ok so you are all against cross breeding to create new breeds, thats fine, BUT forgive if im wrong, the majority of "pedigree" breeds these days, are cross breeds, if you look in the history of most breeds you will find they were crossed to get a breed.

:)

yes, for a purpose - not just to sell with a silly name.

let me think:
Great Dane
or
Bull-shi...

I'll take the dog bred for a purpose thanks :)

Absolutely true, and if you want to "create" a new breed then that probably the only way you are going to do it.

BUT most breeds were originally created for a purpose, at a time when people were probably a lot less sentimental than they are now. Cross beeding dogs creates a lot of wastage (ie dogs that dont fit the purpose they are bred for) More than likely these would have been culled. Even if you are only breeding for a pet you still have requirements (temperament, health and marketability - i.e does anybody else want one?)

Many of the breeds were created by people with the resources to retain large numbers of dogs to run on and find out if they were worth breeding from. Many would have been quite prepared to cull pups surplus to requirements or those that didnt 'make the grade'.

This doesn't really happen now, so what would happen is that the results of these matings flood an already saturated pet market. Maybe they will sell / find good homes, and maybe they will meet all the criteria that the breeder envisaged. However, what happens if they dont?

As Chloe says, in the past they were crossed for a particular purpose - to improve a hunting hound's speed or scenting ability, for example. If the cross didn't work, then the offspring were culled and the experiment wasn't repeated. Likewise puppies surplus to immediate requirements were also destroyed. When all the rescue centres are empty of random or careless crosses, then people will be free to experiment again.