Should "Hybrid Breeds" be Promoted

If you are wondering what is the right dog for you, this is the place to be. In this introductory forum we talk about topics such as breed vs. mix, size, age, grooming, breeders, shelters, rescues as well as requirements for exercise, space and care. No question is too silly here. This particular forum is for getting and giving helpful, nice advice. It is definitely not a forum for criticizing someone else's opinion, knowledge or advice. This forum is all about tail wagging and learning.

(Page 1 of 3: Viewing entries 1 to 10)
Page Links: 1 2 3

Dr. Watson

Not a wiener- dawg!

Barked: Thu Oct 11, '12 11:43am PST


	First, let me say that I have nothing against anyone who already has a hybrid breed pup/dog. Lots of people don't know the story behind the breeding of hybrid dogs. But I do not believe they are ethically bred, and I believe the only hybrid breeds that should be purchased are those in shelters. This is a fairly hardline stance, I know. But I am not alone. There has been a series running of Dogster of which I just recently became aware: Hybrid Breeds. All of the articles are by Kelley Pulley. While there is a disclaimer listed by "DOGSTER WARNING: If you are in the market for a Snorkie, please be forewarned that this is not an established breed, and the chances that you will encounter backyard breeders or puppy millers trying to capitalize on this fancy mutt's popularity are pretty high. As with any breed, please DO YOUR HOMEWORK and resist the urge to impulse buy. If you see "buy it now" PayPal buttons on websites hawking these dogs, this is a huge red flag and we implore you to run screaming in the opposite direction. We are also huge fans of adoption here at Dogster, and urge you to look at local shelters and rescues for lovable pups that might just -- gasp -- be the offspring of a Schnauzer and a Yorkshire Terrier. It's really not too far-fetched. But, anyway, onto the profile ..." However, I find the articles so overwhelmingly positively about the hybrid pups/dogs that this segment may be easily overlooked. Excuse me if this has already been discussed, but it seems to continue unabated.

[notify]

Member Since
01/04/2009

Barked: Thu Oct 11, '12 11:56am PST


	People at work know I'm a dog fanatic, and I had a girl come up to me and tell me very excitedly that they had a new "hybrid." At first I was like, "What?" And then she told me that she had gotten a mastiff/lab cross and it dawned on me that she meant she had gotten a puppy. She said that the breeder had only charged her $700.00 for the puppy and when I asked if they had done any health testing, she excitedly told me that yes, they were "100% veternarian approved." I asked her what that meant, and she told me that the vet had checked them over and that the puppies were healthy. Nice. Veternarian approved. What a great phrase to lure in unsuspectiing puppy buyers. I smiled and wished her luck with her puppy, because I didn't want to rain on her parade and it wasn't like she was going to take the dog back based on what some crazy dog lady at work told her. If people want to get a designer mix, then as far as I'm concerned it's buyer beware. If dogster wants to promote hybrid dogs, then it's their business. But, frankly it makes Dogster look as unethical Dogbreedinfo.com. I guess if that's the image they want to portray, so be it. I personally take every article on Dogster.com with a grain of salt. Most of the authors are just normal dog owners who think they have some kidn of original spin on life with dogs, and they don't.

my posts

[notify]

Rigby

Whisper Words of- Wisdom

Barked: Thu Oct 11, '12 12:00pm PST


	I know Dogster HQ has been personally contacted by numerous users regarding these articles. I've got nothing against mixed bred dogs at all. And I am 100% for the responsible mixing of breeds when there is a viable purpose or goal in the end. But I strongly feel that these articles are endorsing poor breeding practices (regardless of the feeble "warning" at the beginning of each article). I was starting to accept these "articles" as they were highlighting the more common trend mutts. But checking back now "BOXERDOODLE" ?! I'm sorry but what?? Then again we should keep in mind that this was the same author of the "10 Dumbest Dog Breeds"

[notify]

Dr. Watson

Not a wiener- dawg!

Barked: Thu Oct 11, '12 2:01pm PST


	I realize there are certain kinds of heelers and lurchers bred that are purpose-bred. But these hybrids are not. The whole situation makes me either depressed or angry. So far, we have had the "Jug," the "Snorkie," the "Cavachon," the "Boxerdoodle," the "Doxiepoo," the Affenpoo,"and the "Bichonpoo."

[notify]

Tyler

Whippy- The- Whipador

Barked: Thu Oct 11, '12 2:27pm PST


	I don't agree with attaching a "designer" name to every little crossbreed and then putting it out there as a new "breed". But, for established "designer" dogs such as the Labradoodle, Cockerpoo, Goldendoodle, then yeah, i have no issues promoting them. If people are adamant on acquiring a "designer" dog then i would rather point them in the right direction with proper information than supply them with nothing at all and they go on to pick the pup from the first BYB ad they find as they knew no better. I understand some people are not breeding for the right reasons, but that can equally be said about purebred breeders too. I find it extremely difficult, impossible even, to find reputable breeders of many of the smaller "designer" dogs, but it's becoming increasingly easier here at least to find good breeders of Labradoodles and the likes.

[notify]

dog-sitter in- charge.

Barked: Thu Oct 11, '12 3:07pm PST


	I suppose it depends on what is defined as 'good'. I find it hard to believe that a person breeding a mix still in foundation and selling off & marketing dogs to the pet public is actually concerned with developing the 'breed'. Not to mention basically they're fundamentally selling off half-developed products which in a serious project would be kept for future refinement or be placed in pet homes (and not sold for a profit).. but of course the same could be said of crappy purebred breeders too - except they don't have the onus of having to develop the breed, simply basically to maintain the best of what's already existing.

[notify]

Sarah,- CW-SR,- CW-G1, CGC

Million Dollar- Mutt

Barked: Thu Oct 11, '12 3:20pm PST


	I started a thread on this a while back. I think it's ridiculous... The articles are almost only positive, they sometimes don't even make sense. I also feel like they are encouraging online purchases or pet store purchases, but because of how they market the dogs. You can't go on petfinder and search for "Jugs" or even "Labradoodles". It was only after several of us complained to HQ and complained on one of their posts about "Dogster Values" that we got the "disclaimer" put in. I have become more and more disappointed in the quality of the "articles" that show up on the front page.

[notify]

Toto, CD,- RN, CGC

We don't do- doodles!!!

Barked: Thu Oct 11, '12 4:17pm PST


	I guess I have been sticking my head in a hole in the ground, but I will not/do not read ANY of the Dogster Magazine. If I don't read it, my blood pressure stays lower and my doctors appreciate that! Not only is it articles like these, but in order to even make a comment you now need to log on to some who knows what site, or you have to join facebook, or some other equally unrelated site. If you do join, suddenly your email is totally loaded with ads for everything under the sun which are impossible to stop. Sorry, I liked Dogster when it was concerned with dogs and their welfare and was a small, SAFE, non pushy site. If I wanted to get involved in those other sites, I would join them on my own and I do not appreciate them being thrown in my face just so I can comment on an article ON Dogster which, as stated above, is being written by some self-proclaimed person who in all likelyhood, doesn't even OWN a dog. Then, people wonder why Dogster is losing its popularity so fast!

[notify]

Jackson Tan

Lad about town

Barked: Thu Oct 11, '12 7:32pm PST


	I don't care for the articles, I don't care for Kelly Pulley, and I really don't care about the flagrant promotion of what are essentially mutts, disclaimer or not. (Remember, CM has a disclaimer too ... BOL!) They aren't breeds. I don't think dogster is hammering that home. Like Lilith says, you are just getting foundation dogs, and paying a stupid price for one to boot!

[notify]

Dr. Watson

Not a wiener- dawg!

Barked: Fri Oct 12, '12 12:09pm PST


	I also don't think these dogs or pups should be designated as a "breed." They are designer dogs, that's the long and short of it. And if anyone can point me to a legitimate, ethical breeder of any of these designer dogs mentioned, I'll eat my hat! (the owner, not Watt!)

[notify]

(Page 1 of 3: Viewing entries 1 to 10)
Page Links: 1 2 3

Dogster

Should "Hybrid Breeds" be Promoted

Love Dogs?

Want a Dog?

Have A Dog?

Be in the Know!

Dogster

Forums Home » Choosing the Right Dog

Should "Hybrid Breeds" be Promoted

Love Dogs?

Want a Dog?

Have A Dog?

Be in the Know!

Prefer Cats?