Everyone understand that most people on Yahoo answers is completely against mixing breeds. Also I would assume that everyone also knows that our current dog breeds were once mixed breeds to get the breed we have today. Now, are you against responsible mix breeding if it is done correctly and for a purpose? Many of your breeds today have 3-4 different breeds mixed with them to get them where they are today and are now considered a breed.
2010-02-24T13:59:48Z
every breed that we have now was made by mixing other breeds with them. Google the history of any breed you want and you will see that they were made by humans to be what they are today. They would mix them with different dogs until they got what they wanted. The Dobe is only 150 years old, they didn't just pop out of nowhere. Some dogs were bred to be foot warmers for the rich. Most dogs were bred for purpose, almost all of them. Times are changed we don't need as many working dogs as we did before, so is it really that bad to try to come up with a "new" breed as long as it is done properly.
2010-02-24T14:01:51Z
I realize that it is a long complicated process, but what is the harm of trying to do what was done thousands of years ago.
2010-02-24T14:06:00Z
You guys are so judgmental. I am not a breeder nor do I ever buy from a breeder. I only adopt from shelters for my dogs. Also if you read the information you would see that I said if it is done correctly, and all the necessary steps are taken. Calm down.
2010-02-24T14:09:32Z
for "BYB smal IQ" I have never ever seen this question on answers before. I am not talking about all the BYB's out there that do this for money.
?2010-02-24T14:45:57Z
Favorite Answer
Elaine, feel free to review the history of the Labrador Retriever. The breed was cross bred with several existing breeds to improve it. Several existing breeds have a similar history.
There is a time and a place for breeding mutts and as already stated it is ONLY for working dogs. The Alaskan Husky is the sled dog of choice because they are faster and more efficient than the working Siberian husky lines. Alaskan Huskies are typically pedigreed but are not pure bred, they are mixed with various sight hounds, shepherds, malamutes, and pretty much anything that lends to a small, lightweight, fast, efficient sled pulling machine.
It is never okay to create mixed breed dogs that serve no actual purpose. Goldendoodles serve no actual purpose. Golden retrievers and poodles are both efficient retrievers and both are good companion pets as they are. There is no need to cross them in an attempt to get a golden retriever that does not shed. Have allergies? Take some Claritin or get a poodle. Don't like dog hair? Don't get a friggin' dog. Creating more "family pet" type of dogs and more lap dogs is not what this world needs.
Many breeds did start out by intentionally mixing breeds. Some of our modern day breeds are cross-bred recreations of old breeds that faded into obscurity, though they are recognized as a true pure breed because they are bred to one comformation and standard and for specific temperament and function. They have bred consistently the same generation after generation and great care has been taken to establish these consistent lines. Today's designer breeds are not bred past second generation because genetics is a crapshoot and things get messy unless you're dedicated for the long haul and know what you're doing.
Designer breeds are wrong. They are created by owners--whether they love their dogs or not--who exploit their dogs for profit. This is wrong, this contributes to the pet overpopulation, and produces thousands and thousands of dogs that don't actually serve any purpose except as companions. There are dogs in the shelter and pet-quality purebreds that make excellent companions as it is.
Hey, would it be unethical for me to breed a poodle and a cocker spaniel and then breed their subsequent offspring to a rooster and sell them on a first come first serve basis as "cockapoodledoos" for $1200 each?
OMG, it's been at least 24 hours since someone asked a version of this question. Gee. . .
In today's world, is there really a need for any mixed breed dog? Yes, I get Lurchers, and Alaskan Huskies, and Fells, and Longdogs, but unless there's a specific need for it, why do it? Hunting with hounds is illegal in many parts of the world, so do I really need a Collie/Greyhound mix in my suburban home? Or a terrier mutt? What does a Wolfhound/Whippet cross do for me that a Scottish Deerhound can't?
Many newly developed breeds like the Klee Kai just have no purpose. In this 'breed', it was started by a BYB breeding mutts to get a miniature siberian husky type dog. But, the dog is too small to pull sleds, too driven to be a great pet, and there is already a small spitz - it's called the Pomeranian. Why does the world need another companion dog?
What niche does a cacapoopoodoodoo of the week fill? Other than the latest "rare" dog that stupid Miley fans think they HAVE to have in order to be cool?
Want a hypoallergenic dog? Get a Poodle. Or a Portuguese Water Dog. Or a Soft Coated Wheaten Terrier. Or a Bichon. What the hell does mixing it with a badly bred cocker/labrador/shih tzu accomplish? NOTHING!
Most dog breeds are quite old and SELECTIVELY bred with only the best specimens to produce the best dog for the job. Randomly mixing dogs doesn't magically produce a better dog. Is your Weim too slow at getting birds? Ok, let's mix him with a greyhound to make him faster. Crap, their legs aren't sturdy enough, they have no recall, and they hate water? How is that better?
I would say if a person had extensive knowledge and a specific purpose for breeding a new breed of dog, yes. But most people don't cross breeds for the sake of trying to find a dog with specific traits etc needed for working, hunting, tracking, whatever. It's to make a designer breed, to make a mutt that they'd think is cute, or because they or someone they know wants puppies. Most people who mix breeds are irresponsible BYBs. Yes our dogs today came from mixing breeds or breeding within a breed and shaping the dog a certain way to obtain a specific trait.
That may be true, but for those breeds that was done hundreds if not thousands of years ago for some breeds. Do you know how many generations of dogs that entails- generations breeding true litter after litter?
The only valid one that springs to mind (although there may be others) is with the Dalmatian Backcross Project, one Pointer was introduced to Dalmatian breeding in order to correct a uric acid defect that, according to this article : "However it occurred, to the best of our knowledge, there were no Dalmatians anywhere that still carried the normal uric acid excretion gene prior to the Backcross project." (This problem was discovered in 1938.)
As you can see from the site, the project was & is being carried out by geneticists, not a guy in his backyard with his Dalmatian & Pointer.
As the 2nd link states however, these backcross Dalmatians cannot be AKC registered or shown in conformation events, and the whole topic is still very controversial.
Our breeds today breed true - you no longer have to mix the breeds to get them. They have predictable traits and, when bred right, are lacking in genetic conditions (hip dysplasia and such). There are over 200 (probably over 250) breeds to choose from between AKC, UKC, and CanadianKC.
Not to mention back then the BEST breeding stock where chosen and bred CAREFULLY - you don't see that happening with ANY mutt. Mutt breeders are in it for profit, and good breeding stock would NOT be allowed to be bred by people like them (as good stock are put on contracts to prevent that).
I doubt you could find a purpose for a "mutt" which can't already be fulfilled by two or more recognized breeds.