Multigeneration Labradoodle?

[Ellie]

"Recognised by whom? (or who?)"

ANKC?

[Tapferhund]

I was under the impression that for a breed to be 'recognised' it must produce True to type for a certain number of generations, I thought 5, but could be wrong, just going by what I was told by someone, somewhere! With the 'labradoodle' this has not happened, there are just too many variations in conformation, coat and temperament from litter to litter and variations within the same litter apparently.

Recognised by whom? (or who?)

Also, I don't think that is the sole or only criteria otherwise the Mini Foxy and others I mentioned in an earlier post would be recognised by now if 'recognised' means by the ANKC.

The Mini Foxie is recognised.....they're now called TT's. When most of the MF clubs were wanting ANKC recognition they were told 'not under the name of MF so change it'......which is what they did. They also had to keep their own registry ...and breeders had to breed 5?7? generations true to type before they could be reciognised. They did this and now the breed is recognised.

Those, clubs and fanciers who chose to stay with the name MF ........are not recognised.

It such a shame the whole lot didn't come on board under the name TT.......as there are some lovely MF bloodlines that are now lost to the gene pool of TT's.

As to labradoodles...they're cross breeds made purely to make money.

[~Anne~]

I was under the impression that for a breed to be 'recognised' it must produce True to type for a certain number of generations, I thought 5, but could be wrong, just going by what I was told by someone, somewhere! With the 'labradoodle' this has not happened, there are just too many variations in conformation, coat and temperament from litter to litter and variations within the same litter apparently.

Recognised by whom? (or who?)

Also, I don't think that is the sole or only criteria otherwise the Mini Foxy and others I mentioned in an earlier post would be recognised by now if 'recognised' means by the ANKC.

The Mini Foxie is recognised.....they're now called TT's. When most of the MF clubs were wanting ANKC recognition they were told 'not under the name of MF so change it'......which is what they did. They also had to keep their own registry ...and breeders had to breed 5?7? generations true to type before they could be reciognised. They did this and now the breed is recognised.

Those, clubs and fanciers who chose to stay with the name MF ........are not recognised.

It such a shame the whole lot didn't come on board under the name TT.......as there are some lovely MF bloodlines that are now lost to the gene pool of TT's.

As to labradoodles...they're cross breeds made purely to make money.

Now you and I both know that this is a point of contention amongst the TT breeders and the MF breeders. I don't plan on entering into the debate in that regard, however, they are recognised by both groups as separate breeds and they have separate registries accordingly.

As for your other flippant statement, that's all it is. Flippant and factless.

[RallyValley]

Hmm I have two multigenerational mutts in my house too And one dog that has been breeding pure for over 100 years.

Wow, that's one old dog ...

Yes a 100 year old still fertile dog, its a world record :D . Seriously though thats what gets to me about these dogs. Chessies have been in development since the 1800's and have had a unified starndard since the early 1900's and some idiots who want a "non shedding labrador" think they can make a breed. Get a poodle if you want a non shedding dog, get a lab if you want a lab.

[RubyStar]

Hmm I have two multigenerational mutts in my house too And one dog that has been breeding pure for over 100 years.

Wow, that's one old dog ...

Yes a 100 year old still fertile dog, its a world record :D . Seriously though thats what gets to me about these dogs. Chessies have been in development since the 1800's and have had a unified starndard since the early 1900's and some idiots who want a "non shedding labrador" think they can make a breed. Get a poodle if you want a non shedding dog, get a lab if you want a lab.

Not that I am for the Labradoodle, but they are probably trying to achieve what the Chesapeake people back in the 1800's and everyone else did to standardise their new breed. In 100 or so years time this "breed" (or any others, my argument isn't soley based on Labradoodles) could well be ANKC recognised as they have managed to standardise it, and will be in the same position as Chessie people and could well be using the same argument as you are. I just hate close mindedness to new breeds as all breeds evolved somewhere along the line. As long as it is done right, why not. But I do hate that the DD is cashing in on what could be a standardised new breed. Agree with whoever said to ditch the name though and come up with a new one if they ever want a chance to be taken seriously as a new standalone breed!

Edited September 3, 2010 by RubyStar

[shellbyville]

I was under the impression that for a breed to be 'recognised' it must produce True to type for a certain number of generations, I thought 5, but could be wrong, just going by what I was told by someone, somewhere! With the 'labradoodle' this has not happened, there are just too many variations in conformation, coat and temperament from litter to litter and variations within the same litter apparently.

Recognised by whom? (or who?)

Also, I don't think that is the sole or only criteria otherwise the Mini Foxy and others I mentioned in an earlier post would be recognised by now if 'recognised' means by the ANKC.

The Mini Foxie is recognised.....they're now called TT's. When most of the MF clubs were wanting ANKC recognition they were told 'not under the name of MF so change it'......which is what they did. They also had to keep their own registry ...and breeders had to breed 5?7? generations true to type before they could be reciognised. They did this and now the breed is recognised.

Those, clubs and fanciers who chose to stay with the name MF ........are not recognised.

It such a shame the whole lot didn't come on board under the name TT.......as there are some lovely MF bloodlines that are now lost to the gene pool of TT's.

As to labradoodles...they're cross breeds made purely to make money.

Now you and I both know that this is a point of contention amongst the TT breeders and the MF breeders. I don't plan on entering into the debate in that regard, however, they are recognised by both groups as separate breeds and they have separate registries accordingly.

As for your other flippant statement, that's all it is. Flippant and factless.

I meant not recognised by the ANKC, I was only stating what I heard from someone, as far as not being recognised by the ANKC because they have not been bred for a certain number of generations 'true to type.' Not an expert and not claiming to be one on this subject.

Just adding my 2 cents worth...not entering into the debate on TT's & MF's as I know nothing at all on that topic.

Also edited to add I am not against the development of new breeds if done correctly and ethically, but just think that if you are going to breed something it has to be true to type. If someone wants a non-shedding dog they need to know that it won't shed, whereas I don't think all labradoodles are non-shedding, and that is just one issue with this cross breed in particular!

Edited September 3, 2010 by shellbyville

[~Midniara~]

I have no problem with them developing their own breed and if they manage to register them evenutally then good on them. What I DO have a problem with it is that they are bastardising the name of the Labradore and Poodle. Give the breed a proper name and I wouldn't give a toss what they do.

[RallyValley]

Hmm I have two multigenerational mutts in my house too And one dog that has been breeding pure for over 100 years.

Wow, that's one old dog ...

Yes a 100 year old still fertile dog, its a world record :D . Seriously though thats what gets to me about these dogs. Chessies have been in development since the 1800's and have had a unified starndard since the early 1900's and some idiots who want a "non shedding labrador" think they can make a breed. Get a poodle if you want a non shedding dog, get a lab if you want a lab.

Not that I am for the Labradoodle, but they are probably trying to achieve what the Chesapeake people back in the 1800's and everyone else did to standardise their new breed. In 100 or so years time this "breed" (or any others, my argument isn't soley based on Labradoodles) could well be ANKC recognised as they have managed to standardise it, and will be in the same position as Chessie people and could well be using the same argument as you are. I just hate close mindedness to new breeds as all breeds evolved somewhere along the line. As long as it is done right, why not. But I do hate that the DD is cashing in on what could be a standardised new breed. Agree with whoever said to ditch the name though and come up with a new one if they ever want a chance to be taken seriously as a new standalone breed!

Hmm I don't see any similarity at all. Chessie people were breeding dogs that were sound and with good retrieving ability and stamina to dogs with similar apperance and ability to create the ultimate retrieveing dog for the conditions of the Chesapeake bay. This is why the breed was developed, for a purpose, not for $$ or fashion. If they found a labrador poodle cross had magic cancer detection abilities and they selected for that as well as appearacnce/breeding to standard ect I would be all for it. But at the moment it seems like all they are doing is robbing the labrador and poodle gene pools for a quick buck.

[Aidan]

Hmm I don't see any similarity at all. Chessie people were breeding dogs that were sound and with good retrieving ability and stamina to dogs with similar apperance and ability to create the ultimate retrieveing dog for the conditions of the Chesapeake bay. This is why the breed was developed, for a purpose, not for $$ or fashion. If they found a labrador poodle cross had magic cancer detection abilities and they selected for that as well as appearacnce/breeding to standard ect I would be all for it. But at the moment it seems like all they are doing is robbing the labrador and poodle gene pools for a quick buck.

No doubt many breeders are, but the cross was first attempted (successfully, too) to provide a low allergy guide dog and breeding did continue for that purpose for many generations. Other breeds have been used in the program to achieve the type they have sought.

[~Anne~]

I was under the impression that for a breed to be 'recognised' it must produce True to type for a certain number of generations, I thought 5, but could be wrong, just going by what I was told by someone, somewhere! With the 'labradoodle' this has not happened, there are just too many variations in conformation, coat and temperament from litter to litter and variations within the same litter apparently.

Recognised by whom? (or who?)

Also, I don't think that is the sole or only criteria otherwise the Mini Foxy and others I mentioned in an earlier post would be recognised by now if 'recognised' means by the ANKC.

The Mini Foxie is recognised.....they're now called TT's. When most of the MF clubs were wanting ANKC recognition they were told 'not under the name of MF so change it'......which is what they did. They also had to keep their own registry ...and breeders had to breed 5?7? generations true to type before they could be reciognised. They did this and now the breed is recognised.

Those, clubs and fanciers who chose to stay with the name MF ........are not recognised.

It such a shame the whole lot didn't come on board under the name TT.......as there are some lovely MF bloodlines that are now lost to the gene pool of TT's.

As to labradoodles...they're cross breeds made purely to make money.

Now you and I both know that this is a point of contention amongst the TT breeders and the MF breeders. I don't plan on entering into the debate in that regard, however, they are recognised by both groups as separate breeds and they have separate registries accordingly.

As for your other flippant statement, that's all it is. Flippant and factless.

I meant not recognised by the ANKC, I was only stating what I heard from someone, as far as not being recognised by the ANKC because they have not been bred for a certain number of generations 'true to type.' Not an expert and not claiming to be one on this subject.

Just adding my 2 cents worth...not entering into the debate on TT's & MF's as I know nothing at all on that topic.

Also edited to add I am not against the development of new breeds if done correctly and ethically, but just think that if you are going to breed something it has to be true to type. If someone wants a non-shedding dog they need to know that it won't shed, whereas I don't think all labradoodles are non-shedding, and that is just one issue with this cross breed in particular!

Yes, I agree on the bit about developing new breeds. However, again there seems to be confusion between registered Labradoodle breeders and the byb. Registered breedrs don't make outrageous claims or claims that they can not back up.

I agree with the person, who said earlier, that they should call it something else. The name has bad rep and is associated with dd's and those out there doing the worng thing.

[*Bones*]

Multi generational labradoodle means labradoole X'd labradoodle for how ever many generatons it is, so multi.

Just curious, how many generations of breeding true is required for a cross to be identified as a breed?

Most animal registries, and geneticists accept 4th generation as pure.

Having a dog breed accepted as pure by the ANKC is rather more complicated than that as listed on the ANKC website

7th generation would be accepted as pure by geneticists

Aidan

No doubt many breeders are, but the cross was first attempted (successfully, too) to provide a low allergy guide dog

I thought the man who originated the cross for low allergy guide dog pups went public a few years ago saying the whole exercise was a disaster?

General experience seems to be that "low allergy" is not a constant. Be interesting to see where labradoodles go in the nth generation, particularly coat type and allergic reactions.

dobesrock, I think DB's argument with the ANKC was about his description on TV of a pure breed, and the matter escalated out of hand, nothing to do with MF or TT.

Both TT and MF are purebred, as far as most people are concerned. One is ANKC recognized, one is not. the shape of the feet is different. The MF registry was/is very careful about what they accepted into the registry

[Aidan]

I agree with the person, who said earlier, that they should call it something else. The name has bad rep and is associated with dd's and those out there doing the worng thing.

They tried "Australian Service Dog" but I'm not sure what happened to that registry?

[*Bones*]

I agree with the person, who said earlier, that they should call it something else. The name has bad rep and is associated with dd's and those out there doing the worng thing.

They tried "Australian Service Dog" but I'm not sure what happened to that registry?

Was that with the goal of the labradoodle being a guide or other service dog?

(Sorry. never heard of the registry so can't help)

[Aidan]

Aidan

No doubt many breeders are, but the cross was first attempted (successfully, too) to provide a low allergy guide dog

I thought the man who originated the cross for low allergy guide dog pups went public a few years ago saying the whole exercise was a disaster?

That would be an exaggeration, but certainly they are not being produced as Guide Dogs in Australia any more. That is not to say that they have never had a purpose or been bred to a standard as set out by a breed club, or that they are not still being used as low-allergy (some people find them tolerable) guide and service dogs.

Personally, I wouldn't want to be responsible for trying to develop a breed that met the very high standard they were looking for - low-allergy dogs with a high suitability for guide and service work. It's a big ask! It's a big ask for Labrador breeders too.

This does not in any way excuse the greedy money-grubbers who just see a market. But I think it's a bit unfair of those who have said they are were not developed for a purpose, represented by a breed club, breeding true to type etc

[Aidan]

I agree with the person, who said earlier, that they should call it something else. The name has bad rep and is associated with dd's and those out there doing the worng thing.

They tried "Australian Service Dog" but I'm not sure what happened to that registry?

Was that with the goal of the labradoodle being a guide or other service dog?

(Sorry. never heard of the registry so can't help)

Yes, and I believe it was an attempt to distance themselves from disreputable breeders and also an acknowledgement of the fact that they were not lab / poodle crosses (other breeds were used as well).

[Staranais]

Most animal registries, and geneticists accept 4th generation as pure.

Having a dog breed accepted as pure by the ANKC is rather more complicated than that as listed on the ANKC website

7th generation would be accepted as pure by geneticists

"Pure" is an arbitrary line in the sand.

If you introduced one dog of another breed, then cross back into the original breed - for example, bred a lab and a poodle together, then bred those pups exclusively to poodles - by the 4th generation the pups would be only 6.25% labrador, by the 7th generation they would be less than 1% labrador.

Who knows if that 1% would be important genes or not - depends what you selected for! But my point is there is no one point where the new breed disappears and the pups are once again "pure".

[RubyStar]

Hmm I have two multigenerational mutts in my house too And one dog that has been breeding pure for over 100 years. :D

Wow, that's one old dog ...

Yes a 100 year old still fertile dog, its a world record . Seriously though thats what gets to me about these dogs. Chessies have been in development since the 1800's and have had a unified starndard since the early 1900's and some idiots who want a "non shedding labrador" think they can make a breed. Get a poodle if you want a non shedding dog, get a lab if you want a lab. ;)

Not that I am for the Labradoodle, but they are probably trying to achieve what the Chesapeake people back in the 1800's and everyone else did to standardise their new breed. In 100 or so years time this "breed" (or any others, my argument isn't soley based on Labradoodles) could well be ANKC recognised as they have managed to standardise it, and will be in the same position as Chessie people and could well be using the same argument as you are. I just hate close mindedness to new breeds as all breeds evolved somewhere along the line. As long as it is done right, why not. But I do hate that the DD is cashing in on what could be a standardised new breed. Agree with whoever said to ditch the name though and come up with a new one if they ever want a chance to be taken seriously as a new standalone breed!

Hmm I don't see any similarity at all. Chessie people were breeding dogs that were sound and with good retrieving ability and stamina to dogs with similar apperance and ability to create the ultimate retrieveing dog for the conditions of the Chesapeake bay. This is why the breed was developed, for a purpose, not for $$ or fashion. If they found a labrador poodle cross had magic cancer detection abilities and they selected for that as well as appearacnce/breeding to standard ect I would be all for it. But at the moment it seems like all they are doing is robbing the labrador and poodle gene pools for a quick buck.

As I said, my argument isn't necessarily about the Labradoodle and I am in no way condoning breeding crossbreeds for profit and pet market. But any "breed" that is bred for a purpose and is breeding against a standard they are working towards, keeping registries, etc. should not automatically be condemned just because they aren't ANKC recognised as yet. All breeds started somewhere. Just saying

[RallyValley]

Hmm I have two multigenerational mutts in my house too And one dog that has been breeding pure for over 100 years. ;)

Wow, that's one old dog ...

Yes a 100 year old still fertile dog, its a world record :D . Seriously though thats what gets to me about these dogs. Chessies have been in development since the 1800's and have had a unified starndard since the early 1900's and some idiots who want a "non shedding labrador" think they can make a breed. Get a poodle if you want a non shedding dog, get a lab if you want a lab.

Not that I am for the Labradoodle, but they are probably trying to achieve what the Chesapeake people back in the 1800's and everyone else did to standardise their new breed. In 100 or so years time this "breed" (or any others, my argument isn't soley based on Labradoodles) could well be ANKC recognised as they have managed to standardise it, and will be in the same position as Chessie people and could well be using the same argument as you are. I just hate close mindedness to new breeds as all breeds evolved somewhere along the line. As long as it is done right, why not. But I do hate that the DD is cashing in on what could be a standardised new breed. Agree with whoever said to ditch the name though and come up with a new one if they ever want a chance to be taken seriously as a new standalone breed!

Hmm I don't see any similarity at all. Chessie people were breeding dogs that were sound and with good retrieving ability and stamina to dogs with similar apperance and ability to create the ultimate retrieveing dog for the conditions of the Chesapeake bay. This is why the breed was developed, for a purpose, not for $$ or fashion. If they found a labrador poodle cross had magic cancer detection abilities and they selected for that as well as appearacnce/breeding to standard ect I would be all for it. But at the moment it seems like all they are doing is robbing the labrador and poodle gene pools for a quick buck.

As I said, my argument isn't necessarily about the Labradoodle and I am in no way condoning breeding crossbreeds for profit and pet market. But any "breed" that is bred for a purpose and is breeding against a standard they are working towards, keeping registries, etc. should not automatically be condemned just because they aren't ANKC recognised as yet. All breeds started somewhere. Just saying

Maybe this just hits a sore sport for me because people would sooner believe a labradoodle is a real breed and a Chesapeake Bay retriever is something I made up. And love to tell me I have the former and I am delusional about the latter. :D Iguess I see your point and if someone was developing a new breed for a function and following the same code of ethics I expect good pure breed dog breeders to follow it probably wouldn't be an issue.

ETA I very much admire coolies and working register BC's and would have one in a heart beat if I thought I could handle it and they aren't ANKC

Edited September 3, 2010 by valleyCBR

[~Anne~]

Hmm I have two multigenerational mutts in my house too And one dog that has been breeding pure for over 100 years. ;)

Wow, that's one old dog ...

Yes a 100 year old still fertile dog, its a world record :D . Seriously though thats what gets to me about these dogs. Chessies have been in development since the 1800's and have had a unified starndard since the early 1900's and some idiots who want a "non shedding labrador" think they can make a breed. Get a poodle if you want a non shedding dog, get a lab if you want a lab.

Not that I am for the Labradoodle, but they are probably trying to achieve what the Chesapeake people back in the 1800's and everyone else did to standardise their new breed. In 100 or so years time this "breed" (or any others, my argument isn't soley based on Labradoodles) could well be ANKC recognised as they have managed to standardise it, and will be in the same position as Chessie people and could well be using the same argument as you are. I just hate close mindedness to new breeds as all breeds evolved somewhere along the line. As long as it is done right, why not. But I do hate that the DD is cashing in on what could be a standardised new breed. Agree with whoever said to ditch the name though and come up with a new one if they ever want a chance to be taken seriously as a new standalone breed!

Hmm I don't see any similarity at all. Chessie people were breeding dogs that were sound and with good retrieving ability and stamina to dogs with similar apperance and ability to create the ultimate retrieveing dog for the conditions of the Chesapeake bay. This is why the breed was developed, for a purpose, not for $$ or fashion. If they found a labrador poodle cross had magic cancer detection abilities and they selected for that as well as appearacnce/breeding to standard ect I would be all for it. But at the moment it seems like all they are doing is robbing the labrador and poodle gene pools for a quick buck.

As I said, my argument isn't necessarily about the Labradoodle and I am in no way condoning breeding crossbreeds for profit and pet market. But any "breed" that is bred for a purpose and is breeding against a standard they are working towards, keeping registries, etc. should not automatically be condemned just because they aren't ANKC recognised as yet. All breeds started somewhere. Just saying

Maybe this just hits a sore sport for me because people would sooner believe a labradoodle is a real breed and a Chesapeake Bay retriever is something I made up. And love to tell me I have the former and I am delusional about the latter. :D Iguess I see your point and if someone was developing a new breed for a function and following the same code of ethics I expect good pure breed dog breeders to follow it probably wouldn't be an issue.

ETA I very much admire coolies and working register BC's and would have one in a heart beat if I thought I could handle it and they aren't ANKC

Define 'for a function'.

[frufru]

Actually, I have read several times (don't ask me to quote - can't remember) that the guide dog people discontinued the programme because they were unable to stabilize the coat characteristics they were looking for.

If you have a look at the doodle registry the "breed standard" covers just about every type of coat you can think of - and they call this a breed!