To think that a labracockapoodle is a mongrel

[voluptuagoodshag]

So why can't folk just say so. Or would that be to justify the extortionate amount they paid for it so they don't come across as mugs.

We're team Rescue Pets in our house. None of my money will go on perpetuating the cycle of irresponsible breeding and unwanted animals.

Sadly this means I am stuck living with a lazy blind Staffy/pig cross and a giant white rabbit that was apparently a dwarf but now can beat up the afore mentioned dog.

I do think there are those people for whom a dog is a fashion accessory and the cutesy names kind of envoke that - I think those people have always been around though and the cross breeding thing is no different from how my beautiful French Bulldog (new addition after our Lab passed away was 'created'. She is a pedigree though came to us needing a new home and her breed was miniaturized from English bulldogs in the 1800s. Now they have to deliver puppies via c section due to their hips and often rely on artificial insemination..so I guess my point is just, the 'labradoodles' etc are just more of what we have been doing for centuries.

I suspect the fad has led to even ore irresponsible breeding.

Some idiot - who really should know better given who he was - said to me about labradoodles being good dogs to have for the allergic. I couldn't help thinking what tosh that is as how can you control which gene is dominant and which recessive? It could be an excessively shedd-y dog, in fact. And I don't even have a GCSE in Biology but figured that out. So how stupid do you have to be to buy one?

My dog is a mutt from the Dogs Trust, bred by an irresponsible idiot who wanted to try to breed a staffy with a JRT. She is a brilliant dog. My last dog was Crufts qualified when I bought her and a very, very expensive pedigree and I loved her to bits. But I'd never have a dog from a breeder again, now. Dogs Trust mongrels all the way.

To add: Is my dog worth more money if I call her a "Jaffie"? Or a "Strussel"?

It really surprises me how negative people feel towards others making a choice about what dog they want to have in their home for the next 15 years!

Different breeds have different temperaments, energy levels, fur type, and quirks - which are pretty consistent across the breed. When choosing your family pet surely it's the responsible approach to research the strengths of different breeds, and opt for one which is going to be the best fit for you - so you can give it a great life.

The choice of a crossbreed is just an extension of this. Whilst the more popular crossbreeds like Labradoodles and cockapoos aren't yet classed as independent breeds - they fairly consistently exhibit character traits which may be preferable to either of the individual breeds alone.

(I should admit that) I have a cockapoo - and he is everything that guides to the crossbreed suggest (low-moulting/good for allergies/not too smelly / soppy / good with children etc etc!). He also cost the same as (if not less than) a cocker or poodle.

I often refer to him as a cocker cross poodle - or a spaniel with a perm! So no, I for me the 'designer' nametag has nothing to do with the appeal - it's about him as a dog.

And ultimately whatever dog people want is up to them....

I also have a Shocker - definitely live up to their names, don't they!
We saw him at home too, with mum,brother and I think, Aunt. Did not want a rescue as I was nervous about unknown history.

My Shocker is currently shockingly stinky. :)

Love pieceofshitadoodle.

My parents labradoodle is non-shedding, but that's pure luck really - lots of doodles DO shed, very badly, which accounts for a large number of the ones in rescues. They are wonderful dogs though - we've met many and have never ever met an aggressive one, I know there'll be exceptions in every breed but labradoodles are the friendliest breed I've ever met.

I agree with a previous poster who said dog owners claim to be dog lovers, but most are not. They pick their dogs like they pick their other consumer goods. It is about them wanting a living, furry little plaything, and nothing to do with loving dogs. I just want people acknowledge the truth, because if you buy from a breeder instead of getting one of many, many rescue dogs out there, this is you. If you can't find a rescue dog that meets your needs, then a real dog lover would just not have a dog rather than keeping breeders in business.

An earlier poster talked about pompoms on poodles.
Did you know there are practical reasons for the pompom cut? I only found this out recently and was amazed. Apparently it's to do with keeping extremities warm and providing buoyancy while the dog is in water. And there I was thinking all these years that it was just a daft fashion.

I also get really angry at the people insisting on having a puppy where there are rescue dogs begging for homes. They cite the usual 'unsure of temperament' argument but any dogs' home worth it's salt would not pair an inappropriate dog with a family. I had two home visits before I adopted my rescue lurcher. My friend with two young DS has been trying to adopt a dog and the local rescue home are making her wait til the perfect dog comes in rather than fobbing her off with one that wouldn't be right. On the other hand some (prats) I know have paid several hundred pounds to a breeder for a puppy and apart from being given a load of schpiel about how precious their dogs are to the breeder (I'm sure they are if you can make £2k+ out of your dog every 6 months) they've not been checked at all - not their home, not their pet owning experience, not their suitability - nothing. Buying a puppy because you get a fresh new slate - rather than learning to live with a real dog - is a bit like demanding a virgin bride when you get married. Bloody weird.

The 'we had to have a certain breed and temperament as we have young children, therefore we couldn't get a rescue' thing, is silly.

People do realise, surely, that when you get a rescue dog you don't just say ' Oh, give me whatever'? You still research the basic characteristics you're after, and wait for a suitable dog to become available.

Well said Koala.

I get really angry when people tell me what I should think and do.

I love my Shocker. I am definitely a Shocker Lover.

I've got two dogs and three cats, all rescues. The older dog is about five and is a staffy crossed with (I think) a boxer and the younger dog is a puppy who is about twelve weeks old and was left in a bin, no siblings or mother with her. The rescue who took her in estimate she was about five or six weeks old when they found her. She is probably a staffy cross too but she is too young to guess at what she is crossed with at the moment. My old cat is about sixteen, I've had her about six years and got her when her owner moved for work and was unable to take her and her dog with her, she found a home for the dog but not for the cat until I heard about her. She is pure black so probably would not have fared well in adoption as an older cat. The younger two are kittens, from the same litter about five months old and were adopted recently at the same time as the puppy after I lost my other cat a few months ago. One is black and white and the other is white and black and were part of two litters of kittens found in cardboard boxes in a gulley. All the kittens are black or black and white/white and black except for one solitary tabby. The rescue probably has at least thirty kittens up for re-homing at the moment plus at least twenty older cats as well as an assortment of young and old dogs, mostly staffy crosses from what I saw. I am at home all the time at the moment so I decided that I could cope with a puppy and kittens.

The issue of what they're called isn't relevant. The big issue for me is that the fact that deliberate cross-breeding happens in the first place. It isn't for development or maintenance of an established breed . It isn't for the creation of a new breed since most of them are first or second crosses, therefore the only reasons left must be for money or because backyard breeders just like having cute little puppies around.

Neither of these reasons are even close to being good reasons to breed more dogs when so many languish in rescue or are pts for being excess to requirements.

I wish more dog-owners were dog-lovers, rather than just lovers-of-their-own-dogs.

It isn't for development or maintenance of an established breed- Right, so if it was, then that would make it okay? You do realise that ALL dogs have derived from wolves, so at some stage or another, ALL breeds were the labradoodle of their time? Also, the 'development' of established breeds is getting us nowhere, other than producing dogs that the KC have decided are 'the best.' Who on earth are they to decide that?

They pick their dogs like they pick their other consumer goods.- Well in a way, yes. What is wrong with that? If you're going to live with something in your house for potentially 14 years, is it not a good idea to do your research and have what fits your family? Rescue centres do a good job, but they absolutely cannot guarantee the history of a dog. We adopted a retired greyhound, were told she was a perfect fit for us, yet she bit me twice for no real reason, completely out of the blue. We kept her and she had a lovely life with us and never bit anyone else, but surely you can understand why I would be reluctant to take a chance on another rescue at this stage in my life, when I have small children?

If you can't find a rescue dog that meets your needs, then a real dog lover would just not have a dog rather than keeping breeders in business.- That is absolute rubbish! You could apply that to anything! You could argue that someone who really loves children wouldn't have their own, as there are so many who need adopting around the world. I can guarantee that I absolutely do love dogs, you do not know me, and you cannot prove otherwise. I have known plenty of vets and veterinary nurses over the years, and most of them have had puppies from breeders, can you honestly tell me that someone who dedicates their career to helping animals doesn't like dogs?! Right....

As a separate question, where do you stand on Jack Russell Terriers, as technically they aren't pedigrees, yet they've had their own 'title' for a long time?

The thing is, there are many people who would make wonderful owners, but who are rejected by the rescues. I know an old lady who is a very experienced owner, her dogs have always been a very important part of her life and she has done the best to keep them happy, in good health and comfortable in old age.

She is now retired and spends most of the day pottering around in the garden or watching TV, she hardly goes out. She was recently rejected by the Dogs Trust after she mentioned that she will need to leave the dog at home once a week for an hour to go to the supermarket.

I know my local rescue actively discourages adoption by people they consider foreigners, even if those foreigners were born and breed in the UK.

OP

but its a posh mongrel.

There seems to be a misconception that pedigree or cross breed dogs come with no temperamental problems or risks- or have I misunderstood?

No, I am not daft enough to believe that my labradoodle is risk free. However, he is considerably less risky than if we had adopted for example (as this was my previous dog) a 6 year old greyhound, with 6 years of completely unknown history and hang-ups. Of course any dog has the potential to have temperament problems, however, if you have had them since they were 10 weeks old then you are reducing that risk, as presumably if you are responsible, then you are raising them in the appropriate manner, with all the correct training and socialisation in place.

The thing is, there are many people who would make wonderful owners, but who are rejected by the rescues. This is a very good point. Rescue centres do not help themselves, they are too strict in their search for 'perfect' homes, when actually 'good' homes are still great for the dogs. I have told this on here before, but my Aunt wanted to rescue a 12 and 13 year old pair of little dogs from the RSPCA, but was turned down because the fences around her acre of land were only 5ft high and not 6ft. The dogs were 12 and 13 for gods sake! Plus, they were jack russell sized, so hardly likely to scale a 6ft fence anyway. Besides which, even if they did, the garden backed onto fields, so they wouldn't have been in any danger. So presumably those poor dogs languished in the rescue centre instead, as I doubt anyone else was going to take them on.

I have to say that the only thing I don't like about my dog is the title 'cockapoo.' I avoid using the term if I can, so I really don't understand this tired cliche that posters on here people trot out about those who "only buy such dogs due to the silly name." That would have been the single reason for me not to get one.

Damselindestress "I don't get why people would rather pay £100s for a 'designer' mutt than rescue one. It's so pretentious." Only if you're someone who buys into the whole "designer" shit. I couldn't give a monkey's about designer labels in anything, and would as readily wear Primark as Chanel. So it's all lost on me. I love the look and personality of the cockapoo and would recommend one to anyone.

"As a dogwalker, the most difficult part of my job is keeping a straight face when someone says they have a "chichon" a "cavapoo" or a "golden doodle" Remind me not to employ someone so judgmental to walk my dog for me, then.