Will all breeds eventually form a poodle puddle?(52 Posts)
Following on from another debate about why get a Labradoodle as opposed to a pure breed...
Does anyone else worry that all dog breeds are heading for oblivion and we'll be left with a cute but homogenized poodly uber dog? I've just got a (pure breed) puppy but at least half of the recent puppy acquirers I know have got a hybrid, usually with poodle elements.
Does it matter? I don't know. I worry that I sound like someone who's not in favour of interracial marriage for fear of redheads dying out or something, but I do think it would be a shame to lose all the unique and varied breeds. Dogs are so amazingly different from one another.
I do really like poodles and was tempted with one myself. In fact I like them so much, I wonder why they have to be bred with every other single breed of dog to create hybrids when they're so ace to begin with.
(Lest my post seem like an anti-poodle tirade).
They are getting a bad press with all the hypoallergenic bollocks.
They aren't so hygiene focused covered in fox shit and (bizarrely) starburst wrappers.
A lot of pure breed owners will say they are superior - a well bred dog with X checks etc
I can't buy into that - seems a control via mankind to breed the 'perfect' example -
My friends pure breed dog has an overbite and she's not allowed to breed him - you can't tell but his chin is too long.
More control equally more money - It doesn't equal a more superior dog
There are plenty of X cross breeds and always have been - it's just now they're finding a market for poodle bred dogs
Dogs used to roam the streets and happily entertained themselves!! Didn't need humans to step in. Often they were given away free of charge..
We have one - he doesn't shed - his little was accidental as the mom went missing - we love him just the same
It's a bit like humans having a genetic test to deter main there offsprings failings - we wouldn't allow it - so why do we do it for dogs?
I am not a a person that is against pure breeds or crosses.
What does bother me is the assumption about cross breeds. Mainly that you will get the best bits of both breeds.
I know someone who got a cocker because she knew someone who said they don't shed and are good for people with allergies. She never checked this information. Got a puppy and had to rehome him within weeks because of her reaction. Then she went and got a cocker doodle because she had been told they don't shed (due to the poodle half) and won't set her allergy off. Again she didn't check (but the breeder told her this was true) and got one that did shed and set her allergies off. Another puppy rehomed. This all cost her well in excess of £1200.
Less than reputable breeders also charge fortunes for these dogs based on these assumptions using them as plus points to up the price.
The trend for cross breeding is a worry. I saw a chihuahua X springer pups for sale the other day for £650-750.
The parents were both KC registered and I suspect the dam owner is using her girl for non KC random cross litters in between the ones she registers with KC. It's awful. And no it wasn't an accidental breeding.
Tbh, while typing this I realise there are so many problems with dog breeding in general. And too many people jump in to buy them without checking anything out.
If ban the sale of all dogs - other than minimal charge similar to the rehiring centers £150 or so -
They would soon stop the trade
I'm not sure why people think a poodle will improve a breed.
There are thousands of breeds out there surely one fits the requirements of the person looking!
Honestly I think it's become a money making scam.
It's a bit like humans having a genetic test to deter main there offsprings failings - we wouldn't allow it - so why do we do it for dogs?
Humans can indeed opt to have genetic testing and counselling before trying for children if there's a risk both could be carriers for various conditions.
When it comes to health testing dogs it's not about avoiding minor "failings", it's about avoiding disabling or even life-limiting health problems.
Whoever bred DDog2 (she was a rescue so we've no idea) didn't bother health testing her parents. Unluckily for her both parents were carriers for hereditary cataracts and even more unluckily for her she inherited the gene from both parents. She started losing her sight when she was barely more than a puppy and was completely blind by 18 months old. She had corrective surgery (to the tune of £5000) which was moderately successful but she still has far less than perfect sight.
I've no idea if any of her siblings suffered the same but each will have had a 25% chance of inheriting both genes and being affected. It would have cost less than £100 (£48 per parent dog) to find out that both parents were carriers and thus shouldn't be bred together.
She's also got terrible conformation (poor thing, she's like the poster child for crap breeding) which has contributed to her developing IVDD at a relatively young age. Obviously there are no simple DNA tests for good or bad conformation but if you breed two dogs together who each have good conformation and whose conformations compliment each other then you've got a pretty good chance of producing puppies who also have good conformation. Unfortunately it also works the other way and poor conformation can have a real effect on the health and fitness of a dog.
I don't see crossbreeding as inherently problematic, I don't always think there's much point to it (it seems a lot of "cockapoo" owners want something that's remarkably similar to a miniature poodle without the show clip for example), but it's not something I can get worked up about as long as it's being done with care.
Shitty breeders are the real issues and they exist in the worlds of pedigrees, crosses and mongrels alike. At the moment it just so happens that crosses (seemingly the more random the better) and French Bulldogs are ridiculously popular and so there are endless puppy farms, BYBs and misguided pet owners who think Fluffy would be the perfect mum churning out puppies to meet the demand with very little care being given to health, conformation and temperament.
I think the popularity explosion of crossbreeds partly came about because of the belief that pedigrees are all riddled with disease and crosses or mongrels are guaranteed to be healthier. Of course it's not as simple as that but it's a myth that still perpetuates.
There needs to be a huge culture shift when it comes to both dog breeding and puppy buying, particularly the latter. As long as people buy puppies from puppy farms, BYBs, puppy dealers, pet shops and so on they will continue to exist. Unfortunately I can't really foresee a time when there won't be people willing to compromise on where a puppy comes from just so they can get the puppy they want, when they want regardless of whether they've picked an appropriate breed or whether they are actually suitable dog owners.
As for the actual question the OP asked; I think the vast majority of breeds have a dedicated enough following to ensure their survival. I agree it would be a huge shame to lose the breeds we currently have, or for those breeds to end up as generic dogs just in different looking suits. Cross breeding isn't the only danger facing pedigree breeds though, closed gene pools inevitably spell disaster in the long run. I'd love to see the KC introduce things like working tests (where appropriate), temperament tests and approve sensible outcrossing between similar breeds to help improve genetic diversity.
Blimey, that was a bit of an essay wasn't it?
Good reading though, especially as your thoughts chime with mine. We have had three Labs, two black females, one yellow dog, and have never bred from any of them. All have been kind dogs, gentle at home, but very different in temperament. The latest is a serial killer, of squirrels mostly, but the keepers locally think she is the tops and the odd pheasant chick is not really a problem as they rear thousands to be shot. She's not the friendliest dog we've ever had, TBH she's quite aloof, but is nice with people once comfortable with them. But she has cost ££££ in vet fees and surgery to correct a congenital deformity.
We have a cockapoo (still find the name hilarious) as he doesn't shed, we have a small house that's hard to keep on top of as it is never mind with dog hair everywhere.
We saw one at our friends once and fell in love with it.
I'm not really against or for crossing breeds...
I don't think it matters a jot if a dog is pure breed or cross breed, just so long as they come from a reputable source with well looked after parents. Puppy farms are full of both pedigree pups and so-called designer dogs, and that's what needs to be stamped out, rather than cross-breeding.
I have a jackapoo and adore her but technically she is a mongrel haha I am under no illusions of her mongrelness
As long as they're responsibly bred, from health tested parents I can't get too worked up about crosses.
'Crossing breeds' isn't a problem. Historically that's how a lot of breeds were formed. The problem is that people are using dogs as breeding machines to churn out trendy cross breeds for hefty price tags.
You can't compare human genetic testing directly to dog testing. What you could compare it to is the testing done in certain communities that have a long history of family members marrying each other for generations.
Every dog started from the same root, so every dog breed, with the huge variation in size, coat and colouring, been achieved through generations of very selective breeding. If you look at a dog's pedigree you'll see the same kennel prefix names repeated which means the dog's grandfather could be the brother of their father etc. That's why certain breeds are associated with certain health issues - they are genetic flaws.
For purebred bitches, there are regulations that must be followed for their pups to be kennel club registered. They are only allowed 4 litters in their lifetime and they have to be at least 1 year old to be mated and not over 8 years old when they give birth. They won't register the offspring if they are the result of any mating between father and daughter, mother and son or brother and sister. Reputable breeders hip score their dogs and run tests for any known health issues before breeding too.
The old fashioned 'Bitsa' crossbreed was very healthy with a broad mix of genes. The new trendy 'cross breeds' are the result of individual purebred dogs which aren't likely to have been screened for their issues or to be particularly good examples of their breed (so may have overshot or undershot jaws or hip issues) being bred together. One poodle bitch can breed 4 litters of poodles and then as many crosses as they can get out of her. The dogs are kept in their own filth in outdoor sheds without basic healthcare or even light.
They are the current fashion westies were before them and others before them. Pedigree pups are still popular and there are plenty of people who travel more miles and wait years for the right pedigree pup. I still see pure cocker and pure poodle pups, plenty of Labradors and many others.
* Puppy farms are full of both pedigree pups and so-called designer dogs, and that's what needs to be stamped out, rather than cross-breeding.*
Ban the sale of dogs and you lose the profit -
I dislike the 'how cute I have a dog that has poo or oodle in its breed name' that is so prevalent.
I do hope pure breeds (which have a history and a heritage behind them as well as a 'fitness for purpose') don't get so fudged that they become unrecognisable.
Just IMO of course.
"As long as they're responsibly bred, from health tested parents I can't get too worked up about crosses."
It's so rare to see any that are though, that's the problem with them.
Thanks for all these really interesting and well-informed thoughts. It seems that it's not cross breeds that are the issue, but puppy breeders generally. And perhaps the cross breeds are more likely to have dodgy breeders (but I recognise it's a problem with both).
It's tricky. I did, I hope, due diligence on my puppy - KC registered, saw at home with both parents, dam is three and this is her second litter, asked and was given permission to speak to the vet that examined him and gave first vaccination. However, I didn't particularly like the breeder and I'm under no illusion that her breeding is a business rather than a hobby.
It's hard to know what's the right approach re. the sale of dogs. On the one hand, at least if prospective owners pay a hefty price for their puppy they're making a financial commitment from the start. If they become free, I worry that too many people might go into it without thinking it through. On the other hand, I can see that selling dogs creates businesses that are more concerned with profit than well being.
When we got our pup in rescue 2 years ago, there were quite a few cross-breed puppies in there, too. She was one of them - some idiot bred a staffy with a JRT. I've heard since that they are often deliberately cross-bred for ratting. This was the poor female dog's second litter the rescue told us, and she was only about 2, herself. They'd obviously bred them with an eye to the main chance, thinking the could sell some 'jaffies' - then had 7 unwanted pups on their hands.
The cutesy name thing is as dangerous to dogs, as the 'Dulux' dog and 'Andrex' puppy were, in the 70s and 80s... People who want a dog because it has a cute name, just like them who wanted a dog cos it looks cute in an advert, really shouldn't be having dogs at all...
Re. cross breeds, just about the thickest person I know said to me they were thinking of having a labradoodle because "They dont shed". I wondered aloud how he knew that it wouldn't inherit the labrador's genes, not the poodle's, and shed like a bastard...
Of course the government should be regulating dog breeding to outlaw back street breeders and puppy farms so there are only licensed breeders (and the standards for them taken out of the hands of the Kennel Club).
But it isn't just the fact there's a supply but also the fact there is even a market in the first place, we ave to tackle. The fact people are so thick as to think a dog who is a cross of a shedding breed and a non shedding breed might, invariably also be a non shedder - pure ignorance. It's about education and also making them udnerstand that it isn't 'rescue' when you buy a dog from dodgy folk on Gumtree - but enabling puppy farming.
Also backstreet breeders have to be seen with the same growing horror we see puppy farms with. Treat those two things as equals.
" (but I recognise it's a problem with both)."
It is, it's hard to find a decent breeder of pedigrees and then much much harder again to find one of crosses, it is ultimately the same issue though.
One of the big differences is IMO that when a breed becomes popular, you'll still get breeders churning them out for money, but, buyers still want things like pedigrees and some basic health checks because even those without much of a clue realise pedigrees should have those, but with crosses, there's no registration (which does have an impact on how many litters a bitch can have) and people think crosses are automatically healthier, so it's even bigger numbers of puppies that are bred.
" I wondered aloud how he knew that it wouldn't inherit the labrador's genes, not the poodle's, and shed like a bastard..."
I know someone who bought a cockerpoo puppy because there's allergies in the family the puppy triggered them, in fact her husband needed hospital treatment after a couple of weeks...they've kept the puppy to be fair though.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.