Labradoodle Pioneer Regrets Fashioning 'Designer Dog'

[geonni banner]

I will say up front that I've never known a Labradoodle or a Golden Doodle, but I can think of a couple of reasons that the Service Dog people would want to "water down" the Poodle characteristics to produce a hypoallergenic Service dog.

 

Of the Standard Poodles that I have worked with, the majority were "characters." That is to say, they had a well-developed sense of humor that tended to make them "ad-lib" in training sessions. They were usually very bright and easily grew bored with extended repetitions of commands. They also seemed to be apt to give tit for tat if they were pinched, poked, had a paw stepped on, etc. (whether inadvertently or not.)

 

Golden Retrievers and especially Labradors, on the other hand, seem to be delighted to do endless reps of simple commands as long as you praise or treat them. Retrievers in general see to have much higher pain-thresholds, and very forgiving natures, which make them much more likely to be bomb-proof with kids, strangers and the general hubbub of city streets, airports, etc.

 

Selecting for the hair-coat of the Poodle, and the temperament and physical stolidness of the Retrievers might indeed prove a difficult task. Some breeds just don't make a good "nick." There was a time that people were mating Arabian horses with Appaloosas to get an animal with the conformation of the Arab and the "chrome" of the Appy. This was largely a failure for two reasons. One, the very common greying gene present in the Arabian often meant that your gorgeous Leopard Appaloosa-looking foal would be a plain grey horse by the time it was three or four. And two, the resulting foal was as likely as not to look like a Quarter Horse /grade cross, with no fancy paint-job even as a baby.

[rushdoggie]

I will say up front that I've never known a Labradoodle or a Golden Doodle, but I can think of a couple of reasons that the Service Dog people would want to "water down" the Poodle characteristics to produce a hypoallergenic Service dog.

 

Of the Standard Poodles that I have worked with, the majority were "characters." That is to say, they had a well-developed sense of humor that tended to make them "ad-lib" in training sessions. They were usually very bright and easily grew bored with extended repetitions of commands. They also seemed to be apt to give tit for tat if they were pinched, poked, had a paw stepped on, etc. (whether inadvertently or not.)

 

Golden Retrievers and especially Labradors, on the other hand, seem to be delighted to do endless reps of simple commands as long as you praise or treat them. Retrievers in general see to have much higher pain-thresholds, and very forgiving natures, which make them much more likely to be bomb-proof with kids, strangers and the general hubbub of city streets, airports, etc.

 

Selecting for the hair-coat of the Poodle, and the temperament and physical stolidness of the Retrievers might indeed prove a difficult task. Some breeds just don't make a good "nick." There was a time that people were mating Arabian horses with Appaloosas to get an animal with the conformation of the Arab and the "chrome" of the Appy. This was largely a failure for two reasons. One, the very common greying gene present in the Arabian often meant that your gorgeous Leopard Appaloosa-looking foal would be a plain grey horse by the time it was three or four. And two, the resulting foal was as likely as not to look like a Quarter Horse /grade cross, with no fancy paint-job even as a baby.

 

This. I love SP but I can see the downside to them as a SD.

[arf2184]

As someone who has never had a purebred dog (unless Meg happens to be purebred...probably will never know for sure) and who pushes rescue/adoption anytime someone mentions getting a new dog, I just don't understand all the hype over 'designer' dogs or why anyone would go pay big bucks to get one from a 'breeder'. If they're bred right out of healthy dogs with good temperament and a specific goal in mind that can't be met otherwise or would take a long time to reach otherwise, then I can see why a person might want a 'designer dog'. But the breeders tend to not be responsible and the people who buy them tend to be ignorant to the fact that they just paid a lot of money for a mutt, not some 'new breed'.

 

I'm all for breeding for a specific purpose and I don't think the guy who bred the first labradoodle did anything wrong as he was aiming for a dog with specific traits to fulfill a specific need and he used good breeding stock to get it. I think you could breed purebred poodles to be good service dogs, but breeding for a specific temperament would have taken much longer than just crossing with a lab who already had the desired traits. When someone needs a service dog, they don't have time to wait for generations of selective breeding.

 

My sister worked for a lady that bred "Shimas" (Shitzu x Maltese) because she wanted to breed 'a cute lap dog with a gentle temperament and better health than the purebreds of these breed'...I don't know enough about either breed to say for sure, but it seems to me that you could just pick one breed or the other and through responsible breeding and careful selection, end up with a dog that will meet that goal and if you start with the right dogs, it probably wouldn't take too long the get there.

[juliepoudrier]

^^Well said. But the lady you know also knows something: There's money to be had in designer mixes, so why go the proven slow and steady route to improve one breed when you can make quick money and lots of it selling your designer breed? Good capitalist sensibilities that one has....

 

J.

[Lewis Moon]

I think wasteful spending should have a moral stigma - maybe if it did, we wouldn't be in this ridiculous financial crisis we're in. I'm working in a school system where we've already been devastated by five years of budget cuts, and now we're about to lose 30 - 40 more teachers. This in a decently affluent, professionally-populated suburb, not in some inner-city mess. People who bought what they could afford over the last ten years (me) have seen their lives disrupted by people who "needed" to obtain what they could NOT afford. There are giant ethical ripples that flow from an entire society where people are spending money on valueless status symbols. Maybe if the collective families of my school district had invested in shelter dogs rather than designer mutts - and the equivalent cars, TVs, and vacations - we wouldn't be dismantling the music program and overcrowding second-grade classrooms.

 

When you can get exactly the same quality dog at a shelter for $200 or less (including spay or neuter, as I did with Buddy), then spending $1,000 or $2,000 on another dog with dubious credentials is foolish and potentially harmful to your family. In the bigger and more important moral picture, it's the reason that shelters turn into euthanasia camps while unethical breeders profit from abuse. Personal decisions affect more than our personal lives. I really do believe we have a moral obligation to research our options and take the time to think about how we spend our money.

 

Mary

 

Mary, if you run for office, you have my vote.

[Lenajo]

Mary, if you run for office, you have my vote.

 

Well she wouldn't mine.

 

The current crisis is heavily the result of people spending what they did not have

 

There is nothing, absolutely nothing, wrong with a person spending money on a purebred, reputable breeder produced dog if they have the money. And I include reputably produced hybrids in that list. Putting moral judgements on puchases simply because of price...i.e. $50 ok, $500 not ok... is not helping anyone. Or do we want a communist country where we get what we "deserve"....never mind that pesky capitalistic idea?

 

Why I wonder..is it ok to buy/adopt an "old" hybrid...a Boston Terrier for example and not a Labradoodle? In 50 years what cross will we complain about I wonder... I hope we have dogs to complain about. That should worry us all.

[Lewis Moon]

Ah...the Paris Hilton defense .

 

You, of course, are correct. I would just rather that things like schools and saving shelter mutts meant more to people than ....um....things.

And yes...in this recession, people spent more than they had...and a few people got rich on that.

 

Now, back to slagging on Labradoodles....

[Lenajo]

So really, as an "anti-Paris" , why did you adopt a purebred dog? Because, frankly, the dog that is dying the most in the shelter is your adolescent black dog of Labish ancestry. The non-pedigree, black faced, non-trained "dawg". The shelters here put them down on the spot (well, except the non-kill - they send them to the the "mean" shelter to do that)

 

Oh..wait...you *wanted* a Border Collie.

 

Reality bites. You are as entitled to what you want and can afford as the next guy. We ask for ethics in the process, and that can be be met buying and adopting equally.

 

 

Ah...the Paris Hilton defense .

 

You, of course, are correct. I would just rather that things like schools and saving shelter mutts meant more to people than ....um....things.

And yes...in this recession, people spent more than they had...and a few people got rich on that.

 

Now, back to slagging on Labradoodles....

[rushdoggie]

Well she wouldn't mine.

 

The current crisis is heavily the result of people spending what they did not have

 

There is nothing, absolutely nothing, wrong with a person spending money on a purebred, reputable breeder produced dog if they have the money. And I include reputably produced hybrids in that list. Putting moral judgements on puchases simply because of price...i.e. $50 ok, $500 not ok... is not helping anyone. Or do we want a communist country where we get what we "deserve"....never mind that pesky capitalistic idea?

 

Why I wonder..is it ok to buy/adopt an "old" hybrid...a Boston Terrier for example and not a Labradoodle? In 50 years what cross will we complain about I wonder... I hope we have dogs to complain about. That should worry us all.

 

This.

[Lewis Moon]

So really, as an "anti-Paris" , why did you adopt a purebred dog? B

Oh..wait...you *wanted* a Border Collie.

 

 

You mean Cerb? My Lab/BC cross (we think) that was found starving with his mother on the White Mountain Apache Reservation? The one I adopted from a shelter? The one that had kennel cough? You mean that dog? How 'bout our cat that was left in a foreclosed home? What about our desert tortoise in our living room that can't be released back into the wild because of a communicable disease she had?

 

Not an animal in our house was "bought".

 

Which one did you mean?

[geonni banner]

I've been thinking about this quite a bit lately. I'm probably about to adopt my second "mutt" cat. Got the first one from a shelter outreach at Petsmart. Got my Border Collie from a rescue, which, it turns out was probably a dog-dealer posing as a rescue.

 

One of my neighbors who owns a restaurant bred her pit bull recently and is "selling" the pups for $700.00. There were 10 in the litter - she still has nine - they are now 5 mos. old and she's starting to panic. One she gave as a present. Man!, just what Richmond California needs! 10 more pit bulls. The shelters are full to bursting with pits and pit mixes. I like pits, They are mostly swell dogs. But we are swimming in them here!

 

Does she have a right to breed her bitch? Certainly. Is it morally defensible? Well.... not so clear. I told her she might just as well have taken a 9mm into a shelter and blown away 10 dogs. Are the eventual buyers (if they materialize) of her puppies evil because they plunk down $700.00 instead of adopting a shelter dog? Certainly they have the right to do so. But having the right doesn't make it right.

 

But you could take these arguments anywhere. Maybe I should be sending my "disposable income" to someone who is working on a renewable energy source and needs funding instead of feeding 3 animals that I "don't need." But those animals needed someone, and they have more than repaid me for the money I spent on them.

 

I think it would be great if people did a 10 year moratorium on eating fish so that wild stocks could have some time to recover and salmon and shrimp farms could be redesigned to be much less polluting. But these things will probably not happen voluntarily, and I don't want to be the one to take away a fisherman's livelihood - even though just doing what he has to to feed his family will probably do just that.

 

I think buying a purebred dog just as a pet is a selfish act. I'd love to have a Scottish Deerhound. But I don't live on venison, and the Deerhounds I know wouldn't have a clue about how to bring a deer to bay, or bring it down even if I did. So instead I fell in love with a Border Collie of uncertain pedigree. Lucky me! I've discover the joy of living with one of the cleverest dogs on earth. And she is no longer marinating in her own feces in a concrete pen, or contributing to canine overpopulation. Does this make me a better person than someone who goes out and buys a German Shepherd Dog because they think it makes them look cool?

 

Honestly, I do.

 

I think people need to realize that all the decisions we make have consequences. They need to think hard about what these consequences mean, and then act in a responsible way. But we all know that asking people to think at all is an iffy proposition. Trying to get them to work out that just because they can do something doesn't mean they should is going to be a tall order.

[rushdoggie]

I think buying a purebred dog just as a pet is a selfish act.

 

I think that's a little harsh...I think the idea of a dog "type" that suits you is a good thing...someone wanting a jogging partner wouldn't necessarily be happy with a couch potato dog. I believe if people used a little more thought and were a little more discriminating about the type of pet they decided to bring into their lives, there would be fewer dogs needing homes.

 

A purebred dog comes with certain characteristics that determine size, fur type, behavior and needs. Choosing a dog who is *most likely* going to meet your goal of having a pet is a good thing.

 

Yes, a shelter dog or a dog from rescue is a great thing, and there are many great dogs out there (I live with some amazing "gently used" dogs, including the *best* dog I have ever known) and there are also a lot of really damaged dogs out there and you might end up with a dog with issues (I live with one of those too, he has major fear issues and will be medicated and "handled" till his dying day), and IMO deciding to get a good dog from a good breeder who is less likely to have genetic issues or end up "broken" doesn't make you a bad person. I say this having been actively involved in rescue for 20 years as a foster home, behavioral consultant and an administrative person.

[geonni banner]

I think that's a little harsh...I think the idea of a dog "type" that suits you is a good thing...someone wanting a jogging partner wouldn't necessarily be happy with a couch potato dog. I believe if people used a little more thought and were a little more discriminating about the type of pet they decided to bring into their lives, there would be fewer dogs needing homes.

 

A purebred dog comes with certain characteristics that determine size, fur type, behavior and needs. Choosing a dog who is *most likely* going to meet your goal of having a pet is a good thing.

 

Yes, a shelter dog or a dog from rescue is a great thing, and there are many great dogs out there (I live with some amazing "gently used" dogs, including the *best* dog I have ever known) and there are also a lot of really damaged dogs out there and you might end up with a dog with issues (I live with one of those too, he has major fear issues and will be medicated and "handled" till his dying day), and IMO deciding to get a good dog from a good breeder who is less likely to have genetic issues or end up "broken" doesn't make you a bad person. I say this having been actively involved in rescue for 20 years as a foster home, behavioral consultant and an administrative person.

 

Mmmmm. You make some good points. It's true that not everyone lives in a place like I do where there are literally dozens of pounds, shelters and rescue organizations. Here you have a great many kinds of dogs from Heinz 57 to rare breeds. I recently met some folks with a Karelian Bear Dog - a rescue. In our neighborhood we have a rescue Field Spaniel, a slew of Greyhounds, rafts of pitbulls, and the list goes on.

 

Certainly if purebred dogs are to survive, we need some litters, but I'm with Roger Caras when he says. Choose your breed and breeder carefully, and then for your second dog, go to a shelter or rescue group and adopt a dog. One thing about quality rescue is that the people you get the dog from do know what the dog is like - what his/her issues are, and other things like whether the dog is a jock or a couch potato.

 

Finding a specific breed rescue is as easy as typing the name of the breed into a search engine. They are out there. It may take a bit of effort to find exactly what you are looking for, but it's worth a shot.

 

We are in agreement when you say, "Choosing a dog who is *most likely* going to meet your goal of having a pet is a good thing." First time dog owners are perhaps better served to get a pup from a quality breeder rather than trying to cope with a "pound hound" with emotional and/or physical baggage. But for the more seasoned pet buyer there are lots of times when, after you have given careful consideration to what you want in a dog, that you can find that package of desiderata in a rescue dog.

 

If you need a working dog, I think it is entirely appropriate to go to the best breeder of your kind of working dog that you can afford. But for the rest of us, I think the rescue dog is the deal.

[sjuguy]

If you need a working dog, I think it is entirely appropriate to go to the best breeder of your kind of working dog that you can afford. But for the rest of us, I think the rescue dog is the deal.

 

I think you've hit it right on the head. If you need a specific working dog, often it is best to go to a reputable breeder. For dogs adopted as companions, rescues are the best option.

 

A couple other points. People go to breeders instead of pounds/rescues for many reasons.

1. They feel entitled/feel that rescues are damaged goods.

2. They don't want to take a chance on potential baggage / want to instill proper "values" from the beginning.

3. They don't know / are not educated about... Pure Bred's, puppy mills, societal impact of overpopulation, breed compatability, etc. The only thing worse than an irresponsibile uneducated person with a dog, is one with a kid

4. They have had a bad experience with a rescue dog / great experience with a breeder.

5. They need specific traits in a working/sporting dog.

Many more

 

 

As far as "designer dogs". I honestly have mixed emotions. How many recognized breeds are there today? How many of these breeds existed 50,100,200 years ago? Why? Somebody, or a group a people decided they wanted a dog for a specific purpose. Dachsunds for hunting badgers, Doberman to protect the tax collector, BC's to heard sheep... These breeds and others were selectively bred to serve a specific purpose. Why is this type of breeding looked down upon now, but was accepted in the past? All breeds were crossed and created at some point in time. That said I disagree with the vanity associated with some of these crosses. Because the demand is high for the designer breeds, there is a huge premium attracting good breeders, bad breeders and everything in between. This is where I see a problem, cross breeding for the sake of the almighty $ and not for the good of the breed.