Cross Breeds- Breeding?

[Steve]

Hey All!

Have not had time to read the whole thread so I apologize if this has already been written.

I am not a breeder. Also I don't think at the rate byb's are pumping out dogs we can safely say that cross breeding could ever be controlled if we made it "ok". It's already out of control.

Besides that I have been looking at the origin of pit bulls and staffies and such. I have read that pittys are a mix of old english bulldog (now extinct) and a terrier of some sort and that staffies are english bulldogs and manchester terriers? This may or may not be exactly right but we can tell that certain breeds have come from crosses. So there is the potential that someone will create a new breed that has a purpose. So essentially a cross. And not just an "oodle" to make a pet shop money!

There are many people who are breeding dogs now who are working toward their breeds being recognised.They register their dogs with their own registries to keep track of ancestry. There's a big difference between that and someone who has no plan for how what they breed today will impact on dogs in 5 years time.

[Steve]

Hey All!

Have not had time to read the whole thread so I apologize if this has already been written.

I am not a breeder. Also I don't think at the rate byb's are pumping out dogs we can safely say that cross breeding could ever be controlled if we made it "ok". It's already out of control.

Besides that I have been looking at the origin of pit bulls and staffies and such. I have read that pittys are a mix of old english bulldog (now extinct) and a terrier of some sort and that staffies are english bulldogs and manchester terriers? This may or may not be exactly right but we can tell that certain breeds have come from crosses. So there is the potential that someone will create a new breed that has a purpose. So essentially a cross. And not just an "oodle" to make a pet shop money!

There are many people who are breeding dogs now who are working toward their breeds being recognised.They register their dogs with their own registries to keep track of ancestry. There's a big difference between that and someone who has no plan for how what they breed today will impact on dogs in 5 years time.

[Miss B]

As for irresponsible breeding- just because someone is CC registered and breeding papered dogs (even if they are show champions) is NO GUARANTEE that the breeder is ethical or breeding healthy pups.

I agree. I know of way too many registered breeders who breed with dogs that have known health problems.

[MissMonaro]

After an interesting discussion in another topic i would like to know what DOLers think-

If breeders of cross breed dogs cared for their dogs, bred from healthy stock and provided information and support for puppy buyers- would this be 'okay'?

What would you need to be happy with cross breeds being bred or do you think they should NOT be bred at all, by anyone?

All perspectives welcome

No and No.

I dont think that anybody should "deliberately" breed crossbred dogs at all.

There are way tooo many crossbred dogs being PTS in pounds now without people producing more of them.

To those that say purebred dogs are too expensive and people just want a "pet".......then go to the pound and rescue one.

And, as already said, there are plenty of breeds of purebred dogs around - so there is a breed out there to suit.

Maybe if more ppl supported purebred dog breeders, that breeders would have more homes for the minority breeds and hence maybe look at breeding a little bit more often.

[Longcoat]

After an interesting discussion in another topic i would like to know what DOLers think-

If breeders of cross breed dogs cared for their dogs, bred from healthy stock and provided information and support for puppy buyers- would this be 'okay'?

What would you need to be happy with cross breeds being bred or do you think they should NOT be bred at all, by anyone?

All perspectives welcome

No and No.

I dont think that anybody should "deliberately" breed crossbred dogs at all.

There are way tooo many crossbred dogs being PTS in pounds now without people producing more of them.

To those that say purebred dogs are too expensive and people just want a "pet".......then go to the pound and rescue one.

And, as already said, there are plenty of breeds of purebred dogs around - so there is a breed out there to suit.

Maybe if more ppl supported purebred dog breeders, that breeders would have more homes for the minority breeds and hence maybe look at breeding a little bit more often.

There are two types of crossbreed owner that I am thinking about at the moment in terms of cost. I remember years ago, a family who really wanted a Golden Retriever puppy and their budget wouldn't stretch to the $600 at the time to buy one and they settled for a yellow Labrador cross breed for $50. Their lab X was gold and inherited the traditional Retriever head and face and was the closest they could afford to a purebred GR and this dog was the love of their lives which they provided an excellent home, trained the dog which ended up a great companion and pet. Finding a puppy they wanted for $50 even though it was a BYB crossbreed, allowed this family who were not overly financial to have a dog in their lives.

Then there is the other type of crossbreed owner, and these are the type that irritate me who could afford to buy the entire kennel and justify that buying a purebred is not worthy enough to spend that amount of money on a mere dog. A dog to these owners means 4 legs and a tail and the cheaper the better???. Having said that, most of the people that I know who have aquired crossbreeds on that basis, don't tend to look after them particulary well either I have noticed

Edited January 23, 2010 by Longcoat

[Steve]

There is a small thing here which bothers me. I dont understand why dog owners and breeders would be so keen to give up their rights. You see purebred dogs and registered breeders are the minority group and far more people think we muck it up more than we think they muck it up. Don Burke told people that cross breeding made for healthier dogs and that is perpetuated by media,much of the scientific community and those who want to breed and or own cross bred dogs.RSPCA Australia have plugged ANY breeder of any dog which fits their "breeder" criteria. Just because we think its the best way to breed dogs that doesnt mean everyone agrees with us and before we know it we may find we are the group which is told they cant breed certain dogs or certain types or certain breeds.There are several breeds which are currently in development which will eventually fit the criteria and apply for ANKC recognition but there are also some who DONT want ANKC recognition and even though they do everything the same as us and simply have their dogs registered on a different registry in some shires they cant keep their dogs entire because their dogs cant be registered with the states Canine Association.

Pedigreed purebred dog breeders breed approx 3% of dogs bred each year in Australia and our numbers have dropped.Thats much different to the UK where about 75% bred are purebred dogs though not that many of them are CC registered purebreds because they have a different registration process.Even if we went nuts and started promoting pure breds and their breeders we dont breed enough dogs to fill the demand anyway.

Why do we care if someone breeds cross bred dogs as long as the dogs dont suffer and they are doing it all right ? Why do we care if someone wants to buy a cross bred dog over a purebred? Why do we want to see dogs bred by anyone other than a registered purebred treated differently? Why is it O.K. to remove the rights of a dog owner to make the same decisions with their dogs that we can make with ours?

Why cant we just promote what we do and our dogs and make sure we are getting it right and let them worry about what they do?

[Bulldust]

I posted a thread awhile ago about a breeder of my breed who has been selling Main registered pups for years which are in fact crossbred. And getting away with it. And im lead to believe there are other breeds who can have this problem. This should be cracked down on harder too

[_PL_]

After an interesting discussion in another topic i would like to know what DOLers think-

If breeders of cross breed dogs cared for their dogs, bred from healthy stock and provided information and support for puppy buyers- would this be 'okay'?

What would you need to be happy with cross breeds being bred or do you think they should NOT be bred at all, by anyone?

All perspectives welcome

To answer with another question. Why bother?

It just sounds like breeding for the hell of it.

Honestly, if you're going to do anything - do it properly.

Breed pure and healthy and support all the dogs you breed for life.

[WoofnHoof]

There is a small thing here which bothers me. I dont understand why dog owners and breeders would be so keen to give up their rights. You see purebred dogs and registered breeders are the minority group and far more people think we muck it up more than we think they muck it up. Don Burke told people that cross breeding made for healthier dogs and that is perpetuated by media,much of the scientific community and those who want to breed and or own cross bred dogs.RSPCA Australia have plugged ANY breeder of any dog which fits their "breeder" criteria. Just because we think its the best way to breed dogs that doesnt mean everyone agrees with us and before we know it we may find we are the group which is told they cant breed certain dogs or certain types or certain breeds.There are several breeds which are currently in development which will eventually fit the criteria and apply for ANKC recognition but there are also some who DONT want ANKC recognition and even though they do everything the same as us and simply have their dogs registered on a different registry in some shires they cant keep their dogs entire because their dogs cant be registered with the states Canine Association.

Pedigreed purebred dog breeders breed approx 3% of dogs bred each year in Australia and our numbers have dropped.Thats much different to the UK where about 75% bred are purebred dogs though not that many of them are CC registered purebreds because they have a different registration process.Even if we went nuts and started promoting pure breds and their breeders we dont breed enough dogs to fill the demand anyway.

Why do we care if someone breeds cross bred dogs as long as the dogs dont suffer and they are doing it all right ? Why do we care if someone wants to buy a cross bred dog over a purebred? Why do we want to see dogs bred by anyone other than a registered purebred treated differently? Why is it O.K. to remove the rights of a dog owner to make the same decisions with their dogs that we can make with ours?

Why cant we just promote what we do and our dogs and make sure we are getting it right and let them worry about what they do?

I don't agree that 'much' of the scientific community think that crossbreeding makes for healthier dogs, there have been a number of studies that suggested that an infusion of other breeds to widen the gene pools of certain at risk breeds would be worthy of consideration but I don't know of any studies which suggest crossbreeding in the broadest sense is desirable, Paul McGreevy may have his own barrow to push but he is only one scientist out of many. The fact that studies find the flaws in purebred dogs is because flaws do exist and the purebred dog is the most feasible to study, people who have an interest in breeding crosses are going to take advantage of the fact that it is much more difficult to collect generational data on crossbred dogs and therefore reliable data is much harder to find, at the end of the day it's all about PR the purebred dog world isn't as competitive in the market because they have allowed others to use this data with little to no effective rebuttal.

Personally I think there should be a united front for all dog breeders be they crosses, pure, sporting, working, show etc so that the shoddys can be left out in the cold, at the moment the dog fraternity is way too fragmented, there is little interaction and therefore little strength as a whole, if all dog bodies could be united under the one banner it would be easier to enact codes of practice that lift the standards for everyone, therefore creating a clearer divide between those who are doing it well and those who aren't and a complete governing body for those with an interest in the health and welfare of dogs.

[GeckoTree]

Do cat breeders feel the same way about all this with cats?

[WoofnHoof]

Do cat breeders feel the same way about all this with cats?

I don't know much about the cat world but I do remember reading somewhere that there are classes at shows for crosses. There are at horse shows for specific crosses or partbreds.

[GeckoTree]

Cool. I remember reading about these cats that were crossbreed, they look like melted candles. Hypoallerginic or something.

[Gayle.]

I don't know much about the cat world but I do remember reading somewhere that there are classes at shows for crosses.

They aren't classes for crosses, they are classes for domestic pets, which is not the same at all. Generally it encompasses the family moggie, as well as purebreds who aren't good enough for the general classes. They are judged on personality, grooming and general "niceness" as cats. Whereas the pedigree classes are judged according to the standard of the breed.

Cats are a lot different to dogs because most cats weren't bred for a purpose or a sport. Plus a moggy isn't necessarily a crossbred......it's more likely a purebred is a selectively bred moggy.

[KismetKat]

The cat fancy world don't seem adverse to developing new breeds at all! We have seen the recent development of the Spotted Mist (a mix of Abyssian, good old moggie and, if memory serves me right, siamese). The yanks have also developed a breed from the humble Singapore street cat and called it the "Singapura".

They certainly don't go screaming into the streets crying "the sky has fallen the sky has fallen" like the dog world seem to do when someone cross-breeds.

[SpikesPuppy]

Burmilla would be another new cross breed cat!!

[Gayle.]

Yeah, but they were developed as a controlled program, not by any Tom, Dick or Harry setting out to make a quick buck. Look up Truda Straede's website, she has a diary about the development of the Australian Mist and it makes VERY interesting reading. She knew what she wanted before she started, but she says even she had no inkling of what she was getting into.

There were hundreds of kittens born as part of her program........obviously there were a lot of "leftovers" as she had to select the ones that most closely resembled what she was trying to produce...and she had to make sure each one was responsibly re-homed. Then she had to get recognition and the breed registered.

Her established breed is now an attractive, moderate, nice-natured cat with a good temperament for families, and it breeds true. When a breeder puts two Australian Mists together to produce a litter they know that they are going to get a litter that resembles the standard written for the breed. Spotted or marbled coat, moderate head, prominent whisker pads, medium size etc. etc.

Burmillas aren't new, neither are Mists, both have been around for quite a while now, but the point is, they weren't brought about by anyone who just wanted to breed for the sake of selling kittens at exhorbitant prices. And the creators of the breed went to the trouble of having the breed recognised.

ETA, here is a part of Truda's diary. Years ago, I read a much more comprehensive version, but I can't recall where. This isn't the work of someone who put cat A to cat B, gave the offspring a stupid name then advertised them in the Trading Post as rare, unique and $1500 a piece, thank you very much and hurry before they're all gone.

http://members.dcsi.net.au/ausmist/jottings.htm

Edited January 24, 2010 by GayleK

[SpikesPuppy]

Yeah, but they were developed as a controlled program, not by any Tom, Dick or Harry setting out to make a quick buck. Look up Truda Straede's website, she has a diary about the development of the Australian Mist and it makes VERY interesting reading. She knew what she wanted before she started, but she says even she had no inkling of what she was getting into.

There were hundreds of kittens born as part of her program........obviously there were a lot of "leftovers" as she had to select the ones that most closely resembled what she was trying to produce...and she had to make sure each one was responsibly re-homed. Then she had to get recognition and the breed registered.

Her established breed is now an attractive, moderate, nice-natured cat with a good temperament for families, and it breeds true. When a breeder puts two Australian Mists together to produce a litter they know that they are going to get a litter that resembles the standard written for the breed. Spotted or marbled coat, moderate head, prominent whisker pads, medium size etc. etc.

Burmillas aren't new, neither are Mists, both have been around for quite a while now, but the point is, they weren't brought about by anyone who just wanted to breed for the sake of selling kittens at exhorbitant prices. And the creators of the breed went to the trouble of having the breed recognised.

But there seems to be little option available for dog breeders to do the same thing???

One could argue that there are more than enough cats in the world and given that the majority are household pets/companions (as opposed to dogs which are used for dozens of different purposes), why do we need more than a handful of cat breeds???

[Gayle.]

But there seems to be little option available for dog breeders to do the same thing???

Has anyone tried? Seriously? It would take a lot longer with dogs because they are a different species with different genetic makeup and it might not come about in one persons lifetime.

But the dog breeders being talked about in this thread, the ones cross breeding, don't appear to be doing it with creation of a new breed in mind. The alternate registers, such as the Australian Bulldogs, seem to be making small inroads into developing a breed but they also seem to be a helluva long way from getting them to breed true. Same with Labradoodles. And there are too may people breeding those for profit for them to ever have any credibility (and especially with that ridiculous name).

why do we need more than a handful of cat breeds???

Because the cat fancy people are just as passionate about their breeds as the dog fancy are about theirs. And there are nowhere near the same about of cat breeds as ther are dogs.

[Steve]

Of course there are the same options available for dog breeders. Its all clearly written up and anyone who want to develop a new breed recognised by the ANKC has a list of things they have to do to get there. That takes about 15 years so while they are working toward that they have to have their own registry to keep the records in order so people know the lineage and ancestors.

The ANKC have opened their stud books and would consider it again tomorrow if the people asking had a good reason and specific plan to explain what they are intending to achieve.Right now there is one with - I think - bull terriers.

Thats still not the point.If you make state or local laws which are different depending on the type or breed of dog or whether its recognised by one purebred registry thats BSL.

Edited January 24, 2010 by Steve

[SpikesPuppy]

I don't think it is that easy to create a new dog breed- in the days when there were less breeds or regulations on breeding and people were breeding for a purpose other than the show ring, people could also cull (and by cull I mean kill, not desex and pet home) excess puppies or ones that didn't make the grade. But someone trying to do that now would be shot down to the ground.

I believe that one day, the Labradoodle will become a recognised & legitimate breed, thanks to a dedicated handful of breeders, but it will have to be given a new name to differentiate it from the Labrador/Poodle crosses.

I hope you did not misunderstand me, GayleK- I meant my question tongue-in-cheek. I don't care if there are 10 or 10 thousand cat breeds. I do find it interesting though that owning a moggy/mongrel cat is acceptable but heaven forbid one owns a mongrel dog.