Looking for a new family member...

[muck]

If the Labradoodle breeder does all of the things a reputable breeder does, I have no problem with that. We have one in our town. She breeds for temperament and prefers to sell to homes where people will do therapy work. Their laid back temperament make them great with kids. She does all of the health clearances on the sire and dam, and guarantees her dogs. Her puppies are crate trained and started on housebreaking before you even get your puppy. I love having her puppies in my classes. They are laid back and easy going. Very few Labradoodle breeders do the health clearances and breed for temperament, but I know of three here in Oregon.

 

The Austailian Labradoodle comes from the fact that the idea to mix these two breeds came from Australia where they crossed the Lab with the Standard Poodle for seeing eye dogs to go to blind owners with pet hair dander allergies. For this program, they were breeding for health and temperament. If the foundation of the line came from Australia, they are often referred as Australian Labradoodles. Not that coming from Australia makes them better prospects, but it makes for good advertising.

 

Other designer breeds were not orginally bred for purpose like the Labradoodle.

 

Yeah, yeah. I heard all that at the time. You are wrong. I did my research and visited the breeder. There is a community of people who are breeding these dogs the right way.

 

Point made.

 

Point received.

 

*******************

 

IMO, my opinion is that a new 'breed' isn't a true 'breed' until you have five or more generations of crosses ... where Lab x Poodle = F1 ... then F1 x F1 = F2 ... F2 x F2 = F3 ... F3 x F3 = F4 ... F4 x F4 = F5 ... and F5 = new breed ... untill then, they are mixed breed dogs ...

 

AND THERE IS NOTHING TO BE DEFENSIVE OF ABOUT OWNING A MIXED BREED ANYTHING (as long as it does its job and makes you happy)!

Edited October 17, 2011 by muck

[Sugar Magnolia]

We have probably created a lot of health and temperament problems with our selective breeding. Some of our selective breeder is all about ego and "designing" a beautiful breed. Some, the selective breeding is done for purpose, for example, we need a dog to herd our livestock, or a breed to guard the livestock, to put food on the table. .

 

I have taken a couple of canine ethology seminars. I learned genes are linked, so you always get a "suite of traits", If you select for one trait or behavior, you get a lot of other stuff too. I am making this up but...let's say you try to breed aggression out of your line of Jack Russell Terriers. By trying to do this, you will also introduce another trait or traits, which may be a new behavior trait, or a new genetic health issue, or your line will physically look different.

 

Both Dr. Brian Hare and Dr. Ray Coppinger, whose seminars I have attended refer back to the famous fox study in Russia that is still going on. If you have watched the PBS program "Dogs Who Have Changed the World" you will know this study. Both Dr. Coppinger and Dr. Hare have been over to Russia to see this for themselves. Dr. Coppinger is interviewed on the Nova program that is several years old. The orginal study was to try and domesticate foxes. So, they bred the fox with the least fear response to people, to another fox with the least fear response to people. What they got, in just 20 generations, was a fox that started to look and act like a dog. It had floppy ears, a curl tail, piebald markings, it started to bark and cry like a dog, and started to wag it's tail.

 

So, we will never get the perfect purebred dog. We will selectively try to breed out hip dysplasia out of our line of dogs, but by doing that introduce possibly epilepsy in the line or something else. Mutts probably are healthier, and the more mix you get, probably the healthier the dog. My English Setter, when I was a kid, lived to be 15. That is almost unheard of now for a large breed dog, even with the hugh advancements in vet medicine. Is it genetics, the chemicals we have introduced in our environment, or something else that has shortened the lives?. Mutts aren't living as long either, so probably a combination. Who knows. But we aren't doing our dogs a favor by selectively breeding.

 

With that said, I love purebred dogs. I love the history behind the breed, the various breed temperaments, and creating a training program unique to the breed, and many are downright gorgeous. I get as many mutts in my classes, and love them too.

Edited October 17, 2011 by Sugar Magnolia

[Rovers]

We have probably created a lot of health and temperament problems with our selective breeding. Some of our selective breeder is all about ego and "designing" a beautiful breed. Some, the selective breeding is done for purpose, for example, we need a dog to herd our livestock, or a breed to guard the livestock, to put food on the table. .

 

I have taken a couple of canine ethology seminars. I learned genes are linked, so you always get a "suite of traits", If you select for one trait or behavior, you get a lot of other stuff too. I am making this up but...let's say you try to breed aggression out of your line of Jack Russell Terriers. By trying to do this, you will also introduce another trait or traits, which may be a new behavior trait, or a new genetic health issue, or your line will physically look different.

 

Both Dr. Brian Hare and Dr. Ray Coppinger, whose seminars I have attended refer back to the famous fox study in Russia that is still going on. If you have watched the PBS program "Dogs Who Have Changed the World" you will know this study. Both Dr. Coppinger and Dr. Hare have been over to Russia to see this for themselves. Dr. Coppinger is interviewed on the Nova program that is several years old. The orginal study was to try and domesticate foxes. So, they bred the fox with the least fear response to people, to another fox with the least fear response to people. What they got, in just 20 generations, was a fox that started to look and act like a dog. It had floppy ears, a curl tail, piebald markings, it started to bark and cry like a dog, and started to wag it's tail.

 

So, we will never get the perfect purebred dog. We will selectively try to breed out hip dysplasia out of our line of dogs, but by doing that introduce possibly epilepsy in the line or something else. Mutts probably are healthier, and the more mix you get, probably the healthier the dog. My English Setter, when I was a kid, lived to be 15. That is almost unheard of now for a large breed dog, even with the hugh advancements in vet medicine. Is it genetics, the chemicals we have introduced in our environment, or something else that has shortened the lives?. Mutts aren't living as long either, so probably a combination. Who knows. But we aren't doing our dogs a favor by selectively breeding.

 

With that said, I love purebred dogs. I love the history behind the breed, the various breed temperaments, and creating a training program unique to the breed, and many are downright gorgeous. I get as many mutts in my classes, and love them too.

 

I think your love of purebreds clouds your judgement somewhat, despite your involvement, or perhaps because of it in the canine business. Genetic selstion to breed is a faulted practice as it exists today. You said it yourself... it's about the "gorgeousness of the purebreds, and that is what lies at the core economy of breeding today. Look at the Schauzers... the mini and giant are disease ridden purebreds. That standard is a much healthier breed. The more they try to breed dogs that aren't genetically suited to be giants or miniatures would be a good step in the right direction. The "gorgeousness" of purebreds will drive that market, and that is what it is, a market.

[Sugar Magnolia]

I think your love of purebreds clouds your judgement somewhat, despite your involvement, or perhaps because of it in the canine business. Genetic selstion to breed is a faulted practice as it exists today. You said it yourself... it's about the "gorgeousness of the purebreds, and that is what lies at the core economy of breeding today. Look at the Schauzers... the mini and giant are disease ridden purebreds. That standard is a much healthier breed. The more they try to breed dogs that aren't genetically suited to be giants or miniatures would be a good step in the right direction. The "gorgeousness" of purebreds will drive that market, and that is what it is, a market.

 

I am curious how you think my judgement is clouded? I clearly stated that we have not done our dogs a service by continuing to selective breed. At one time we bred soley for a purpose, to work for us, protect us, and put food on the table. That is still true and many of our purebred dogs still serve a great purpose, but most purebred dogs are purchased for a particular look and or trait.

 

Also, I never said I would not get a rescue dog. If I do, as I have stated in a previous post, I will get a young adutl because I know what I get, since dogs grow into behaviors. With a puppy, I don' know the dominant trait, or how the puppy was raised during the socialization period, which might affect the outcome of their overall temperament.

[Bier Meister]

when i first read the title, thought soup posted this.

[wirehairman]

<== I'm fully in support of dogs being selectively and carefully bred for a purpose (and doggy beauty pageants are not a purpose IMO).

 

If you're not looking for a working or hunting dog, I would personally recommend a "mutt" from the pound. At the same time, I have no problem if there is a particular breed you are drawn to because of looks, temperament, or whatever. I would advise doing lots of research of the breed and potential breeders, as others have suggested. I would also recommend you pick the puppy based upon the parents before the puppies ever hit the ground. You will go home with the first fuzzy little, doe eyed bundle of love you see otherwise.

[Yukon Cornelius]

. You will go home with the first fuzzy little, doe eyed bundle of love you see otherwise.

this is the trooof

[Rovers]

I am curious how you think my judgement is clouded? I clearly stated that we have not done our dogs a service by continuing to selective breed. At one time we bred soley for a purpose, to work for us, protect us, and put food on the table. That is still true and many of our purebred dogs still serve a great purpose, but most purebred dogs are purchased for a particular look and or trait.

 

Also, I never said I would not get a rescue dog. If I do, as I have stated in a previous post, I will get a young adutl because I know what I get, since dogs grow into behaviors. With a puppy, I don' know the dominant trait, or how the puppy was raised during the socialization period, which might affect the outcome of their overall temperament.

 

When I went to "rescue" a pup, I found one that wasn't a pup anymore. Pups get adopted, not rescued. My mutt was about 5 months. Nuerotic as all get out, nervous, had obviously been abused ( proven by her deathly fear of plastic garbage bags) but I looked at her and thought "No one else is ever going to take her.". So I did. So I agree with your premise of the young adult adoption, although it took a year to get her to calm down, get some confidence and become less fearful. she is still a nervous dog as an old adult, but at 13 still as healthy as I could possibly hope for.

 

In fact tonight, I got home and let her out. There where some squirrells in the yard and she bolted, (she used to hunt and kill them with regularity, but she is a bit too slow to have a successful hunt and chase anymore) but she ran straight into a shepards hook I have in the yard for a bird bath and bird feeder. I thought she was SERiuosly injured, but most of it was now I think fear and shock of the water hitting her hind quarters. She did as far as I can tell get a very nasty bump/bruise, but it was a horrible scare. She was yelping and crying. She seemed fine, but then yepled again on the staris. My guess is it's a nasty bruise, ot so I hope.

 

Back on topic, yes, breeds are purchased for a "look" most lapdogs and miniatures, as well as some giants, and others are bred for traits. I can support the latter, but not the former. Breeding dogs for a "look" is IMHO irresponsible. I well understand why border collies were bred. I do not understand why a person with a 3k sq. ft. property would buy one. Looks? They need to run, need open spaces, need tyo herd, need to have a job. But breeders breed and sell them into family homes. People buy them for "looks". Or reputation for some wierd sort of social or emotional reason. Herding dogs need to work and need space. How many border collies actually get that environment?

 

You want to see a happy healthy border collie, go to a farm. you want to see an unhappy, unhealty and sometimes destructive one, look in suburban backyards. This is one of my issues with breeders. I have others. And I don't buy into the "hobby" idea. they make $$$ breeding these dogs. maybe not a lot, but they do.

 

There is a lot wrong with the whole dog breeding business, and it IS a business.

[Sugar Magnolia]

It's a matter of personal choice and there are choices. I would personally rather pay $1000 for a puppy from a breeder who does genetic testing, knows the health history of the stud dog for at least to 4 generations, who can prove genectic health testing has been done on 4 generations of the puppies lineage, guarantees the health of the puppy they place, does a background check on the person who buys their puppy, and encourages the buyer of their puppy to contact them if their dog has health problems. Yes, you can get a purebred puppy from a breeder for half of that cost, or maybe even less, who does not or little of the above, but not worth it to me. If I don't buy a purebred puppy from a breeder who does all of the above, I would personally get a rescue.

 

I would be very concerned about buying a puppy for a pet store. First off, the pet store has to make a profit so why not go directly to the source? You get to meet at least the mother of the puppy, and see how the puppy was raised. The puppy is living in a cage in a pet store during the most important time of their social development. That is the worst place for them to be. Also, dogs who learn to defecate in a cage will learn it is okay to be dirty, and are more likely to defecate and urinate in a crate if you chose to crate train.