Cross breeding yes or no?

[Josie]

someone on dogforumuks Facebook page has gotten rather passionate about how disgusting cross breeding is.

I like to do a ‘guess the breed’ game and I did a cross breed.

She said that dogforumuk was promoting backstreet breeding and should be ashamed! Pfffffft

(I keep telling myself ‘Must not get into pointless argument’)

So....

What do you think about it?

Personally I think the same could be said about poor pedigree dogs who can suffer terrible health problems.

 

[JudyN]

Good topic

A lot of people I know are dead set against any form of breeding when there are so many dogs in rescues, and I have some sympathy with that view. But if responsible breeders stopped breeding, within a few years every dog in the country would have been accidentally bred or come from puppy farms and 'backyard breeders' with little or no knowledge. If all dogs were bred responsibly, focusing on temperament and health more than appearance, then maybe fewer dogs would end up dumped or in rescues.

It's funny how a lot of lurcher owners are against crossbreeds, as lurchers are the original designer dog

Crossbreeds are often healthier than pedigrees, and I see no problem with well-established F1 crosses such as cockerpoos, labradoodles and springadors - from what I've read these tend to have predictable temperaments so the buyer can be reasonably sure of what they're getting. But as F2 crosses are a lot less predictable, maybe F1 crosses sold to non-breeders should be neutered at an appropriate age?

Of course, when a crossbreed becomes a fashion item, and breeders/puppy farmers are breeding random crosses because there's a chance that the pups will be achingly cute, that's another matter. But then fashions for pedigrees are damaging too - I hate seeing all those brachy pugs, Frenchies, Boston terriers and so on. You wouldn't choose for your child to be asthmatic so why would you opt to have a breed that can't breathe?

Bottom line, it doesn't matter what a dog is as long as it's been bred to be fit for purpose (which nowadays mostly means fit to be a companion animal in a family home), and as long as the breeder goes out of their way to ensure prospective owners are suitable and understand what they're letting themselves in for. Just look at the number of people who are convinced that their puppy is aggressive or abnormal because of normal puppy biting.

 

[PWDmum]

I’m not a fan to be honest, we have enough breeds already out there to suit anyone’s needs, non shedding , working, toy and so on, if you are after a dog that looks like a cockerpoo ( seems to be the most popular ) reseach a well bred small/ medium non shedding breed that fits that profile,

I don’t buy into the crossbreed is healthier than the pure bred , a badly bred dog is a badly bred dog, regardless of type and who bred it, and you are more likely to get a healthy pure bred that has been carefully bred by a breeder who health tests and breeds from health tested stock.

Most designer dogs have no health testing behind them, they are F1 , bred by someone who buys breed A and uses breed B and hopes for the best,and unfortunately people buy into being told they are healthier.

Poodles and cocker spaniels both suffer from the same health issues, for instance PRA, if you have not tested breeding stock to see whether they are clear, carriers or effected, and understand what out of those three you can breed to gether, you are going to get effected pups, and sadly most people you speak to who own one of these crosses, do not have any idea what you are talking about.

I’m also interested in the theory that F1 temperaments will be more set than later generations , a dog temperament is set by genetics, regardless of F 1,2,3 ..... breeding, and if you don’t know the history behind those dogs, you can’t breed for good temperaments.

There is a belief that by diluting ( cross breeding) genetics, you will get healtheir dogs Until people start to take time and reseach health issues in what ever breed you buy, and only buy from those who test and breed for health, unhealthy dogs will continue to be bred,

The buyer holds the trump card here... use it to buy as healthy as you can

 

[Mad Murphy]

I happened to see that rather passionate rant.
When you go into the history of pedigree dogs you find that they have all come from selective (cross) breeding ..
In essence this is very much like the discussion of what is a weed and what is a flower . I argue that many weed flowers are more beautiful and stronger that their cultivated hot house cousins.

Many argue that the careful out breeding of dogs such as the pug and the English bulldog to give what is now called an old fashioned bulldog is actually bringing the breed back to what it once was instead of the horribly overbred and unhealthy dogs we see today.

If dog forum uk promotes health and wellbeing for all dogs regardless of their race then I am happy.

 

[excuseme]

Oh wow, what a subject to get mixed up in.
I for many years believed that pure breeds were best and that cross breeding was so wrong.
Over the years I have mellowed and can see that selective cross breeding with care is not such a bad thing. After all the puppy farmers do it without any care at all !!(how wrong is that).

If cross breeds are selectively bred and if both parents were to have been carefully DNA tested or hip scored for their individual breed problems, then these dogs can be much healthier than many of the unfortunate pure breeds that are bred to a show bench design. Such as the German Shepherd, Frenchies, Cavalier spaniels, and more. There are so many of these unfortunate "pure breeds"!

I love the Lurchers, and F1 cockapoos and Labradoodles, keeping the crossing to a minimum so that you have some idea of temperaments and needs.
Too much in depth crossing just produces a real "mongrel", but at the end of the day, a happy family dog. So what's wrong with that?

Right or wrong, we all have our own views that we may change from time to time.

 

[JudyN]

I don’t buy into the crossbreed is healthier than the pure bred , a badly bred dog is a badly bred dog, regardless of type and who bred it, and you are more likely to get a healthy pure bred that has been carefully bred by a breeder who health tests and breeds from health tested stock.

I did see a study that concluded that the average lifespan of crossbreeds was longer than pedigrees. BUT that may well be because crossing will moderate some of the more unhealthy characteristics common in some pedigrees - as an illustration, and I have no idea what this cross would produce, crossing a deerhound with a boxer could result in a dog that lives longer than a deerhound and can breathe more easily than a boxer. It may well be the case that if you only considered more healthy pedigrees (which is what we should aspire to), lifespans would be the same.

But sure, the health/temperaent of the parents in breeding a crossbreed is just as important as in a pedigree, as is knowledge of how the genetics is likely to pan out. And that is going to be more involved in crossbreeds than pedigrees.

It's a shame some people have to get so heated and go on the attack when you have a different opinion to them. There isn't one obvious answer, there are many aspects to it, and people entrenched in their own viewpoint are never going to be able to learn from aspects they haven't considered. I'm certainly happy to be swayed by people who have more than my very limited knowledge about breeding and genetics.

 

[arealhuman]

Mixed FTW

 

[JudyN]

What does FTW stand for, @arealhuman?

 

[Flobo]

What does FTW mean?
I am a fan of mixed breeds, though I have pedigrees in my life and I love them all. But with some pedigrees comes health issues as we all know, it can't be denied and they are purpose bred this way, sorry. A French bulldog is not a French bulldog if it doesn't have the right traits is it? I have a 2year old French Bulldog staying with me at the mo, a beautiful dog but obvious problems.( BTW, she came from Bulgaria originally, has had a litter and is on her 4th home, thankfully now she has been spayed and has her forever home.. so we also have to consider mental and emotional welfare too that is a downside to the desire for pedigree dogs). I also know nothing about genetics but what is wrong with a world where dogs are bred to be healthy as opposed to looking a certain way?.. I get it with working breeds that are still bred to work, but most of our dogs now are 'pets' are they not??

 

[JoanneF]

I agree with those who have spoken about light and shade in the argument. In an ideal world, puppy farming would be eradicated and all breeding would come from health tested parents. There should be no such thing as an accidental litter, the mismate jab would resolve that (so an accidental mating doesn't result in a litter). But I would also be saddened if the cost of testing made the price of a well bred dog out of the reach of great homes which had lower incomes.

 

[Flobo]

One more point to add, when some pedigree pups have such a high price tag, £1000 upwards, is it any wonder that people invest in breeding them? And I know breeding has it's own costs but some don't consider that when they think it's an 'easy' way to make a lot of money unfortunately...

 

[Sezzy]

I have a cross breed for no other reason than I saw her and fell in love with her

 

[excuseme]

That's fantastic

And in so many cases the best way.

 

[Josie]

I happened to see that rather passionate rant.
When you go into the history of pedigree dogs you find that they have all come from selective (cross) breeding ..
In essence this is very much like the discussion of what is a weed and what is a flower . I argue that many weed flowers are more beautiful and stronger that their cultivated hot house cousins.

Many argue that the careful out breeding of dogs such as the pug and the English bulldog to give what is now called an old fashioned bulldog is actually bringing the breed back to what it once was instead of the horribly overbred and unhealthy dogs we see today.

If dog forum uk promotes health and wellbeing for all dogs regardless of their race then I am happy.

I thought you may have seen that post! I shouldn’t have got into a debate but I wasn’t very happy that she said I was promoting backstreet breeding

 

[Josie]

A very passionate thread! With some great replies!

Really the main thing is that we all love dogs and want what’s best for them

 

[excuseme]

Put me in the queue to give her a "Black eye"

 

[Mad Murphy]

I will admit Im not a lover of the idiotic name thing. A cross is a cross, Max was a pure st Bernard and a pure Bouvier des Flanders and we always said cross bouvier. Remy was a mystery and we referred to him as a mongrel ie; being of unknown origin.
I think part of the backlash on the designer dogs is the feeling from some breeders that their careful selections and breeding for health and character traits is being undermined by the whole springadoodleyorkiepooshitalotta type of fashionable dogs and I understand that, however to accuse someone of promoting BYB just because of a picture is going too far. Besides there are plenty of BYB churning out 'pedigree' dogs with awful problems so what about them?

 

[Mayblossom]

springadoodleyorkiepooshitalotta .....love it! Should be in the dictionary

 

[lynyona]

Years ago cross breeds were just cross breeds now they have these so call designer dogs cross bred and sold for extortionate prices and financial gain .Sorry I'm not a big believer in it don't get me wrong the cockapoo and other dogs are cute but some are ugly and as someone else mentioned who knows what health problems they are going to have and especially with these 4 cross bred ones .I have a pug x staffie puppy only because I was bought it by my youngest son. All my previous dogs have been mongrels except my Old English Sheepdog many many years ago

 

[leashedForLife]

.

personally, i've had crossbreds, purebreds, & random-breds in my lifetime, & i've been lucky in that all of my dogs were fairly healthy, the sole exception being my Akita, who developed a blood disorder just after her 2nd B-day when i was about to get her hips & elbows cleared.
She was to have been a breeding bitch, & the 1st offer i got came from the Chinook breeders at the UKC Centennial Show, who wanted to get more size & muscle in their bitches without sacrificing temps. They were impressed with how well my 9-MO pup coped with the crowds, masses of other dogs, daily afternoon thunderstorms, & camping in a tent on the show grounds.

I question *why* anyone is breeding - whether purebred, crossbred, or a random-bred with a delightful temp.
Are U producing show-quality get who are intended to exceed their parents' quality?
Are U producing X-bred sport-dogs for an express purpose?
Are U producing good pets with equable temps & solidly tested health IN BOTH prospective dam & sire?

I think all dogs should be tested B4 breeding, at the very minimum, elbows & hips / knees, plus a complete eye-exam by a k9 opthalmologist that certifies they have no heritable, visible problems at this time, & that eye exam is to be ANNUAL as long as that dog is bred.
If U are crossing breeds, both dogs get all the applicable tests for dogs-in-general PLUS their own breed-specific heritable issues - such as full-depth skin punches in 3 different locations, in all Poodles of whatever size, to be sent to a pathologist & examined for signs of Sebaceous Adenitis.

I do question the creation of high-intensity sporting crosses - Ex, Border-Jacks ... a BC's intensity plus a JRT's aggro & snappy, reactive temp? -- God knows, BC pups are sufficiently mouthy as they are WITHOUT any added irritability from a JRT admixture, & being "smaller" doesn't minimize the issues that surplus sport-dog crosses can create in pet homes.
Anybody who competes & deliberately makes a *litter* of sport-cross pups "so i can have one of my own" is IMO an irresponsible arsewipe; what will they do with the leftovers? Drop them off at the local shelter? Place them in pet homes via a CraigsList ad?
If U want a well-bred sport dog of a specific cross, i'd urge every competitor to BUY one from a known breeder who tests both prospective parents, & has their litters reserved before they're whelped. // Yes, U'll pay for that pup - but U won't contribute yet more surplus pups to an overburdened shelter & rescue system, 'cuz dollars to donuts, if U place those pups directly into pet homes, particularly novice homes with young children, they WILL bounce into a shelter or rescue within their 1st year of life.

The intention of the breeder is paramount for me - & IMO, it's imperative to test B4 breeding, & also to *wait* until both prospective sire & prospective dam are a minimum of 2-YO.
I despise the show-breeders who justify mating a 6-MO Italian Greyhound bitch by saying, "she's full grown...". Don't feed me that pablum; delaying breeding until dogs are 24-MO or over does 2 very important things, it allows heritable problems that will affect that dog the TIME to manifest as symptoms, & it ADDS an average of 2-years to their pups' lifespans.
Even conditions for which there are no tests, can thus be seen & avoided - 85% of issues that will affect a dog, are symptomatic by 2-YO. // And what else can add 24-mos to a dog's brief lifetime?

Profit-oriented breeders just tick me off, & i'm appalled that the AKC is now in bed with the industrial-scale puppy mills they once preached against. They used to warn puppy-buyers to avoid pet-shop pups & puppy mills; now, they throw their massive lobbying corps into the legislative fray to DEFEND puppy-mills. There have been repeated attempts in the USA to pass a Federal bill for healthy pups & requiring humane care of breeding stock; the AKC has worked diligently to defeat every bill, spending hundreds of thousands on each effort. It's disgusting.

- terry

.