Hi all.  Now I'm not wishing to start an ugly thread but I just need to cement my thoughts and others thoughts would be helpful though I think I know my answer. I have a bitch hopefully in pup.  I'm putting together my list and vetting.  One possible has been passed to me because they missed out on lines elsewhere.  My breed has both show and working strains and my bitch is 1/4 show but in nature and appearance is working.  The Sire is working.  Both decent pedigrees.  This possible buyer is a breeder.  They have been upfront in that she will be looking to have two litters of a fashionable crossbreed then a purebred litter from a bitch pup of mine.  I'm not a crossbreed snob.  A dog is a dog and some crosses are great.  But I like my breed and hence I'm breeding MY breed not a cross breed.  I appreciated the honesty and at first I had no issue but on reflection I don't think I'll say yes.  My thoughts are 1. I'm breeding KC reg dogs for a reason.  Do I want my pups to breed crosses.  I don't think I do.  2.  It's not just my bitch lines, it's her breeders and the sires lines.  I'm not sure I would want to find out my lines had been used for crossbreeds without my knowledge.  I have good relationships with both lines and that's valuable.  3.  There is a club for this "breed" and there are some health tests.  But it's still going to be hit and miss what you get nature/appearance wise.  I'm not sure whether we're talking F1 or F2 hybrid here. 4.  These pups will have a low COI due to the strains even though they share some ancestry.  I know there are different opinions on mixing strains but the KC does not differentiate and dual purpose is not unknown  and for pet purposes might actually be better 4. This isn't a new breed for this breeder but they weren't aware that the KC doesn't differentiate strains.  Which leads me to think pups wouldn't be registered.  I know there's some snobbery in there but on reflection my gut is saying no.  Am I right?

Oh you are soooooooooo right.   Do you really want YOUR bloodlines messed around like that - by who and for what.   Oh yes, BYBs and MONEY.  Breeders spent years working on producing a dog what fits what they wanted it to do, built up lines that bred true, produced and had ratified a Breed Standard.   And then along comes a BYB who, knowing there's a market from all the uninformed hype about inbreeding being a no no and a cross bred animal being so much healthier .............   Avoiding mix breeding has nothing to do with snobbery, or shouldn't.  All breeders should be striving to protect the various purebred breeds.

This will become an ugly thread from most who produce purebred animals I'm afraid.

I was more than choosy about who my stud boys were allowed to be mated to (BITCHES OF THE SAME BREED), let alone mix breeding.   I turned away more enquiries than accepted them to protect my bloodlines and the breed.

Please be very careful about where your hoped-for puppies go.   They should carry endorsements so at least that shows intent, even if it doesn't stop anybody from taking a litter(s) from them at some point.   And of course, not being able to KC register any offspring makes no difference in terms of non-purebred puppies.   Yes, this breeder will go elsewhere, but at least you'll have the satisfaction of knowing her activities won't include your stock.

ps   For me, there should really be no difference between show and working lines in any breed, much as clearly those wanting a working dog, will be looking for working ability, above show looks.   It's a pity that I think those breeds who are shown, don't have to succeed in working trials to quality for a Championship title these days.   Is that right?

MamaBas thankyou.  And I agree with the show/working aspect.  Lines are bred for certain traits desirable to the breeder/trialler.  I think lines is as far as the differentiation needs to go.  I dont necessarily think show champions should have to be proven in the field but I much prefer the worker strain for appearance.  Far too many of the show dogs are over bred and ugly.   And as for whether shows could prove good workers I believe most could be useful even if not Ftch.  Instead too many shows are just fat lap dogs.

I know others will reply more fully but you are soooooo(n) right!
Good for you to be so principled and care so much for your breed'

Totally agree with everything MamaBas says and think any reputable Breeder will have the same view.
I'd just go a bit careful in calling people BYBs...it's a 'sue all' society these days and unless there is evidence of such with the Breeder in question, you can end up in court for suggesting this.

Of course you are right. For me it all comes down to WHY DO THEY WANT TO BREED? (Sorry to shout that but wanted to emphasise it.)

I mean, if they are breeding crossbreds because there is some functional reason in that they make perfect therapy dogs and will all go into some therapy dog programme or they will become working dogs where that cross is desirable, or even the cross makes highly desirable dog sport dogs (ie agility or working trials) then yes... but otherwise, why are people looking to breed crossbred dogs if not just for making money?!?

They can't show them. They can't compete in some KC events with them (field events). Unless they are clearly into a dog sport or therapy or work where these crosses are required, then they are just breeding for profit...

Totally agree with you 1234. I gave my own daughter hell when she bred a litter of Cocker poos from the Cocker she had whilst living at home and took with her to her first house. All her friends wanted one and she gave in.  (it was long before the price hikes I might add)
She didn't ever breed another Litter of Pedigree Pups never mind a crossbred litter.

I agree with 1234, is there a reason for the crossbreeds? That's a different story if there is.

Apart from the known crosses that are sought after for various disciplines there may occasionally also be a gap among recognised breeds that could be filled with a new breed, which has to come from crosses originally.

I own a new breed, every one is dna tested to prove parentage and has had all available health tests done too before breeding from them. There was a reason for them being created, the founder wanted a dog similar in temperament and looks to a borzoi but smaller, healthier and longer lived. Whippets skin did not cope well with the rough terrain she exercised them in.

So, I'm very grateful for the vision of one dedicated geneticist who crossed borzois and a whippet with what the Americans called long haired whippets (most likely these were sheltie x whippets) After very careful selection, health and temperament paramount, Silken Windhounds were created, and I'll never have another breed now, they are perfect for me. So done correctly, sure there is room for more breeds or crossbreeds, but not just random crosses for money with no clear plan, health checks or registry, endless F1s with pot luck size, temperament etc.

Quite honestly if someone wanted to get a puppy and plans were to breed it to a different breed twice and then a pedigree litter they would go no further than me saying NO!.
We should be guardians of the breeds we are in and not be allowing them to be messed about. What are the chances of this person fully health testing too? If you don't lift endorsements you know they will breed crosses. Like you say its not just your lines but many breeders going back as well.
Maybe word out to other breeders in case she soon learns not to mention the cross breeding. I would because if I knew this and it then happened to someone else I would be kicking myself as could easily have been prevented.

Copied from my reply on 'another' thread:

"In the main the whole Crossbreed breeding thing is rather hypocritical, as they all rely on purebreeds in order to breed first crosses.

They are in fact using the hard work and expertise of the parental breeds breeders.

If they are breeding healthy pups it's down to the work of those people.

There are very few cross breeders who health test their breeding stock, though some of the Cocker.cross Poodle breeders seem to be doing some and going down into further generations trying to get some consistent results.

Once you get past the first cross the results become less predictable strangely enough, so more backbreeding and selection needed

What were the aims of the breeder?"

Some cross breeders would be better researching breeds more, as iften what they are trying to 'create' already exusts, and their energies could help these less known breeds.

As a dog owner I have to admit from my Dog Walking experience, the Cocker x Poodles seem to be rhe most successful cross, many I meet are initially a little nervy and servile for my taste, but maturing into rather jolly people.

Mind you the coats are usually far from what some hope.

Not only are they not easy to groom, but they more often than not moult, and soak up water like sponges.

The ones my friend day cared always needed bathing and drying after wet walks.

> though some of the Cocker.cross Poodle breeders seem to be doing some

Not enough unfortunately, a friend almost lost their 'cockapoo' after it ate horse poo, the horse had presumably just been wormed and the dog turned out to be MDR1 affected, clearly it wasn't just a poodle x cocker! Another oodle I met on a walk was nearly blind, PRA, the owner was gutted having bought it thinking it would be healthier than a pure bred!

I do feel sorry for people who think they're doing the right thing, like the poster on another thread who said both parents were 'in good active health'. General Public don't often know that health testing is so much more than a vet checkup unfortunately.

Or those who mate a healthy breed to a known unhealthy one with no health testing.

Some that come to mind are Cavalier x Bichon, and Terrier x Pug.

Certainly adding heart issues to a Bichon, or Pug genes into a healthy terrier breed?

On the other hand I'd be all for some judicious outcrossing in breeds with the most extreme health limiting features to change conformation for the better faster than simplybselecting from the existing gene pool.

This needs to be done in a joined up and recorded way, using fully health tested candidates to avoid bringing in further problems.

For example using long lived Tibetan Spaniels with Pekingese?

I don't know enough about the genetics of either breed, just a possible example

a friend almost lost their 'cockapoo' after it ate horse poo, the horse had presumably just been wormed and the dog turned out to be MDR1 affected, clearly it wasn't just a poodle x cocker!

Interesting, especially considering how many supposedly purebred (not!!) Merle Poodles are used at stud to create crossbreeds. Could be a big clue there as to their background. Every other advert you see now for Poodle crosses have Merle pups.

Quite apart from the crossbreeding issue (which I would never agree to) I never sell any pup for breeding unless it is to somebody I already know and trust, and the conditions on lifting the endorsement is that the dog has the relevant health tests with good enough results and has been shown or worked AND placed with good results, or is a professionally qualified working dog. I will never lift endorsements for a bitch or dog kept as a pet only and my contract now states this. Needless to say, it's all down to lessons learned in the past. At least this person was honest enough to admit their intentions, many would just go ahead and breed crossbreeds whatever as no endorsement can stop that.

Along similar lines, I don't allow any of my stud dogs to be used unless it is for a breeder I trust. I know I'd worry too much otherwise.

> On the other hand I'd be all for some judicious outcrossing in breeds with the most extreme health limiting features to change conformation for the better faster than simplybselecting from the existing gene pool.<br />

I absolutely agree with this. But there was a huge fuss with dalmatians if I remember correctly, with purists very upset about Fiona the “mongrel”.

I’m not a purist myself and while I don’t agree with cross breeding for the sake of it, I’d rather we breed healthy dogs that can live normal lives than dogs that aren’t really fit for any purpose. And outcrossing seems like the easiest way to get healthier dogs if it’s done properly.

Silverleaf: 

> outcrossing seems like the easiest way to get healthier dogs if it’s done properly.

What a wise comment! It will take decades and the shared end goal should be the same throughout the whole canine population.

And the KC system allows for it, if agreed.

The first generation offspring carry 3 asterisks, backcrossed next generation 2 asterisks (25% outcross), 3rd generation 1 asterisk (12.5% outcross), and 4th generation considered purebred with 6.25% outcross blood.

The Dalmation import I believe had less outcoss blood than this.

Bruce Cattanagh had his bobtail boxers accepted this way from crossing in bobtail corgi.

Brainless:  Wow, I am always amazed with your knowledge of the canine world! It sometimes takes me a little while reading through your information but never fails to impress

I knew about the single asterisk but not 2 and 3.  And I didn't realise the KC actually operated this system.  I assume it's only in very specific breeds and for very defined reasons.

Brainless: "As a dog owner I have to admit from my Dog Walking experience, the Cocker x Poodles seem to be rhe most successful cross, many I meet are initially a little nervy and servile for my taste, but maturing into rather jolly people.

Mind you the coats are usually far from what some hope.

Not only are they not easy to groom, but they more often than not moult, and soak up water like sponges."

Not so much from the temperament view but coat and shape there is so much hit and miss.  I don't really understand the none mounting argument for a cockerpoo.  Spaniels I find don't tend to "moult" rather they shed but it's almost unseen until you sweep and end up with a nest.  Not like a retriever or lab moult.  And I've seen CPs that look like curly spaniels and like scruffy poodles.  Is there even a standard?

They also can do it with purebred dogs without verified ancestry.

My first dog was a Belgian Shepherd Groenendael born 2/10/1988.

One of her ancestors was a dog from Rhodesia, and after examination by several judges was deemed purebred and registered.

He was Noir Du Rhodesia, and among others sired the bitch Ch Viroflay Nightingale born 16th March 1965.

Unfortunately with the current mess on KC website the asterisks have not been properly attributed, showing just one on him, and none on her and one on another offspring.

One of mine went through the process for this Brainless. She has 3* by her name and her offspring have 2.

Ah I must have the asterisks other way around, sorry.

It seems I may have got the asterisking thevwrong way around, seems it's 3, 2, 1 and not 1, 2, and 3, for the generations with outcrossed or unverified/unknown breeding.

> Quite apart from the crossbreeding issue (which I would never agree to) I never sell any pup for breeding unless it is to somebody I already know and trust,

I don't know how anyone (other than a commercial breeder/puppy farmer) can buy a pup 'for breeding' anyway. Breeding should never be the primary motive to buying a dog, but rather something that comes later, an offshoot of owning and loving the dog, doing well with it and wanting to pass on it's excellent qualities.

When I imported my last silken a breeder asked me (when pup was 16 weeks old) if she could use him the following year, sure he has lovely lines and is genetically clear for everything we test for, but I still didn't know what sort of dog he was going to turn into, he may have developed traits that I wouldn't want to pass on. I said to her to ask me the following year, when I had a better idea if he should be bred on from. He lived up to his promise and is a lovely boy and has some gorgeous (and fast) kids, but I couldn't be sure of that at 16 weeks, with only one baby puppy win to his credit.

> Bruce Cattanagh had his bobtail boxers accepted this way from crossing in bobtail corgi.

Oh I remember reading about that years ago. It was fascinating how quickly he got to a really nice looking boxer-shaped dog after the initial cross.

Reminds me a bit of my own breeding work with peas - I’m working towards having tasty culinary peas with interesting flower colours. I guess the pretty flower is my bobtail.

Genetics is fascinating.

I think you were the right way round just one out in terms of when the asterisks start it starts with the unverified dog (3*) then decreases with each generation x

i'm not against forwarded per say, for me it's more how you breed more than what you breed.
However saying that I would be uneasy in your situation as they don't have the pup yet and already planning 3 litters from it. What happens if the bitch grows to be not sutible for breeding, would they keep it as a pet, move it on or breed it anyway. As they want to breed some cross litters endorcing the pup wouldn't effect this If they chose not to bother health testing or wanted to breed to young for example. I'm guessing this isn't a person you know if is known by others well established in your breed.

My first pedigree dog, (born December1958), had a single asterisk on her reg. card as she was descended from an Interbred Retriever. The Haulstone Golden Retriever kennel used a Labrador, (from memory FT Ch. Heydown Grip), to improve speed in the field. Lovely temperaments, and intelligent working dogs, but so many health problems in those pre-testing days.

Going back to the OP here, if anybody approached me for a puppy, especially who I didn't personally know, with a stated intention to take 3 litters from her (2 mix bred, 1 purebred) that would produce an emphatic no from me - and this litter isn't even born yet

Further, to set the record straight, for want of a better description, I call people who are deliberately mix breeding BYBs because clearly, unless as stated re a need for a certain mix, for a job, the only reason that  breeder is breeding, is for income.  This isn't directed at THIS potential buyer who of course I don't know either.   I have a hard time understanding why anybody would spend the time and work it takes to do a litter, wouldn't do it to further the breed and their bloodlines, not to mess around with already established breeds ..... other than for income because there's a known market out there.   Also, for me, outcrossing which is needed from time to time in any breeding programme, should normally be possible within a breed, assuming the gene pool is wide enough.   Was a time when my own main breed needed new blood way back and it was decided to use the Bloodhound (and on another occasion, the Beagle) BUT the difference then was, once done, the breeders involved knew when to go back to the original breed and with what animals.  JMO.

> Was a time when my own main breed needed new blood way back and it was decided to use the Bloodhound (and on another occasion, the Beagle) BUT the difference then was, once done, the breeders involved knew when to go back to the original breed and with what animals.

Also this would have been done in an organised way within the breed for improvement, not willy nilly

Definitely agree with the ‘hit and miss’ comment - I think everything about the ‘___poos/doodles’ are hit and miss, temperament, coat, health etc. Having worked as a dog groomer previously the main dogs were the ‘somthingpoos or doodles’, cockerpoos being the most popular/common and then probably cavapoos the next. Most of them were very nervy, friendly but nervy, a lot of them were either way too friendly with other dogs (probably not socialised properly due to the fact they’re a ‘trendy’ breed and many families are drawn in to getting one without doing their research) and ended up annoying them and not reading other dogs signals, or were way too fearful and timid of other dogs - this would come out either in reactivity (barking or aggression) or they’d just hide in a corner away from others. Coats were a mixed bag, you’d get some very curly almost poodle like and others very flat almost spaniel like with a wave through (like Huga said). Most of the time the dogs who had a curlier coat actually ended up looking good - IF the coat had been maintained properly and we could actually style and cut it without having to clip/shave it very short due to matts but I say that with a big IF because many owners want their dog ‘fluffy’ but then don’t keep on top of the coat with a good brush through so more often than not we’d end up clipping dogs very short due to matting, we’d have dogs come in that we’d have to clip very short I’d say at least twice a week every week...we’d get more in the winter as people would leave it longer between grooms because of the cold but then the dogs would get more muddy and wet due to the worser weather and this would create matts.
I have no idea why they’re advertised as having low maintenance coats or coats that don’t shed. The hair that comes off some of them when you start drying them, it was like a cloud of hair surrounded you as soon as you put the blaster to them. And the majority have bought the dog having no idea on what level of care the coat needs, most of them didn’t know what matts were and we’d have to tell them and teach them to brush their dogs...which didn’t help by the majority of them bringing their 6month pup in and us saying if you want to keep them fluffy then brushing is key, the most common and annoying answer was ‘they don’t like being brushed and they bite the brush so we can’t brush them’
There isn’t a standard and I doubt there ever will be, litter mates can have drastically different coats, looks, and size. Again we had brothers and sisters coming in that looked completely different breeds - even the now more advertised sectors of cockerpoo ‘F1, F1b and F2s’ just something that is used to bring more buyers in and make the dogs seem more desirable.

Don’t get me wrong most of them are bonnie and although a bit highly strung imo most are very nice towards us humans, one of my lab has a best friend that’s a cockerpoo, but I just think they’re such a mixed bag that you couldn’t rely on what you were getting. And unlike brainless my walks are usually ambushed by an overexcited cockerpoo who thinks every dog wants to play and doesn’t listen to its owners - but then again its genetics are that of a working dog not a lap dog which many people forget. Both cockers and poodles need physical stimulation and mental stimulation and enough of it!

I'm lucky in that my dogs are pretty tolerant/like the over exuberant ambushers

As you say coatwise such a mixed bag, and such a pain to care for, even just as a daycare/walker.

With walking with them with my friend, with plenty of excersise and habituation with other dogs traffic etc they mostly made nice companions, but as you day they need plenty of activity and company.

Perhaps this is not going to be a popular perspective and is not directed at the poster, but the poodle crossbreeds are now so popular it might be something to consider that without good quality dogs being bred, the population of unhealthy, dogs of bad structure will dominate the well bred ones. As we go forwards into the future, many of the stalwarts of breeds will leave us and we will be left with uneducated people with bad quality dogs responsible for taking forward whole gene pools, potentially just to feed demand in the pet market. Inevitably we are going to lose breeds. Facebook is full of people breeding their pets and I think I’ve said before, imagine what a positive support to breeds these people could be if they were allowed to have good quality dogs and given support, even if they are not breed purists and also support meeting the pet market demand with the occasional cross breed.

> As we go forwards into the future, many of the stalwarts of breeds will leave us and we will be left with uneducated people with bad quality dogs responsible for taking forward whole gene pools, potentially just to feed demand in the pet market.

You are not wrong...... I've just been onto Pets4 (why do I keep doing that!!) and found an advert for dockerhuahuas.   WOT!!!!

I’m trying to think what a docker is (apart from a big burly bloke who works at the docks)

That’s quite an image!

Alexandra to some extent I agree.  There will always be crossbreeds.  This particular one does at least have a breed club and who knows it might one day become a recognised breed by KC.  And yes a good healthy gene pool would be a plus.   But one reason why i breed registered tested dogs is to counteract the puppy farms churning out unhealthy dogs.  Given the current prices it seems to make no difference whether they are KC or not and I feel that the more good dogs are available whether as pets or working the better.  I can't vouch for my dogs as champions at all but I can say they are good healthy dogs and i breed to promote that which means I'd prefer to keep my breed going and healthy not create a new breed.

I have had the conversation with various vets and asked why more responsible breeding advice is not given.

Answer they don't want to alienate customers.

Yet they crtiscise 'breeders' constantly, but somehow don't include casual breeders who arguably as a group can cause more harm.

Yes I agree entirely and that is the same for me personally, I have a breed I have lived with and loved my whole life, registrations are at the lowest ever and my contribution I hope will be improvements to support maintaining genetic diversity and increasing the pool of clear or carrier dogs in a breed with limited testing and over 80% affected in the two main conditions. I have a lot pinned on my young import for this reason! Still very suitable for the pet market of course!!

> registrations are at the lowest ever and my contribution I hope will be improvements to support maintaining genetic diversity and increasing the pool of clear or carrier dogs

Ditto.

Now after 8 generations, and the loss of my only breeding age bitch, my hopes hang on litters planned by owners of my lines.

Two of the potential bitches are 5 year old maidens, so it's now or never. A third is the 2 year old daughter of the one I lost.

All 3 owners as first time breeders are having their hands held by myself and other bred enthusiasts, especially the stud dog owners.

My experience is that serious breed enthusiasts are really keen to encourage responsible knowledgeable breeding.

what puzzles me is why the poodle crosses keep being done when it is not producing the desired dogs?

I get people want medium sized dog none shedding with easy care coat and nice nature but the crosses do not produce that in large number of cases.  you end up with dog that moults with fur that mats and a hyper personality far too high energy for pet owners.   Why keep breeding more of them aside from nice little money earner as it doesn't work. 

Does this dog exist in any breed? medium size, none moulting, easy to brush though despite being 'fluffy' with easy personality that is usually good with kids and doesn't need hours of exercise?

Those I meet do meet the aesthetic and temperament the owners like, and are happy with their energy levels.

I may be lucky as most have been owned by people prepared to pay for daycare/walkers and proffesional grooming, as well as being quite active walkers themselves.

I don't know what the rescue situation is for this type of dog.

So far as coat care is concerned there is nothing more satisfying when you're on the sofa than spending tv time giving mine (wcs) a lovely calming groom.  It really doesn't take that much to keep them tidy.

> Answer they don't want to alienate customers.<br />

Exactly!!  Again how Noel Fitz keeps schtum given what he sees on a regular basis, I really don't know.    Maybe he speaks to these people off camera?

> Maybe he speaks to these people off camera

I know he did with someone I know about finding a good breeder who hip and elbow scores when they get another puppy

I am sure we only see what they need us to see for the point of the programme. I am sure a lotof things are discussed away from the cameras .

Does this dog exist in any breed? medium size, none moulting, easy to brush though despite being 'fluffy' with easy personality that is usually good with kids and doesn't need hours of exercise?

Yes. The POODLE.
Drives me insane that people take such a fantastic breed available in several sizes and colours already, and which can be clipped in any way you like, and cross them to other breeds that end up with more difficult coats and unpredictable outcomes of size etc.

You can groom a poodle into a doodle cut too.
Also have the Spanish water dog, barbet, lagotto too