is a place to gain some understanding of dog behavior and to assist people in training their dogs and dealing with common behavior problems, regardless of the method(s) used. This can cover the spectrum from non-aversive to traditional methods of dog training. There are many ways to train a dog. Please avoid aggressive responses, and counter ideas and opinions with which you don't agree with friendly and helpful advice. Please refrain from submitting posts that promote off-topic discussions. Keep in mind that you may be receiving advice from other dog owners and lovers... not professionals. If you have a major problem, always seek the advice of a trainer or behaviorist!
(Page 1 of 7: Viewing entries 1 to 10) Page Links: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 
 |
 |
 |
 |
Sanka
Dog food? Yuck! |
 | | Barked: Sun Nov 8, '09 3:30pm PST | |  | |  | | ...and we only had legit breeders....would there be no more mix breeds? As in not designer dogs? (I'm talking way in the future, no more strays, and no more shelters: I know, completely unrealistic, but just think about it) All dogs come from said breeders.
Many people shun at the idea of crossing breeds intentionally, even in making designer breeds. But why is it that we must only have the breeds that we have classified now? What is so wrong with muts and mixes? Why do "responsible" breeders only breed dogs of the same breed?
Heck, many purebred dogs have more medical issues than muts. Even purebreds are mixes. At some point in their gene pool, somebody mixed breeds to create what is the standard now.
Honestly, I'm a huge fan of mix breeds. I like that my dog stands out and is easy to spot. (Well, it's usually easy to spot your own dog out of a crowd, but you know what I mean). I like that they're just different looking and arn't the standard color or size or personality of a certain breed.
Granted, dogs within breeds can look different from other dogs within that same breed, but they all have the same characteristics. Would it be possible to be a responisble breeder and breed random mix puppies?Edited by author Mon Nov 9, '09 4:20pm PST
|  |  | |  |
| | my posts | my page | msg me | my family's posts | gift me | become pals | [notify] |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Isy
Anything if you- just throw the- ball!!! |
 | | Barked: Sun Nov 8, '09 3:45pm PST | | | | | | To answer your question, no responsible breeding is random. There is a difference between creating the foundation for a new breed and breeding "designer puppies". Every breed we have today intially started by crossing certain breeds and breeding the generations over and over again. Breeds are founded by intelligant breeders that fully understand genetics and the consiquences of mixing certain genes. These are extremely thought out desicions which takes years to find just the right dogs, followed by 30 years or more of inbreeding and cross-line breeding to "lock in" the desired traits and bannish the bad ones. These early breeds are not muts. They are intentional crosses bred for a specific reason by a fully knowledgable breeder. Muts are not usually healthier than responsibly bred purebreds. That is a total urban myth. | | | | |
| | my posts | my page | msg me | my family's posts | gift me | become pals | [notify] |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sanka
Dog food? Yuck! |
| | Barked: Sun Nov 8, '09 3:52pm PST | | | | | | Just to clear things up, I wasn't saying mutts are healthier than purebreds. I was meaning to say that mutts can be just as healthy as purebreds and purebreds can get the same health issues as mutts. I've actually heard the opposite...in that purebreds are often healthier than mixes...which is why I put that tidbit in there.
In my head, I was thinking about the bulldog and all of the health issues that surround that breed. Sorry about the confusion. | | | | |
| | my posts | my page | msg me | my family's posts | gift me | become pals | [notify] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addy, CGC
Let's go for a- walk! |
| | Barked: Sun Nov 8, '09 3:58pm PST | | | | | | ...and we only had legit breeders....would there be no more mix breeds? As in not designer dogs? (I'm talking way in the future, no more strays, and no more shelters: I know, completely unrealistic, but just think about it) All dogs come from said breeders.
"Mixed breeds" and "designer breeds"--not the same thing. At least, all designer mutts are mixes, but not all mixes are designer mutts. Many are accidental. Many are intentional crosses for some purpose other than selling the puppies for high prices to the gullible and the ignorant.
Many people shun at the idea of crossing breeds intentionally, even in making designer breeds.
No, especially in making designer mutts, because the people doing that are motivated by nothing else except money, and don't have the interests and well-being of the breeding dogs, the puppies, or the puppies' eventual families at heart.
There are also, of course, too many people who shun the idea of crossing breeds regardless of the reason. That's a problem, because intelligent, purposeful, planned crossing with health-screened dogs can produce both new breeds for new purposes (some guide dog programs are reporting excellent results from Golden/Lab crosses, for instance) and improvements in the health and stability of existing breeds (see Dalmation/Pointer Backcross Project, for instance.)
But why is it that we must only have the breeds that we have classified now? What is so wrong with muts and mixes? Why do "responsible" breeders only breed dogs of the same breed?
See above; there are people crossing breeds intelligently, responsibly, and with a plan other than selling all the cute puppies.
Heck, many purebred dogs have more medical issues than muts.
A claim beloved of designer mutt breeders and many mutt owners, but not well-supported by the evidence. There really aren't any really solid studies that don't have significant pro-mutt biases built into them.
Even purebreds are mixes. At some point in their gene pool, somebody mixed breeds to create what is the standard now.
Yup.
Honestly, I'm a huge fan of mix breeds. I like that my dog stands out and is easy to spot. (Well, it's usually easy to spot your own dog out of a crowd, but you know what I mean). I like that they're just different looking and arn't the standard color or size or personality of a certain breed.
You realize you're just as much of a snob as Mr. & Mrs. Country Club, owners of Ch. Myopia Overgroomed, right? It's not enough that you love your dog the best: you have to believe that your dog is somehow intrinsically better than other people's beloved dogs.
Granted, dogs within breeds can look different from other dogs within that same breed, but they all have the same characteristics.
Cresteds change color. Both hair and skin. Repeatedly. Tell me your mutt can do that! 
Would it be possible to be a responisble breeder and breed random mix puppies?
No, because responsible breeders, by definition, do not breed "randomly." They health screen any dogs they might breed, they have a plan in mind for what they hope to achieve by the breeding (a plan other than just selling all the puppies for big bucks), they have homes lined up for the puppies before they're born, especially whatever puppies turn out not to meet the requirements of what they're trying to achieve. This doesn't mean that they necessarily only breed purebreds of currently-recognized AKC breeds; it does mean they don't breed "random mixes."
Because the responsible breeder does not put two random dogs together just to find out what will happen.
Edited for clarity and broken tags.Edited by author Sun Nov 8, '09 4:01pm PST
| | | | |
| | my posts | my page | msg me | my family's posts | gift me | become pals | [notify] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chandler
Code name:- Farmcollie |
| | Barked: Sun Nov 8, '09 3:59pm PST | | | | | | Well, I think it is possible to have a responsible breeder of mixed breed pups.
They'd just have to do all the medical checks appropriate to both breeds, have contracts, do research to make good matches, etc...
...just like responsible purebred breeders do.
The thing is...the VAST majority of "designer dog" breeders do not do these things. My impression is that most of them are in it for the money, not the good of the dogs. | | | | |
| | my posts | my page | msg me | my family's posts | gift me | become pals | [notify] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Holly
I'm sweeter than- sugar! |
| | Barked: Sun Nov 8, '09 3:59pm PST | | | | | | Sanka, I think at that point, as long as people were responsibly breeding, there wouldn't be mutts but people creating new breeds (or at least attemtping to).
If that makes sense bol! I wasn't sure how to word it. | | | | |
| | my posts | my page | msg me | my family's posts | gift me | become pals | [notify] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CH- ChekrdFlags- Vegas GoGo- Girl
All Pyr! From- pasture to show- ring! |
| | Barked: Sun Nov 8, '09 4:09pm PST | | | | | | Just to clear things up, I wasn't saying mutts are healthier than purebreds. I was meaning to say that mutts can be just as healthy as purebreds and purebreds can get the same health issues as mutts."
& that is where health testing & OFA'ing breeding stock comes in to play...One can't be considered a responsible breeder without it & I don't see many breeders of mutts doing it. | | | | |
| | my posts | my page | msg me | my family's posts | gift me | become pals | [notify] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chandler
Code name:- Farmcollie |
| | Barked: Sun Nov 8, '09 4:21pm PST | | | | | | Oh, I don't think purebreds are at risk, there will always be people who want certain characteristics to be more predictable. You can't just pick any dog out of the pound and expect it to do the work of a Border Collie, Australian Cattle Dog, Pointer, Dutch Shepherd, or Great Pyrenees, etc. | | | | |
| | my posts | my page | msg me | my family's posts | gift me | become pals | [notify] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
  | (Page 1 of 7: Viewing entries 1 to 10)
Page Links: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 |
|
 |
My Account
