There is a collie x gsd for sale.   4 months.   Asking £400 to make sure it goes to 'good home'.  Do you think the amount you pay makes for a better home? It will probably be sold before my husband gets home to telephone to view her.

Gosh, know what you mean, when I was a child plenty of litters of those mixes and they were give-aways mainly, or just a few pounds. :-D

Litters like this used to be 'real' accidents and they were sold as such. ;-)

I would like to say that when people pay this amount they are to be more thoughtful and really want a dog..... and the breeder may just be after as much money as they can get or.... may well think it entices a good home...... but alas, doesn't seem to make any difference today....... people are happy to spend hundreds, even thousands and still re-home a dog, it may well stop impulse buys initially, but  long term I think it makes no difference sadly.

If I were you though, for the sake of another £100 - £200 why not buy a GSD or Collie KC reg dog with all health tests done....... seems for the extra you may as well go for a pup from a good reputable breeder and get your money's worth, you know a cross breed like this is not worth £400 so why pay over the odds when you can get a pup knowing what it will look like, it's breed traits, and from a breeder who breeds for temperament, health and looks............ seems silly to pay £400 for a pup you'll know none of these vital things about. 

**shrugging shoulders** ;-)

How many doodles and designer crossbreeds and bulldogs and the like go for twice that and then some?  And how many of them end up with people that have no clue how to look after the coats, or the potential medical issues, or even bother to walk the dog (hint: it's a LOT)?

No, £400 will not secure a good home.  It'll just secure a home with someone with £400 to pay for a dog!

If these people are genuinely trying to find the dog a good home then the cost may just be a sort of visual deterrent.  River was on preloved with a £20 price tag for that very reason but her owner was more than happy to just give her to me for free because she could see that of the 3 or 4 people who'd met River, I was the only one who actually knew what I was doing and could give her the home she needed!

I've recently seen someone state they will be paying £700 for a Cavachon.

Yesterday someone at work asked me if one and a half thousand was too much to pay for a  Jack Russell chi cross after I had stopped laughing and mopped the tears from my eyes I asked if they had a mask gun and a horse telling them that they could get a pedigree chi for about that amount not a Mongrel with a fancy name she was rather gobsmacked at my reaction breeders had a Jack female and chi male thankfully not the other way around I told her if she wanted a Mongrel go to the local dog rescue and get a better dog for a lot less money, the puppies they where trying to sell where five weeks old and still on mum with no effort made to wean them as yet so God only knows what care the bitch has and the breeders are to quote sick of the mess the pups are making

I agree with Carrington, I can't see the point of paying that much for a puppy from parents who aren't health tested.  You could very easily spend more than the extra couple of hundred at the Vets in the first year alone, as well as all the heartache that's involved.

I'd recommend finding a dog breeder who knows what they are doing rather than buy from a backyard breeder who just produces puppies to sell the problems they produce to unsuspecting new families.  :(

Regardless of this particular litter- what is it that makes raising a pedigree litter more expensive than a X-breed litter- (provided health tests are done on both sire and dam.) Often you see breeders stating they make little profit from breeding, yet in the same breath say a mongrel should be much cheaper. If you are only covering some of your costs then why shouldn't X-breeders do the same?

I'm playing devils advocate here as I wouldn't go for a deliberate X myself, just wondered.

> I'm playing devils advocate here as I wouldn't go for a deliberate X myself, just wondered.

I see plenty of posts on various forums where "breeders" haven't done any tests, because they are "just for pets".
What makes "pet" dogs - who are as prone to all the canine hereditary ailments as non-pet ones - a special case? Owners who don't care about paying out thousands for preventable illnesses and structural deficiencies that their beloved animals suffer from?

Or, (more likely) these "Pet" breeders think they have no traceability, accountability or responsibility as the dogs aren't registered? Are "pet buyers" suckers?

I have even seen recently a "pet" breeder going ahead with a breeding where the bitch had a structural abnormality, that any show breeder would never have bred from...... but apparently it's all OK as the bitch is a pet and the puppies will be also be pets? Flipping heck, if I was paying the better part of a 4-figure sum for a dog, pet or otherwise, I'd at least expect its dam didn't have a hereditable issue that might cost me thousands for surgery later on.

>what is it that makes raising a pedigree litter more expensive than a X-breed

A pet litter is unlikely to involve much travel (including foreign travel or use of AI) or stud fee (price of a puppy in my breed),

No costs involved with proving the parents qualities.  Traveling up and sown the country and maybe even abroad is expensive.

Unlikely to be supporting and providing facilities for a whole family line of dogs, which a breeder developing a breeding line will very soon have.  Even with spacing the dogs out every three years they will soon have up to 6 dogs to keep, mostly passengers (as half will be above breeding age).

As already mentioned health testing of parents can be pretty expensive (the main reason, apart from ignorance,  pet people don't do the tests).

Registration, Affix maintenance, micro-chipping/tattooing costs.

They are unlikely to cut corners on rearing and may have to pay staff to help with other dogs or the pups.

>the puppies they where trying to sell where five weeks old and still on mum with no effort made to wean them as yet

I have Chihuahua Long Coats.  I too make no effort to wean, having always waited for pups to decide when they want to steal mums food.  My breed does not do well by weaning early.  So people visiting will see regular feeding by my bitches.  They can't leave home until they are 12 weeks, and it is not unusual to see my bitches giving pups a comfort suckle on the day they leave home.

Just wanted to point out that weaning toy size breeds is totally unlike any other.

You think that's bad! A university friends relative has just purchased her first dog.... A Weimaraner cross Border Collie cross Siberian Husky for the grand total of £795!

I can just see this being a recipe for disaster myself!

Oh my gosh! What a mess! :O Thinking of the fur that is going to moult!

I had to refrain from "I told you so" recently when someone was boasting about how much their labradoodle was... Only to turn around and say they were gutted that it did end up moulting. People pay well up over the thousands bracket for those cross breeds! As a poodle person (my first dogs) it makes me so angry that people make the presumption that they don't like poodles but would happily buy a cross with it in. Why not get a parents tested KC reg poodle and not have to worry about the skin and joint issues! A client recently asked if my mother still had a complete male poodle - to which I replied no (thankfully!) only for her to turn around and say "what a shame, my lab bitch would make some lovely pups!" (Picked my jaw up from the floor!)

Have to get off my soapbox now, the idea of even having to pay for a cross breed (unless it's a shelter/adoption donation) really grinds my gears.

A relative had the same thing sqwoofle payed a load for her multi generation labradoodle (that some how made it more expensive at the time) and it didnt get the shaggy coat, beard and eyebrows that they wanted he has a lab coat and sheds. Seems to have the worse traits of both breeds and reasontly has been diagnosed with Addison's Disease. From what I've been told They all most lost him and payed a fortune at the vets so far.

Yet they didn't lurn and went and got a bulldog puppy and was saying how the breeder just payed a load to get in a rare colour dog and when I mentioned that there's lots of people breeding non standard colours for money I was told oh no there good breeders and they were actualy one of the cheaper ones. Fast forward a couple of months and pup has demodex mites and had two bad cases of it, they have been trying to call the breeder and guess what the breeder doesnt want to speak to them and won't answer there calls, so much for that life time support. Last I heard they were considering putting the pup down as their vet was struggling to clear it up.

I've just seen a gsd x ddb litter advertised for £750. There is also the current trend of crossing newfies to gsds and then crossing back to gsd (1/4 newfie pups) which apparently create the 'king shepherd'. It makes me so angry. Especially when the advertisers can't even spell the breed names correctly. The one asking for a gsd stud for his gsd x newfie girl wants a 'thoroughbred' shepherd with no white in pedigree. Can be be black with minimal brown but actually wants a black long haired dog.

Next door own a 7 yr old 3/4 chi x jrt and I was told they were finally going to spey her. I was so relieved as she comes into season every 4 months and constantly backs into the fence, flagging my stud boy. Thankfully he's a snob and doesn't even bat an eyelid. Will you be getting the puppy done too? I asked....ooooh no, we're planning to breed him with our mate's dog when they are old enough.

She is a 6 month old yorktish terrior and he is a 5 month old friseshitzuhuahua. They cost £400 and £350 respectively.

No way would I part with £400 for a mix bred pup of 4 months.   No way.   And of course the amount of pay doesn't make for a better home - much as just maybe if somebody parts with mega-bucks they just may take more care of the puppy?   Doesn't necessarily guarantee that however - depends on how deep the potential owner's pocket is!!   When we sold our puppies, much as I'd never give them away, I was always concerned about the right home above the imcome.

If you have that kind of money to part with, why not save up a little bit more and buy either a Collie, or a GSD from a reputable breeder (going via the relevant Breed Club may be a plan).

If this was a planned mating, I'd not subscribe to the income of a BYB - ever.

what is it that makes raising a pedigree litter more expensive than a X-breed litter

Logically it should be obvious that a reputable breeder will spend money when buying the best foundation stock they can get their hands on - not cheap.   Then they will usually show a bit (campaign to a title even) before going ahead and breeding and they will test - again a significant outlay.   On the other hand a BYB will just put Dog A to Bitch B with no more thought than parting the gullible from their money.   And actually in these days of fad-breeding, it's quite often that a 'designer dog' may command more money that either of the breeds involved!!!  Vet costs, feeding, etc. won't cost much more or less than any other litter of course.   But that's not the whole picture.

>Last I heard they were considering putting the pup down as their vet was struggling to clear it up.

Monthly advocate should keep it at bay. 

Sadly a bitch I bred, who was homed with an obedience friend, caught a random a virus that caused immune system collapse. Started with Hypothyroid, though vet wouldn't have it, but I spotted the signs as a friends dobes had it, he was shocked that she functioned at how low the levels were the the tests came back, then went onto demodex, acute pancreatitis. 

The advocate kept her Demodex under control, though she never grew her coat back properly and looked like a vulture. 

It was heart breaking as her sister that  had had never had an ill day in her life until two days before I lost her at just short of 14, though she did make 13 1/2, just on sheer willpower..

Good question Parrysite, ;-)

Firstly, let's look at the pet breeders or BYB's to be fair, going cross breed mad...... why should these dogs cost less than a KC pedigree pup from a reputable breeder?

Well.......

A cross breed, generally is not health tested, and even if it is, what difference does it really make? When a novice is putting two different breeds together they are obviously going to be changing skeletal shape, they are adding two whole series of modified genes together, you cannot predict what that will do or make, what shape, size or genetical throw back with regards to genetical health problems in adding them together will make?

Genetics are extremely complicated, it is hard enough keeping things in check with one breed to the same breed, putting two different breeds together throws out all the hard work and rips everything up, back to square one, unless done by someone who understands exactly what they are doing and they are few and far between. Sometimes you may be lucky, sometimes not.............What is the point of it?  Two different breeds put together, should not be charged the same as a pedigree dog coming from a reputable breeder... should it?  It should be free to next to nothing to buy, because you don't know what you are getting?

Those who are breeding seriously with their heart, to make a new breed that they hope will be passed by the KC? Who health test....... and care for their dams, sires and pups in the same way as any reputable breeder....... I see your point, for their time, costs and love of their 'breed' they should perhaps charge more than a BYB with no knowledge or care of genetics or rearing...... but any 'new' breed, will need to breed generations incurring many mishaps, hits and misses, to try to settle the genetic look, temperament and health....... so IMO they should not be priced anywhere near pedigrees until they are accepted,  (if ever) they are still mongrels, how can they be anything else?

They are but experiments until that day... people are crazy IMO to pay for an experiment, which may well die out, and the cross never seen again 15-30 years from now.......regardless of perhaps the same rearing that a reputable breeder will do.

But, fancy names and big prices are obviously more appealing to some than genetics, knowledge and a recognised breed, Humph!  What can you do????????? IMO they are just plain crazy to pay for that, absolutely crazy.

With a KC pedigree dog, with the price, you get that KC registration/pedigree it is proof you are buying a dog which is 100% of that breed with it's set breed traits, looks and lineage (of many breeds) going back to the 1880's when the KC first began registration.

A KC pedigree dog should come from a reputable breeder who looks at those lines and chooses carefully the dam and sire to enhance and hopefully breed healthy, long living pups who look like the breed and have fabulous temperaments. That should be worth more than the other two examples of breeding, shouldn't it?

The health tests cost, the care costs, the shows or working ability, heart and soul put into making sure you get the best to breed from costs, pups raised properly costs, (I know mine cost a fortune to feed, giving the best start possible) a reputable breeder will also spend a lot of time with the pups and dam, caring and socialising, along with spending a lot of time with prospective buyers, opening our homes to people and developing close relationships, and being there for the whole of that pups life.

Many BYB's of cross breeds and pedigree dogs, don't understand the traits and lineage of their dogs, they will not be able to give you help with training, behaviour or any type of support, it is purely money, money, money and goodbye........ you shouldn't be paying for that, when you don't get it either.

There are many different types of breeders, many differing categories..........

You shouldpay for what you get, a good breeder, a well thought out litter, a dog whose looks and breed traits are known,  it is darn annoying that people who do and know none of these things charge the same and more......... but that's life. ;-)

Monthly advocate should keep it at bay. 

Thanks barbara, I'll ask there daughter when I'm down there next weekend how it's going and if they arnt allready I'll tell them to try the advocate monthly, I know they use frontline with there dogs so not sure if there parents use it to with there two.
It's a shame as her mother has wanted a bulldog for so long, sadly the first one they had died at about 2 years from trachea collapsing, they rushed him to the vet but by time they arrived it was too late. That's when they went for the cross breed as there 'healthier', so much for that idea and now they decide to try again with the bulldog breed they get more problems.

My point was that if there was two litters, a X breed and a pedigree, both parents had health tests and were though out litters with homes.. Why should the X breed not cost the same to actually raise?

Show entries etc would surely be done even if you're not breeding and so can't really contribute towards the 'cost' of a litter as-such? You'd still be showing on the years you didn't have a litter coming, surely?

>Why should the X breed not cost the same to actually raise?<br /><br />Show entries etc would surely be done even if you're not breeding and so can't really contribute towards the 'cost' of a litter as-such? You'd still be showing on the years you didn't have a litter coming, surely?

Breeding for those who work or show is for that primary purpose, and therefore that is part of the costs of breeding.

Someone who has no costs beyond rearing the litter even with health testing does not have the same costs as the breeder exhibitor.

In the same way someone who only shows a dog does not have the same costs as their fellow competitor with the number of dogs needed to establish and continue a line. 

So the excess puppies help defray some of the additional costs.

Show entries etc would surely be done even if you're not breeding and so can't really contribute towards the 'cost' of a litter as-such? You'd still be showing on the years you didn't have a litter coming, surely?

And those show results helps to sell the pups -even to pet homes. You wouldn't just show the year you plan to breed. It is a legal fact that if you are a hobby breeder (as they like to call it, personally I don't like it as the hobby isn't BREEDING) -you can offset costs for show entries and travel to shows against your puppy sales. After all, the show ring is an advert for your dogs. The crossbreed/mongrel breeder will never have that cost.

>you can offset costs for show entries and travel to shows against your puppy sales. After all, the show ring is an advert for your dogs.

In the same way as Car, Boat, Caravan  manufacturers, offset show costs.

I do understand what you're saying, and believe me I definitely do not support X breeding, I'm just trying to see it from the point of view of some of the more responsible doodle etc breeders. I think that if they're breeding from health tested stock and rearing the litter correctly then it is better than a pedigree breeder who hasn't a clue, by a long mile.

I agree with Josh - doodles and cockerpoo types are so popular now that what we need are breeders breeding from tested stock, that at least would be better than people breeding from any random pair.

Definitely.  Some responsible breeders producing pups (and there are some) is infinitely better than all these doodles and the like being produced only by greeders.

But what is the primary purpose of breeding the doodles if it isn't money?     They aren't show dogs,  there's no accepted 'work'  for them,  so the only reason I can see is to produce more pet puppies.  But there is a glut of pet bred pups and huge numbers are being put into rescue.   So how can it be said that breeders of doodles are responsible?

Health tested parents or not,  what reason does the breeder have for producing that litter?

And health testing isn't all the story,  it's a part of the story.    Responsible breeders consider the ancestors of the parents/pups too and factor in their health history in order to assess breeding suitability.   No point in using health tested parents if their parents and grand parents have had health problems that don't have reliable tests but will have a bearing on the health of their progeny.

No responsible show breeder would knowingly sell a quality puppy for crossbreeding,  so either these dogs have been bought dishonestly,  or they aren't buying quality dogs for breeding.

What health tests have the Doodle breeders (or any cross breeders)  contributed to the development of?

Responsible breeders of pedigree show dogs have been contributing money and blood/tissue samples/x-rays etc  for decades to help develop the health tests which are available now.    They couldn't have been developed in isolation.   All theses blood tests/tissue samples/x-rays etc cost a lot of money which is paid for by the breeders with no outside help.

Responsible breeders also contribute to the cost of rescuing and rehabilitating dogs of their breed not usually bred by the show fraternity who prefer that their pups come back for rehoming,  and to the vets bills which can be considerable.     What do most 'responsible'  doodle and cross breeders do?

There's a whole lot more going on with responsible breeding than just health testing the parents and raising the pups properly in order to  to sell them. ;-)

I'm not going to quote anything of Dill's post, because I agree with every word. This is my gripe as well -there is NO reason for breeding these crossbreeds other than for money or just "fun" (and really, is breeding a litter of puppies responsibly FUN? More like hard work and often heartache and worry!). It's not like they are bred for guide dogs or assistance dogs or police dogs or other working dogs USED for practical work, all examples where I COULD accept crossbreeding responsibly, as then the motive is a good one. Not just breeding for the sake of it.

Here's just one example of costs to a breeder.

Post Mortem Liver Biopsy Sample from already DNA tested dog (CLEAR) taken by vet and sent on breeder's behalf to Copper Toxicosis researchers. 

Cost £50+ (on top of vets bills and cost of Euthanasia)   Emotional cost - HUGE, it's the last thing you want to think about when you've just lost your dog!

Benefit to breeder - NIL

Benefit to dog concerned - NIL

Benefit to breeder's dogs - NIL

Benefit to researchers, on it's own very little, but as part of a large number of biospies - HUGE!

This is part of a scheme to verify and improve the DNA test for Copper Toxicosis.   CT affects several dog breeds, but as far as I'm aware, only Bedlington Terrier breeders are routinely DNA testing, breeding only from good results, and sending post mortem samples.  The results may not be known for many years.   Copper Toxicosis is now very rare in the show Bedlington, but we continue to work towards eradicating it completely, without narrowing the gene pool and introducing other, possibly worse problems.

There are other schemes, in other breeds, which also have little benefit to the breeders at this time, yet they still pay from their own pockets for the good of the breed in the long term.

What are cross breeders and 'doodle' breeders doing that is responsible, apart from a few health tests, and ensuring pups go to 'good homes' ?

>Responsible breeders of pedigree show dogs have been contributing money and blood/tissue samples/x-rays etc  for decades to help develop the health tests which are available.

>Responsible breeders also contribute to the cost of rescuing and rehabilitating dogs of their breed not usually bred by the show fraternity who prefer that their pups come back for rehoming,  and to the vets bills which can be considerable.

Forgot to add that to my responsible breeders expenses. I have always donated 5% of the sale price of my puppies, half to breed rescue and half to breed club 'health research fund'.

Oh I agree that the main reason these people are breeding is money / fun / to supply the vast demand for the doodles and poos. But as there doesn't seem much hope of stopping people doing it, at least if they would test the parents it would be a step in the right direction.

I hate to use the words 'supply and demand' when referring to dogs, but there IS a demand for these doodle dogs, and so surely a responsible health tested multi-generation doodle is better than a poorly bred dog of any other breed?

I agree that a lot of the time it comes down to money but that isn't an exclusive problem of cross breeds it happens in pedigree dogs too.

I think there needs to be a wider education for responsible breeding and puppy buying practices and ostrichsize using those that see benefits in doodles that are at least breeding from health tested stock and trying to produce a multi-generation dog that breeds true.

They're in the minority, for sure, but the same can be said for responsible breeders full stop.

The problem is,  where is the supply of responsible owners?

There is a demand, but most of the people demanding a doodle wouldn't pass the vetting of a responsible breeder anyway.   If people were more responsible,  there would be far fewer dogs going into rescue.

I've seen the website of at least one 'doodle' breeder whose main selling point is that they are responsible breeders who health test the parents.    They talk about F1 F2 generations as if it means something.    This does not change the fact that they are churning out puppies.   They are a large establishment and at the rate they breed,  I'm surprised there's anyone who wants a doodle left who doesn't have at least one!

There is a demand, but most of the people demanding a doodle wouldn't pass the vetting of a responsible breeder anyway.

Again I agree. Yes there are good owners of doodles, but so many are the "want it now because it is the dog to have" type that would be turned down by good breeders. And I don't believe for a second that there ISN'T a suitable pedigree breed out there for everyone.

There are plenty that would argue there is a scarce supply of responsible buyers full stop- no matter if they're breeding pedigrees or X-breeds/mongrels. The problem of wanting one because they're in-vogue so to speak can apply to any dog. Dalmatians being a prime example!

>There are plenty that would argue there is a scarce supply of responsible buyers full stop- no matter if they're breeding pedigrees >or X-breeds/mongrels

Absolutely!

Which begs the question

"How can it possibly be responsible to breed to supply the demand from these people? "

Your question could apply to breeders of pedigree dogs too.

Except responsible pedigree dog breeders only breed when they want a pup to keep, or in a vulnerable breed,  to ensure numbers for the gene pool.

The only pups sold then,  are surplus, as the breeder m ay not be able to keep them all.

These breeders will keep pups until the right owners come along,  not just sell to anyone with the  money ;-)

Your question could apply to breeders of pedigree dogs too.

Of course Dill's question does, and that is the entire point. No responsible breeder would ever breed to supply a demand. That's not why we breed at all. Doesn't matter whether it is crossbreeds or pedigrees. The difference is, with pedigrees you CAN be responsible -with designer crossbreeds you can't as there simply is NO good reason to breed them.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree. I'd never buy one myself but have met some lovely ones who are bred responsibly. I can totally understand your points but I do feel that overall it is a case of education and not a case of one breed/x-breed over another.