Yes, I *would* like salt n sauce with that please

PucciNPoni

PucciNPoni

Well-Known Member
Joined
23 March 2009
Messages
4,064
Visit site
cos I have to eat my words!

Anyone reading posts by me might have the idea that I'm biased against labradoodles. I'm not in particular. I am against the willy nilly breeding of them (or any designer cross breed)...or I was...until I met Rollo! And his mum!

It's not his labradoodleness, and he's not just a common cross breed. He's an "Australian Labradoodle, darlings" :D

So why the sudden flipsies? Cos from what I gather from the owner of this rather nice young dog - the breeder has:

-imported registered stock from Australia, registered with Oz kennel club <---not real name
-hip scores on both parents (low)
-health / genetic testing done on parents
-explained in detail how to brush and maintain the coat
-explained in detail how to body condition score so he doesn't become too fat or thin
-taught them how to trim nails and pluck ears
-has given a lifetime guarantee (eg dog is to come back to breeder if they can't keep him)


Oh yes, there is a god! :D
 
katielou_houston said:
I still don't think they should be bred.
Click to expand...

K_H,

broadly speaking I'd be with you, on this one, but on occasions, we meet the odd breeder who actually knows what they are doing. I am totally opposed to those who create these designer cross bred dogs, generally. We should all, however, keep an open mind.

I'm probably going to be shot at here, but these are my thoughts. I have met a great many breeders of dogs, in my time, and so few of them have actually understood what temperament, specifically in the breeding bitch, actually means.

I'm going to guess at a figure now, but I suspect that currently, less than 20% of brood bitches, of what ever type or breed have a suitable temperament, and I'd bet that I'm not far from being right. Brood bitches of the correct temperament are for more likely to replicate themselves, than those of unsound temperaments.

Fashion Breeding, has done so much damage, and it's all so often been practised by those who simply aren't qualified. Some of them shouldn't even own a dog, far less breed! All too many of the known "difficult" breeds, are owned by those who haven't a clue what they're doing. The experienced will tend to steer clear of them, and for a very good reason.

During the mid to late 1800s there was a fashion to cross breed retrievers, with pointers. The idea was that they'd have a dog which did both. The reality was that they ended up with dogs which did neither! The Continentals managed it with their HPRs, but that took a great many generations to achieve.

It is not my intention to offend those who enjoy this forum, and I would hope that I haven't.

Alec.
 
Well IMVHO your 20% guess is about 70% off the mark :D I have known a lot of dog breeders, involved with showing and working dogs, and would totally disagree with you on that one :)
 
Alec Swan said:
K_H,

broadly speaking I'd be with you, on this one, but on occasions, we meet the odd breeder who actually knows what they are doing. I am totally opposed to those who create these designer cross bred dogs, generally. We should all, however, keep an open mind.

I'm probably going to be shot at here, but these are my thoughts. I have met a great many breeders of dogs, in my time, and so few of them have actually understood what temperament, specifically in the breeding bitch, actually means.

I'm going to guess at a figure now, but I suspect that currently, less than 20% of brood bitches, of what ever type or breed have a suitable temperament, and I'd bet that I'm not far from being right. Brood bitches of the correct temperament are for more likely to replicate themselves, than those of unsound temperaments.

Fashion Breeding, has done so much damage, and it's all so often been practised by those who simply aren't qualified. Some of them shouldn't even own a dog, far less breed! All too many of the known "difficult" breeds, are owned by those who haven't a clue what they're doing. The experienced will tend to steer clear of them, and for a very good reason.

During the mid to late 1800s there was a fashion to cross breed retrievers, with pointers. The idea was that they'd have a dog which did both. The reality was that they ended up with dogs which did neither! The Continentals managed it with their HPRs, but that took a great many generations to achieve.

It is not my intention to offend those who enjoy this forum, and I would hope that I haven't.

Alec.
Click to expand...

I have no issue with the breeder in general they sound like exactly the right kind of person.

I have a problem with the fact that there is nothing wrong with a poodle and nothing wrong with a lab so they do not need to be crossed. You will not get a mix of the 2's personality, coat ect you will get one of each.

The fact is that most of them go to pets homes that would have been perfectly fine with the lowly poodle or lab.
 
Sometimes I dread bringing up the word labradoodle, because on any forum I've ever been on (grooming especially) it tends to bring up lots of heated emotions. I'm all for a healthy debate...

I'm very opposed to the breeding of two very different breeds for hte sake of getting something cutesy with a cutesy designer lable.

On the other hand, I'm not opposed to creating a dog with a specific goal for which it's intended in mind (aside from just raking in the big bucks). The origins of 'doodles from what I understand was for working as a smaller and potentially hypoallergenic guide dog. I see nothing wrong for this as a reason to breed them to start with.

I abhor the idea and fact that as Alex says, some folk are breeding that probably shouldn't even OWN a dog. My excitement does not come from this new fangled breed, it comes from "well, if you gotta do it, at least do it with some intelligence and genuine care!" and this breeder seemed to be doing her research, and breeding with the best of intentions.

Every breed of dog is manufactured by humans. So why not a labradoodle, if it's done in THIS fashion?
 
Because they are no longer breeding for a purpose. The hypoallergenic thing didn't work out. So now they are bred for just pet homes when a poodle or lab would have been just fine.
 
PucciNPoni said:
I abhor the idea and fact that as Alex says, some folk are breeding that probably shouldn't even OWN a dog. My excitement does not come from this new fangled breed, it comes from "well, if you gotta do it, at least do it with some intelligence and genuine care!" and this breeder seemed to be doing her research, and breeding with the best of intentions.
Click to expand...

I do agree with this point though at least they are being somewhat responsible.
 
Sounds like a great breeder
All 'breeds' came about by breeding for a certain type of dog. The labradoodle imo is not yet established enough to call it a breed (i.e you cannot reproduce the same characteristics again and again over generations-yet) . All breeds started by cross breeding, so I don't really care tbh.
 
I agree with you SusieT for the majority...however, if the Australian Kennel Club recognises them? I don't believe they do yet (so I read) but it seems that there is the Australian Labradoodle Association which is trying to standardise them, and become a recognised breed. I misunderstood yesterday when I spoke to the owner that they were already recognised by OzKC. But the ALA has their own registration in which they promote PRA testing, hipscoring, as well as responsible breeding. My point here was, would you recognise the Australian ones as a breed once they've been approved by their Kennel Club?

Katielou: How can you argue with this: In as much as I love to say they're not a breed (cos here, they certainly are NOT), is it so wrong to try to create a new breed? Maybe someone here can tell me about the origins of breeds like Bichons, Cavalliers, Shih Tzus, and other "non working type" dogs? Were they wrong to be bred from teh start?

I'm not digging, just asking for the sake of a healthy debate! :D
 
Last edited:
Couldn't the same be said for lots of breeds? Afterall, beauty is in the eye of the beholder! They're not *my* cuppa tea, but lots of people don't like Border Terriers, MinPins, or Miniature Poodles (which I have one of each). What's the point of any of these? Okay, arguable, BTs have a working history. But min poodles and min pins?

I'm a bit partial to saying for example that chinese crested are not exactly what I call a thing of beauty (at least the ones that have come in to my shop - but I've seen some that are gorgeous). And bull dogs? So not my thing, and lets face it, they might have had purpose once upon a time ago, but now? How about lurchers? When a greyhound would do? I never even *heard* of a lurcher before I came to the UK.

***disclaimer*** I don't mean to bash anyone's choice of dog breed. I am purely highlighting some obvious arguments that could be made.
 
PucciNPoni said:
How about lurchers? When a greyhound would do? I never even *heard* of a lurcher before I came to the UK.
Click to expand...

Are you saying my dog is pointless? :eek::eek: :D:D:D

Actually I agree with every word you have said. The main purpose of most dogs of whatever breed today is to be a companion first and foremost (even if they do work some of the time) and personally I would rather see labradoodles etc bred responsibly for pet homes than some working breeds like border collies, Patterdale terriers and Springer spaniels (just to name a few, don't be offended please :D) who can all go demented without a job to do.

And that's without even touching on the argument that the quality of the breeder is potentially more important than the dogs they produce........ **ducks and runs for cover** ;) :D
 
Brownmare said:
Are you saying my dog is pointless? :eek::eek: :D:D:D

Actually I agree with every word you have said. The main purpose of most dogs of whatever breed today is to be a companion first and foremost (even if they do work some of the time) and personally I would rather see labradoodles etc bred responsibly for pet homes than some working breeds like border collies, Patterdale terriers and Springer spaniels (just to name a few, don't be offended please :D) who can all go demented without a job to do.

And that's without even touching on the argument that the quality of the breeder is potentially more important than the dogs they produce........ **ducks and runs for cover** ;) :D
Click to expand...

Lurchers, and I've kept, bred and "seen" a great many, tend to fall into two categories, amenable, well mannered and courteous dogs, or the opposite of all that!! I've yet to have the latter. They can also be lithe, graceful, elegant and wonderful companions!

Your second para...Absolutely right. The three breeds which you've highlighted CAN make good pets, BUT, and they aren't alone, they need, not necessarily physical exercise, but importantly, mental stimulation.

Alec.

Ets, when your certain of your facts, stick to your guns, never run for cover! a.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top