Lab X Poodle. Anyone?

[Purdie]

Would it be worth making a sticky post in general about the different oodles? eg

Interested in a Labrador x Poodle (commonly nicknamed "Labradoodle")? Try -

- Standard Poodle

- Curly Coated Retriever

- Portuguese Water Dog

Interested in a Cocker Spaniel x Poodle (commonly refered to as "Spoodle")? Try -

- Standard Poodle

- Miniature Poodle

- Lagotto

- Bedlington

etc, complete with a link to the DOL breed profile of each.

I'm sure The DOL Mind could come up with alternatives and then point anyone interested in the direction of the thread. Just an idea.

E x (bit off topic, sorry )

This is a good idea;Before i joined here i had not heard of a Lagotto and didn't know much about a Curly coated retriever.

[Merci]

Hey guys, saw this today and I think it suitably outlines the issue.

http://www.3news.co.nz/Making-oodles---inside-NZs-puppy-farms/tabid/371/articleID/162135/Default.aspx

Nobody is disputing the fact that the DDs can be cute lovable dogs, its the motive of the person who bred them and the questionable heritage behind dogs. TBH I dont think this issue is restricted to DDs, it just happens that DDs are all the rage at the moment. Thats where the money is at and therefore thats where the souless people looking to make a quick buck have gone.

[Clyde]

Hey guys, saw this today and I think it suitably outlines the issue.

http://www.3news.co....35/Default.aspx

Nobody is disputing the fact that the DDs can be cute lovable dogs, its the motive of the person who bred them and the questionable heritage behind dogs. TBH I dont think this issue is restricted to DDs, it just happens that DDs are all the rage at the moment.

It's the lack of health testing which irks me.

[WoofnHoof]

How were the pure breeds initially developed?

With a job in mind, not just to make money

It could be argued that job = money, how many times have I heard that a good kelpie is worth more than 3 human workers? Is it not ultimately about money when it's a working breed?

I don't think it's a good idea to argue that pure breeds were developed out of some higher moral purpose all breeds were developed to serve humans.

The main argument against the DD trend is that in this day and age we have more tools to ensure the health and welfare of the individuals being bred and these tools are not being utilised in the development of these breeds and that is what should be changed.

Some breeds were developed to sit on rich people's laps, is that noble? Is that a worthy cause? No doubt the purists of the time were outraged that their breeds were being used to create a breed with such a dubious purpose but that's what humans do.

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/nov/13/inventors-idea-regret

person who bred original doodle is sorry. and it was to try to get a dog that a blind person with allergies could use.

Personally I think a small lap dog for a royal princess would act nicely as a kind of furry chastity belt. No way anyone is sneaking in on that girl. And princesses were important commodities about 200 years ago. Sometimes their dog was their only friend.

Unfortunately didn't work for Paris Hilton.

[poodlefan]

I don't think it's a good idea to argue that pure breeds were developed out of some higher moral purpose all breeds were developed to serve humans.

Perhaps not but I cannot name a purebred dog whose development stopped at F1 crosses and that in which a very great deal of it's physical and temperament characteristics don't conform to a pretty narrow standard.

A dog that ranges in size from small to large, can have a raft of different coat types, and a raft of different temperaments is not a "breed" and should not be advertised as such, nor acquired with the idea that you've got any real certainty about what sort of adult dog you're going to get.

For those breeders aspiring to move beyond F1 crossbreeding for profit - go right ahead. But FFS change that god awful name and settle on a breed standard that's not as wide as the Nullabor.

Edited September 25, 2011 by poodlefan

[WoofnHoof]

I don't think it's a good idea to argue that pure breeds were developed out of some higher moral purpose all breeds were developed to serve humans.

Perhaps not but I cannot name a purebred dog whose development stopped at F1 crosses and that in which a very great deal of it's physical and temperament characteristics don't conform to a pretty narrow standard.

A dog that ranges in size from small to large, can have a raft of different coat types, and a raft of different temperaments is not a "breed" and should not be advertised as such, nor acquired with the idea that you've got any real certainty about what sort of adult dog you're going to get.

For those breeders aspiring to move beyond F1 crossbreeding for profit - go right ahead. But FFS change that god awful name and settle on a breed standard that's not as wide as the Nullabor.

I agree, I'm just pointing out that the argument against DDs shouldn't really be about the morality of the 'purpose' as that doesn't really make a lot of sense.

There are breeds which range in size (eg poodles) and breeds which range in coat types (eg chis) but your points about the breadth of the standard and the implications of the name are quite valid and hopefully will be addressed in the long run because I don't think the demand for the general 'type' is going away.

[Alkhe]

And that is why I like purebreds.

A history of a purpose reflected in the look they share with each and every member of the breed. Combine that with predictable traits and I just don't see the need for a crossbreed of dubious origins who may or may not turn out as you hope.

Until these crossbreeders aim for a predictable result that includes health testing they won't get a word of support from me.

I am sitting here with a supposedly purebred dog from a registered breeder that looks vaguely like the breed he is meant to be, acts like it sometimes, and is riddled with health problems that can not be tested for. You can get burnt no matter where you get a dog from and even if it is purebred and even if you do some research.

There are some DD breeders who are driving towards predictable results and health testing. There are some purebred breeders who are not. I don't think it's fair to pick on one as if the other doesn't have the same problems. Most purebreds have been around a lot longer than whatever DD of choice we are talking about. I am sure that some breeders of DDs believe they are developing a new breed for whatever reason. That's their prerogative. Good luck to them.

Agree. Not all breeders do health test, either. Just as it's naive to say that all registered breeders are reputable, it's naive to assume that they are all as benevolent, informed and concerned as some on this board. As far as I'm aware, there's nothing to stop a non-registered breeder health testing their dogs, and no reason that healthy dogs couldn't be produced by a non-registered breeder.

[Alkhe]

I honestly if people new the truth they wouldnt buy them. Of course there will be a few people who dont give a damn but I would consider a large amount of DD owners just uneducated about these dogs

I disagree. Every owner of a DD I have asked has given me a reasonably considered answer as to why they chose one. They did not impulse buy. Most did not come from pet shops. Temperament considerations are invariably high on the agenda. I know someone with a pair of Labrador/Cocker Spaniel crosses, both from the same breeder. They liked the first one so much they decided to get another. Both have the most beautiful temperaments, never cause any trouble at the dog park. Just really nice dogs. Another dog park regular has a gorgeous young Lab/Poodle cross that is all wriggly cuteness and plays very well with my two and is lovely with people and very responsive. Owner flew the dog in from a breeder in QLD. I understood that this breeder was selected over local breeders for some particular reason.

I have had the same experience with owners of non-rescue cross breeds. Not the flying in from Qld, but being very impressed with a breeder, meeting parents, getting another dog after their first, etc.

In addition, many people's forays into the purebred dog world have left a very bitter taste in their mouth, for better or worse. To be honest, having "overheard" (read: been unable to get away from earshot of some conversations) at the Melbourne Show yesterday, I'd steer well clear myself if that were my first/only experience with it. That's based on one particular breed which shall remain nameless, but yeorch.

[sheena]

Oodles could never become a recognized breed, cause if you breed a labradoodle with a labradoodle you are not necessarily going to get a labradoodle. A good friend of mine, against my advice, just bought an oodle, cause it was so cute, & she was assured by the place she bought it that they do not buy from puppy farms. They only buy from reputable breeders

Edited September 26, 2011 by Troy
LInk rmeoved

[Sandra777]

Love the way they will fly the pup to you anywhere in Australia or Tasmania. If I was Tasmanian I think I'd take offence at that ;)

Had a fair bit to do with "foxie"/poodle crosses (the foxie wasn't a Fox Terrier in this case) and they were actually nice dogs - if you like very active, very agile, very noisy, very intelligent dogs with terrier temperaments. The "breeder" called them Foodles which is slightly less repulsive than Fox Poo

[poodlemum]

Was at a local supermarket the other day - they have a notice board for customer ads. Someone had an ad for "Cavoodle" puppies . I couldn't resist - I crossed out "Cavoodle" and wrote "cross-bred mutts".

[TrinaJ]

Has the war against DD's been lost when big international toy chains are making replica toys???

Perhaps people should write to companies such as ELC and advise them that by selling these DD plush toys they are in effect supporting puppy farmers and then give them a copy of Oscars Law so that they can read about it. I personally would have a lot of issues with myself buying a product from a company that supports or turns a blind eye to puppy farming all for a $ - why not sell poodles, Labrador, westie etc, why a made up dog from a person who doesn't care about the health or well being of a dog, they only care about the $$$

Edited September 25, 2011 by TrinaJ

[Chris the Rebel Wolf]

That is truly scary.

I have no problem, whatsoever, with Lab x Poodles. Or Lab cross anything, or crossbreds in general (My boy is one, after all). I have a problem with unethical types promoting Labradoobles as a purebred, price it as such, peddle it as such, and claim that they never shed, fetch your paper, do the crossword for you, and select your winning lotto ticket.

[sandgrubber]

For those who say X-breeds are not bred for a purpose, there are some X-breeds that are purpose bred. For example, a segment of the protection dog business is working to beef up the mastiff. Do some web search on bandog or bandogge and you'll come up with some breeders who do lots of genetic testing, select their dogs carefully, and some are making heaps of money doing so. This outfit, for example, is a multinational kennel that does testing up the yin-yang, charges high prices, and exports all over the world:

http://www.oldbulldo...outbulldogs.php

http://www.oldbulldo...-guarantee1.php

I don't think Ken and Barbie will be getting one of these, though.

Btw, does anyone know what an Australian bandog mastiff is? Are they already capitalising on creating dogs that will pass the Vic regulations and have even greater macho appeal than the APBT?

Edited September 25, 2011 by sandgrubber

[corvus]

There are purpose-bred 'Border Jacks' for flyball as well. And lurchers for hunting.

[fbaudry]

I honestly if people new the truth they wouldnt buy them. Of course there will be a few people who dont give a damn but I would consider a large amount of DD owners just uneducated about these dogs

I disagree. Every owner of a DD I have asked has given me a reasonably considered answer as to why they chose one. They did not impulse buy. Most did not come from pet shops. Temperament considerations are invariably high on the agenda. I know someone with a pair of Labrador/Cocker Spaniel crosses, both from the same breeder. They liked the first one so much they decided to get another. Both have the most beautiful temperaments, never cause any trouble at the dog park. Just really nice dogs. Another dog park regular has a gorgeous young Lab/Poodle cross that is all wriggly cuteness and plays very well with my two and is lovely with people and very responsive. Owner flew the dog in from a breeder in QLD. I understood that this breeder was selected over local breeders for some particular reason.

And that is why I like purebreds.

A history of a purpose reflected in the look they share with each and every member of the breed. Combine that with predictable traits and I just don't see the need for a crossbreed of dubious origins who may or may not turn out as you hope.

Until these crossbreeders aim for a predictable result that includes health testing they won't get a word of support from me.

I am sitting here with a supposedly purebred dog from a registered breeder that looks vaguely like the breed he is meant to be, acts like it sometimes, and is riddled with health problems that can not be tested for. You can get burnt no matter where you get a dog from and even if it is purebred and even if you do some research.

There are some DD breeders who are driving towards predictable results and health testing. There are some purebred breeders who are not. I don't think it's fair to pick on one as if the other doesn't have the same problems. Most purebreds have been around a lot longer than whatever DD of choice we are talking about. I am sure that some breeders of DDs believe they are developing a new breed for whatever reason. That's their prerogative. Good luck to them.

Thank you Corvus for articulating so well what I wanted to say. Most of the poodle crosses in my neighbourhood / local park were purchased after much thought and research, and from "small" breeders who only had a few dogs raised in a family environment. All these dogs have beautiful natures, are well trained and have great social skills with both people and other dogs.

In the past, when people mentioned to me that they were getting a x oodle, I always kept my mouth shut even though I really wanted to promote the benefits of getting a purebred. I felt a bit smug and superior getting my pup from a registered breeder, recommended by the breed society, home to many champions, doing health testing etc etc...

I ended up with a highly strung pup, completely unsocialised and suffering from a very serious Obsessive Compulsive Disorder. 3 years down the track, after 2.5 years of consultations with a veterinary behaviourist, various medications, neurologist appointments, a brain scan, cognitive behaviour modification therapy and a very hefty bill, we all agreed that the kindest thing to do was to give the poor young dog his wings as he had no quality of life.

The whole experience left me very bitter and disillusioned, and I can understand why some people who are looking for a family pet might turn to DDs. Don't get me wrong, I am still hoping that one day I'll be able to get the perfect representative of my breed of choice, but I think many breeders turn people off by their arrogance and focus on purely aesthetics features.

[Steve]

I no longer see the Labradoodle which is bred by registered labradoodle breeders as a designer dog .I see it as a purebred in development . The registered breeders do more for testing and health and temp than many breeders of recognised purebred dogs do. Big difference between a registered labradoodle form a registered labradoodle breeder and a first cross mutt.

Edited September 26, 2011 by Steve

[poodlefan]

There are purpose-bred 'Border Jacks' for flyball as well. And lurchers for hunting.

Are you suggesting that every BC/JRT cross in a litter will be the ideal combination of temperament and conformatiom for flyball? You can put that idea to bed for a start. It simply doesn't happen.

Lurchers are generally not first crosses btw.

Poor breeding practices do not provide sufficient justification IMO to desert long established breeds in favour of unpredictable combinations of breeds that generally do not come from the highest calbre of breed representatives in the first place.

To suggest that going to a puppy farmed first cross (for the most part) will guaranteee a better chance of temperament and conformation is simply not the case. God knows, most of us have seen our share of temperament and conformation disasters in DDs but of course courtesy of the media we don't tend to hear as much about them. There are plenty of wonderful DDs. There are plenty of wonderful, healthy, sane purebreds.

If you think purebreds are so prone to issues Corvus, why do you now own two??? If purebreds are such disasters, why is crossing two of them supposed to solve the problem?

Shit luck shouldn't see generations and hundreds of years of selective breeding ignored in favour of dogs that come with a bunch of claims that many simply can't live up to.

Edited September 26, 2011 by poodlefan

[fbaudry]

I don't think Corvus is suggesting that purebreds are such disasters. I think she is just trying to say that it's not all black and white, i.e. all purebreds are great and all crosses are necessarily bad and bred by money grabbing uncaring individuals.

Shit luck shouldn't see generations and hundreds of years of selective breeding ignored in favour of dogs that come with a bunch of claims that many simply can't live up to.

To me the real selective breeding towards the end of the 19th - early 20th century when breed clubs, Kennel clubs and dog shows were established. If we look for instance at the spaniels, up to the late 1800s there were roughly 3 main types: land spaniels, water spaniels and toy spaniels. Each of these types had been "selected" to perform different functions, but out crosses remained common. Different dogs from the same litter could be classifieds as different breeds depending on their size for instance (English cocker / Field spaniel)

With our desire to categorize and fix mostly physical appearance, we have restricted the gene pools by only breeding together dogs we deemed to be of the same breed. By doing that we have been able to produce dogs of predictable appearance / temperament, but it is very likely we have also unknowingly selected undesirable genes that we know have to test for and try to eliminate (PRA and so forth)